CIA to Obama: We Already Did Your Dumb Plan And It's 'Doomed to Failure'


Pete Souza / White House

The Obama administration has proclaimed that arming the supposedly moderate Syrian rebels is the U.S.'s best play in the fight against ISIS. But according to The Huffington Post, CIA analysts don't believe that plan is going to work at all.

It's an opinion the CIA has been keeping quiet about, until now. A top CIA official told HuffPost that opinions among agency analysts range from "ambivalence to outright opposition." And they have good reason to hold those opinions—the CIA is already covertly arming the Syrian rebels, a strategy that has already been show to have failed, in no small part because the rebels are unreliable and the equipment eventually finds its way to ISIS.

According to a Democratic Congressman consulted by HuffPost:

"I have heard it expressed, outside of classified contexts, that what you heard from your intelligence sources is correct, because the CIA regards the effort as doomed to failure," the congressman said in an email. "Specifically (again without referring to classified information), the CIA thinks that it is impossible to train and equip a force of pro-Western Syrian nationals that can fight and defeat Assad, al-Nusra and ISIS, regardless of whatever air support that force may receive."

He added that, as the CIA sees it, the ramped-up backing of rebels is an expansion of a strategy that is already not working. "The CIA also believes that its previous assignment to accomplish this was basically a fool's errand, and they are well aware of the fact that many of the arms that they provided ended up in the wrong hands," the congressman said, echoing intelligence sources.

Not exactly a ringing endorsement, huh? At least war skeptics can now confidently state that the president's plan will fail, since it has already failed.


NEXT: Another Oklahoma Cop Charged With Serial Sexual Assault

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. +1 Alt Text

    1. It sucks all the way down. 8-(

    2. “Bart! Where did you pick up words like that?!”

      “Yeah, Moe. That team sucked last night. They just plain sucked. I’ve seen teams suck before, but that was the suckiest bunch of sucks who ever sucked!”

  2. CIA is already covertly arming the Syrian rebels, a strategy that has already been show to have failed

    Somewhere, I hear Joe Strummer crooning, “Saaaaaaaandanista…” as Fawn Hall shreds documents for Oliver North….


    1. I don’t recall what you’re talking about.


    2. Actually, our arming of the Nicaraguan rebels wasn’t a total failure.

      The Marxists were forced into a more open multi-party government, after all.

    3. You must be too young to actually remember the Clash, because Washington Bullets was released while Jimmy Carter was President of these United States.

      The song had nothing to do with Reagan, the Contras, Iran, Fawn Hall, Ollie North, etc.

      The song is a paean to Jimmy Carter and his leftist isolationist nonsensical policies, which also gave us the Iranian Revolution AND the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan–both gifts that just keep on givin’, lo these many decades later.

      Thus endeth the lesson.

  3. Wow, that’s impressive even for Obama. It’s like precognition, except for failure. Prefailition?


    1. premisconceivability.

  4. But this time it’s new and improved with air strikes!

  5. OT: Daniel Hannan, still pretty awesome.

    The greatest cultural victory of the Left has been to disregard the Nazi-Soviet Pact

    It’s this lop-sidedness in our folk memory that we need to address. While Nazism is well understood as the monstrosity it was, there is often a lingering sense that Communism was well-intentioned, even though it went wrong. The merest connection with fascism bars a politician from office; yet those who actively supported the USSR are allowed to become ministers and European Commissioners. Wearing a Che Guevara tee-shirt is not regarded in the same light as wearing an Adolf Hitler tee-shirt; but it should be.

    1. Lesson for dictators: commit your million plus Holocausts via government designed starvation

        1. Or just ignore those who complain from the outside and kill those from the inside. Remember Stalin would receive lists with the numbers of those to be killed and ALWAYS rounded up in his execution orders.

    2. Even now, Russia refuses to accept that its annexation of the Baltics was an “invasion”. Forty-seven per cent of Russians have “a positive view of Stalin” (just imagine how we would react if 47 per cent of Germans had “a positive view of Hitler”). To deny the magnitude of the Nazi genocide is, in several countries, a criminal offence; but to signal, with your idiotic Che tee-shirt, that you are all for breaking a few eggs to make an omelette, is radical chic. Germany has come to terms with its past and become a valued ally. But Russia?

