“Afif blamed Americans for causing ISIS by supporting Syrian rebels, saying ‘this beast which you raised up, as in past cases, you find it’s dangerous for you.'” Indeed, and the same thing can be said for Hizballah, if this report is true. The U.S. should not be aiding any avowed enemies of the United States. There are Kurdish groups that we could aid with a clear conscience. Other than that, we should stay out of this thing and try to contain it as much as possible. But that would require a realistic assessment of what this threat involves, and that is not forthcoming.
“US Reportedly Providing Indirect Military Aid to Hezbollah,” by Ari Yashar, Arutz Sheva, September 22, 2014:
Mohammed Afif, the new head of public relations for the Lebanese-based Iranian-backed terror organization Hezbollah, gave a rare New York Times interview as Lebanese experts reveal his group is indirectly receiving American intelligence aid in its fight against Islamic State (ISIS).
Following ISIS’s temporary conquest of Arsal last month on the Lebanese side of the Syrian border, the US sent new weapons to the Lebanese army, which coordinates with Hezbollah. Likewise, US intelligence has found its way to Hezbollah according to Lebanese experts.
That leaked intelligence may explain some recent impressive achievements against ISIS, including the first known Hezbollah drone strike.
It is worth noting by contrast to the blasé indirect provision of intelligence and weapons to a terror group in Lebanon, during Operation Protective Edge US President Barack Obama blocked a routine Hellfire missile shipment to Israel and ordered strict supervision on future transfers.
Afif told the American newspaper “we need to open up a new page with the world media, with the Arabs and internationally,” hinting at the international legitimacy he hopes to achieve for the terror group under his role as media adviser to Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah.
Nasrallah recently expressed his fears of the ISIS “monster,” calling the fight with the group “a battle of life and death no less important than fighting the Israeli enemy, as (ISIS) actions and objectives only serve Israel.” Indeed Hezbollah has called to wipe out Israel numerous times, and fought terror wars against the Jewish state.
Ali Rizk, a Lebanese analyst at the pro-Hezbollah Al-Mayadeen news channel, told the New York Times that while the US cannot publicly ally with the terrorist organization Hezbollah, “what happens underneath is something totally different.”
Justifying the aid, Rizk said “Hezbollah is not representing an imminent threat against the world. It represents a threat against Israel, as Israel represents a threat against Lebanon. But Hezbollah is not going to threaten the US and Europe. Nobody said Hezbollah is cutting off heads.”
Hizballah is responsible for the massacre of over 200 American soldiers at a military barracks in Lebanon. And Israel presents no threat to Lebanon, if Lebanon leaves it in peace.
While Hezbollah may be benefiting indirectly from the US, it remains antagonistic to America over Syria, where it has joined Iran in supporting Syrian President Bashar Assad against the very rebels the US is arming. However, the ISIS threat has indeed raised talk that the US may even join forces with Hezbollah’s sponsor Iran.
Afif blamed Americans for causing ISIS by supporting Syrian rebels, saying “this beast which you raised up, as in past cases, you find it’s dangerous for you.”
Angemon says
Keyword being “imminent”…
Beagle says
Predictable and even logical if the only goal is to destroy IS. As RS suggests, we need clear thinking about many things including US national interests, Islam, jihad, and Islamic sectarian differences other than “they need to stop having sectarian differences”. Also, I’d like a unicorn for Christmas.
It is fascinating that a jihad group has come along which is so bad, IS, that suddenly genocidal, terrorist, trouble-making, Iranian-Pasdaran-created, Iran-backed, used to be considered by terror experts one of the most dangerous to the US groups in the world, Hizballah, looks good by comparison. I did not foresee that, until a month or so ago anyway.
RichardL says
the two more years of Obama will be costly.
Charli Main says
I freely admit to having limited knowledge of American politics but I´m given to understand from American JW posters that Obama has a dhimini sock puppet waiting in the wings to replace him.
RichardL says
McCain only sounds like Obama in this instance, but he doesn’t look like him. Or weren’t you talking about The Official Sponsor of Nice Jihadis in Syria? 😉
Charli Main says
I was thinking more along the lines of Hillary Clinton, dhimini water carrier in waiting.
UneasyOne says
The one thing we can be grateful for is that Sunni, Shia and other branches of this religion hate each other almost as much as they hate us. We need to foster that hatred wherever we can, because if they ever unite under one banner, we’ve got problems.
Lisa says
Indeed. Imagine two billion Arabs against a diminishing West.
umbra says
Their ideology is that they will never unite. The only realistic way they are going to solve their sectarian problem is to wipe out all other sides, leaving one faction remaining. However, it is improbable that any one faction can wipe out another unless the endangered faction is extremely small and out of media coverage. Western military intervention (or threats thereof) will dissuade actions that lead to that outcome. After all, obama, cameron and countless other western leaders want to preserve their vision of unconditional multicultural diversity, even if it cancerous in nature. That said, islamic sectarian aggression is rarely not all-out war (at least in recent times) nor is it continuous. They do pause every now and then and/or resort to low intensity conflicts.
paddy says
and still the cancer grows