Here's the snippet from the speech:
Today, as part of this effort, I am calling on Congress to support a new counterterrorism partnerships fund of up to $5 billion, which will allow us to train, build capacity and facilitate partner countries on the front lines. And these resources will give us flexibility to fulfill different missions, including training security forces in Yemen who’ve gone on the offensive against Al Qaeda, supporting a multinational force to keep the peace in Somalia, working with European allies to train a functioning security force and border patrol in Libya and facilitating French operations in Mali.
A critical focus of this effort will be the ongoing crisis in Syria...
So with the additional resources I’m announcing today, we will step up our efforts to support Syria’s neighbors — Jordan and Lebanon, Turkey and Iraq — as they contend with refugees and confront terrorists working across Syria’s borders. I will work with Congress to ramp up support for those in the Syrian opposition who offer the best alternative to terrorists and brutal dictators. Source: New York TimesSaudi Arabia created Jordan. Saudi Arabia can protect Jordan. Turkey has fallen off the ally radar and Iraq is lost. Lebanon needs help, but that means ridding the earth of Hezbollah. The U.S. is only about maintaining, not ridding.
The Syrian disaster is a clear example of funding Muslim rebels we knew nothing about, and who have turned out to be worse than the regime, yet we continue the charade. It's likely U.S. Ambassador to Libya, Chris Stevens, was trying to buy-back weapons stolen from Moammar Gaddafi's arsenal, to send to Syrian rebels, when he was murdered by Muslim terrorists on September 11, 2012. We cannot help them enough to garner a 'smidgen' of appreciation.
How would infidels train the anti-terrorist fighters? What Rules of Engagement will we insist upon for our $5 million, and how do we rodeo where the money goes? Yes, we can 'give' the funds to one entity and demand they sign an official paper, but we cannot make them keep the bargain, and nearly every Muslim in every Muslim country can be bought off by any "extremist" terrorist that comes along, and if he/she can't be bought off, he/she can be killed.
In these countries, we have Embassies (with the exception of those we've had to evacuate, or may have to evacuate at any time). Secretary of State John Kerry and the Pentagon will have everything to say about where the money goes, and how the infidels we send to train, are protected from the non-infidels, unless we turn that responsibility over to Muslim terrorists, as did Hillary Clinton. What will the Rules of Engagement be for our side? Do we have even a single reason to have confidence in the decisions Kerry or Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel will employ? No, we have not one.
For every Muslim soldier or police in a Muslim country, who is willing to work with our forces, there are infinite numbers of the enemy more than willing to buy the willing. This is true in Afghanistan and Libya, and we can count on "trusted" authorities to cross us, and then blackmail us, and when they do, we do nothing, and they know it. And you know darn well, we sure won't do anything to offend anyone, anywhere, on the other side of our borders.
The don't like us. They like our money and they use it to kill us. This is a bad idea.
Written by and originally posted by Maggie @ Maggie's Notebook