      1. “to signal, with your idiotic Che tee-shirt, that you are all for breaking a few eggs to make an omelette”

        I would bet good money that 99% of the dopes in their Che tees don’t know a single factual thing about him.

        1. “Do too. He invented the Che-a pet.”

          1. “He was like cool and stuff.”

          2. +1 Murderous Houseplant

        2. Greatest T-Shirt Salesman of all time.

    3. Western society does need de-Marxification.

      I think the most 1A compatible approach for doing this is to legally recognize political religions as literal, bona fide religions, with all the restrictions (and protections) that implies.

  6. Exactly. Fuck this shit. We should cut a deal with Assad.

    It should be obvious by now that the “moderate” forces of the Arab Spring are too weak to oppose the Islamists.

    1. We’ve got a rather long and I’d argue less than intelligent antipathy towards the Syrian regime which I guess is part Isreali influence, part Cold War thinking.

      1. I think we tried to do something there in the 50s and it failed miserably. Maybe we didn’t get over that yet, we just keep trying it in other mideast countries, where it also fails. But what comes around go around, so here we are back in Syria.

    2. You would cut a deal with a man whose murdered thousands of his own people (most of whom were not part of any beheading brigade), simply because he also fights ISIS? Man, you must really love liberty and avoiding foreign entanglements. Let’s just give him some heavy weaponry and I’m sure none of that will be turned against anyone else once ISIS is gone…Assad is OUR man!

      1. Not because he also fights ISIS, but because our policy of attempting to overthrow him has obviously been a completely unmitigated disaster.

        If we hadn’t egged on the Syrian uprising, do you think that ISIS would even exist?

      2. You would cut a deal with a man whose murdered thousands of his own people

        Wouldn’t be the first time. Hell, just in that neighborhood, we’re writing checks to the Palestinians, aren’t we? And haven’t various Pali “governments” executed plenty of Palestinians for political crimes? I can’t say that the current Egyptian regime (which we also write checks to) hasn’t killed a few of its enemies, either.

        1. Nor are the Syrian rebels hands exactly clean.

          Most of the weapons we’ve given them have wound up in ISIS’s hands. Along with a few Western hostages.

  7. Obviously, Obama only has a couple more years in office and there are some major crony bucks headed his way from military contractors.

    So, the CIA is wrong, it’s going to work as planned, lining the pockets of Obama and his cronies.

    1. Spooks vs. Generals.

    2. Sometimes I find the Chomskeysque conspiracy theories to the effect that the military industrial powers that be require the US to lash out militarily periodically with the target being not important just to keep a proper set of awe going in the developing world, I swear Obama and elites have been shopping around a target (Assad, Boko Hareem, ISIL) until they found one they could sell the public on

  8. We already know that the history of gun control is rooted in racism, but what about now? Have “we” discussed this yet?

    1. A thinly veiled attempt to prove that white males are the majority of gun crazed crazies, linking guns to racism.

      1. The origin of gun control was rooted in keeping firearms out of the hands of scary brown people. Seems nothing has changed.

        1. (except for now, lots of black folks are in on the game of keeping guns out of the hands of black folks)

        2. What’s changed is that we simply can’t pass laws against the “wrong sort” of people having guns? we have to take guns from everyone to disarm blacks and Italians and Jews.

    2. Are the people who own the vast majority of guns the ones doing the vast majority of the shooting and killing?

    3. I don’t acknowledge the un-scientific, nebulous concept of “race” so I usually just leave the space blank.

      In the cases where I *have* to put down *something* I consider that humans came out of Africa 60k years ago so I put down “African”.

      Like it matters.

      … Hobbit

      (I guess I could put down “Hobbit” in the space marked “Other”)

  9. How was Obama supposed to know that the CIA has been arming the rebels, and that it’s failed? It’s only now being reported on in the news.

    1. You really don’t expect all of those white guys to tell a black president anything, do you? He’s the most brilliant possible president, but he can only do so much when constantly fending off racism and sexism.

