French Terror Attacks, scores dead

[Minimalist]

Most of the people we've handed cash and guns to have not used them to shoot at us.  We have a great track record there, and that's including those cases where they do.  I fear that we might be suffering from selection bias, in making the comment above.  We pour money and guns to our allies, and the enemies of our enemies like a tidal wave.

Actually our track record of giving guns to people who throw them down and run like rabbits is pretty clear.  The Iraqi army seems to have trained for the 100 dash.

[The Grand Nudger]

Ah, but Min, we armed the others guys as well...the ones the Iraqis are running from......remember?  

@ Abaris, no argument from me. I'm skeptical of our arms spigot as well....but it's a bit bigger than just the failures, or delayed failures, in that case. Remember, the 1979 deal worked, didn't go well for the soviets. Are we talking a pie in the sky version of how we wish history and events would play out here...is that why I don't understand this discusion, or the contention that the CIA is the worlds taskmaster? Perhaps I'm too wedded to a reality in which shitty people exist, and all contingencies can't be known or planned for?

[abaris]

Remember, the 1979 deal worked, didn't go well for the soviets.  Are we talking a pie in the sky version of how we wish history and events would play out here...is that why I don't understand this discusiion, or the notion that the CIA is the worlds taskmaster?

But did it work? Was that kind of result desirable in the long run? 26 years since the Soviets upped and left and the country's still in shambles. The enemy of your enemy isn't always your friend. Basicallly it was kicking a known factor thereby empowering the unknown, which ultimately provided one of the breeding ground for what we face today.

I wouldn't call that a success. It's a short time breast pounding moment with ugly consequences.

[The Grand Nudger]

In the long run, it accelerated the fall of the soviet union. It took a wee bit more than just that incident alone to produce the groups which exist now, to which you're referring. When -doesn't- armed conflict have ugly consequences?

[WinterHold]

One point here, what do you think of the attacks themselves?  Do you think they were justified?  On Charlie Hebdo or the latest attack?

For me to question the incident's and point to some fishy aspects, makes you concluded this ? that I'm a supporter ? 
Or is this stereotyping ?
I don't. And I'm insulted beyond level.

Questioning stuff doesn't make you a supporter of criminal/terrorist acts, SofaKingHigh

[The Grand Nudger]

What's fishy, again? Was there another gunman on the grassy knoll? Did they fake the photos of the attack? Are all islamic terrorists part of a fifth column conspiracy to discredit islam at the behest of The Jews and The Great Satan? Refresh my memory.

[Edwardo Piet]

Salmon is pretty fishy. Being a fish. It's also delicious.

[Minimalist]

Ah, but Min, we armed the others guys as well...the ones the Iraqis are running from......remember? 

But it was unintentional.  Picking up guns...or tanks...that are left in the street can not be considered American policy.

Although listening to these assholes running for the GOP nomination you would think that it was.

[The Grand Nudger]

I got the distinct impression that it -was- our policy, lol. The important thing seemed to be getting the guns there, not necessarily who was holding them. I wouldn't point to Uncle Sam on that one so much as I'd point to contractors, ofc. Politicians as complicit halfwits, maybe?

"I've got a crate of guns here and the army said it didn't need any more, now who am I supposed to sell them to?"

[Minimalist]

I am sure that's a big part of it.

Also a part of it is when they are delivered to the right groups who then sell them to others.  Those people are born merchants!