I don't see the harm in arming a proven ally.
Today's proven ally is tomorrow's sworn enemy.
We need to remove ourselves from foreign entanglements, and yet there are those situations that, of we do not act, appear to threaten to set stages wherein we become vulnerable to attack. But we live in an age where certain technologies are so highly developed that when coupled with the utter moral bankruptcy encountered across the globe, one cannot be certain of anything.
Who are ISIS/ISIL? Where did they come from, ultimately? It does not seem at all far-fetched to think they are product of the same men who see to it that a given bill is passed and enacted in the US Congress or the EU. I may be wrong about it - it is possible there is a lot more going on "organically", but U for one cannot tell. But I place no limit on the things Theye are capable of and willing to do, the only limits they respect are those that tell them what it is with which they can get away with at worst acceptable negative consequences.
The world is now one gigantic smoke and mirrors act. What is even more fascinating is the prospect that much of what happens is not of Theire direct making, but simply the consequence of Theire having cultivated a general environment so completely warlike that they are capable of hiding in the fog, wherein they are almost perfectly safe to act as they please, the meaner fundamentally unable to separate the signal of what Theye do from the general noise. That, in fact, is probably the greater truth at play in the world today.
We wonder why there is such chaos in the world, but if one thinks in terms of strategy for universal dominion, everything we see makes the most perfectly clear sense. Surround oneself with the noise of endless chaos everywhere and he finds himself in an environment of nearly perfect camouflage. This has the added advantage of greater resource efficiency. Instead of attempting to micro-manage the world, Theye simply set conditions such that the meaners take the ball and run with it, unwitting.
By what mechanism have drugs become such a scourge in the lives of countless millions of people? Because all one has to do is expose enough people to them and the epidemic takes off as a matter of its own nature. Leave doors ajar by which some may pass to satisfy the rising demand and the cycle completes itself. Declare "war" on the circumstance and human proclivity all but ensures the perpetual life and spread of the cults of abuse and addiction. Prohibition serves doubly to provide the pretext for the "war" and the usurpations of power that go hand in hand with it.
By that means alone a significant proportion of a population are neutralized as potential threats to Theire machinations. Comparatively little is expended directly in terms of resources. Theye set the conditions and sit back, letting nature takes its course. So long as they have root control, the risk of anything going so fundamentally wrong as to result in serious threats to Theire positions in the world are all but nonexistent.
Now add open warfare, economic manipulation for effects, class hatreds, paranoia, nationalism, religion, competing political paradigms, etc., and the world becomes warlike in great totality. Remember that the definition of "warlike" is not restricted to armies shooting at each other. Warlike in terms of an environment is as much a matter of psychology as anything else. If you can establish warlike circumstances in a sufficiently broad cross section of daily living, the perceptual environment of the meaner will become warlike. That is, it will become sufficiently noise-riddled that the average man will become incapable of distinguishing the real trouble makers from the rest, and perhaps ultimately uninterested in trying. This is the perfect result for the tyrant.
Like the Kurds for instance. This arming of questionable Syrian groups is wrong.
And the Kurds may be steadfast allies. However, the same appeared to be the case with the so-called "mujahedeen". During the Soviet war in Afghanistan, were they not our great buddies... our "proven ally"? Now look at them.
There is NO SUCH THING as a "proven ally" because these entities are not flawlessly constant. Today I love you, tomorrow I want to kill you. Humans.
There does need to be a higher standard of proof to receive US arms.
If we are to persist in arming others, then I would agree. I would add that there are certain categories of arms I would never allow outside our borders. The absurdly obvious ones are nuclear weapons. Why don't we give those out? The reasons should be obvious. But what about aircraft? Tanks? Fire-and-forget ground to air missiles? Artillery? Chemical weapons? Biologics? Where is the line to be drawn?