      1. And obstructionism.

      2. You would think that while Barry is out playing golf, the CIA would at least leave him a Post-it on the fridge.

  10. But THIS time we’re gonna arm the Syrian rebels with stuff that expires after 3 months, sorta like printer cartridges.

    1. We’ll sell them magazines that hold 10 rounds, but you can only use the first 6 before you have to replace it?

  11. A little off topic, but do any of you hate that fucking picture of Obama with his dirty-ass feet up on the desk in the Oval Office? It seems so disrespectful to me.

    1. Why the fuck would any of us have any respect for some fucking desk in some fucking office?

      1. It’s not some fucking desk in some fucking office, it’s the president’s desk in the president’s office.

        1. I have about as much respect for that desk and that office as I do for the fat redneck slob with his feet up on his desk at the local vehicle tow lot.

    2. Least of my worries…

    3. I’m not offended that he puts his feet on the desk. I don’t care about that. I’m offended that his team choreographed a fake “candid” shot because of their obsession with image.

    4. Yes.

    5. So that’s what people mean when they say someone is being disrespectful to the office of the President.

    6. I don’t care about the feet on the desk, but the fact that the guy uses hand gestures while talking on the phone is prima facie evidence that the man is a moron.

      People who gesticulate while talking on the phone are nearly always profoundly stupid in my experience.

    7. One would think that Obama, as an Indonesian Muslim, would know how rude it is to point the soles of the feet at another person.

  12. Worst president ever.

    Its almost as if he is trying to be just that.

    1. Hey, it’s all about legacy now.

      1. Hey, it’s all about legacy now.

        Don’t be too surprised if we all end up being the kooky old granpas and great uncles who rant about what a fucking pile of shit Obama was, how horrendous his presidency really was, how thoroughly wrong and incompetent the man and his Admin. was on every issue when some family kid starts spouting off about how Obama saved us from the Great Recession and made the world safe for democracy.

        Roosevelt was a serial fuck-up and look how glowingly that power-hungry psychopathic cripple is portrayed by history.

        1. *Roosevelt was a serial fuck-up and look how glowingly that power-hungry psychopathic cripple is portrayed by history.*

          World War Two saved his hide.

          Hopefully that doesn’t give Valerie Jarrett any ideas.

  13. But but Johnnyboy McPain said that the “moderate” rebels are our friends!

    1. Was that right before, or right after, he said that ISIS was the moderates we wanted to arm?

  14. People have got this shit all wrong. The Arab Spring was a giant fucking mistake.
    Obama’s entire Middle East policy, has been a total disaster, starting with his fucking Cairo speech, and proceeding through his support for various Arab uprisings.

    ISIS would never even have _existed_ absent Syria’s civil war, which is a direct result of Obama’s “strategy” of changing the middle east by overthrowing Arab dictators.

    We were better off with Saddam, We were better off with Assad, and we were better off with Mubarak. We were even better off with Ghadaffi, as it now appears the Lybia’s government is falling apart with islamists gaining the upper hand. The entire Arab Spring did nothing but open the door for psychotic, murderous, religious nutjobs to sweep across the region.

    Obama’s a fool of epic historial proportions.

  15. Wow. When you’ve lost the CIA in an opportunity to stir some shit up?

    That is how amazingly incompetent this president is.

  16. Maybe Obama should push for gun control in the Middle East…

  17. Feet on the furniture? Wtf kind of example does that set? Might as well do the river dance on the desk paid for by extortion.

    Does anyone think this individual, or any other politician is capable of managing foreign interactions with other individuals just because they put on a fancy suit? Central planning of an economy (etc.) is a failure, so is central planning of “foreign policy”. These politicians have no clue what the hell they are doing, and whatever they do results in blowback of epic proportions.

    The 70+ interventions since WW2 alone would have been very costly to trading partners. War is expensive, and when the central bank can criminally engage in fraud with no consequences and print money like no tomorrow, so goes war. The financial cost is hidden to all but those whom have some sort of clue about economics.

    Everyone gets screwed by protracted conflict. Whether it be my brothers and sisters in the military, individuals, and future generations. Hopefully the DOD monopoly gets turned over to free individuals in a free market. Any company wanting to engage in such conflicts would have been out of business long ago.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.