Obama founded ISIS

When people hear that they automatically think it's nonsense, but it isn't as far fetched as it seems right? The United States has funded many """rebel""" groups in the past to try and overthrow a government under the narrative of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" so why shouldn't this instance be any different?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=-23kmhc3P8U
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

It would be nice if the rebel groups we were funding were actually against ISIS. Sure we can continure sending billions of dollars to a couple of sandmonkeys running around with AKs, but next thing you know ISIS has already come and taken all the resources we've provided.

Because yknow, 8 years and billions of dollars shows reason of evidence that the rebel groups either suck balls or are helping ISIS

Actually, if you're applying that logic then Dubya gave rise to ISIS. Obama just didn't do anything about it.

youtube.com/watch?v=-23kmhc3P8U

Funding =/= founding

You have any proofs?

Creating and managing groups and cells in national and foreign territories is not the job of the POTUS

Or ISIS started out as a CIA honeypot used to attract (and track) violent Jihadists from around the world? They created this monster w/ good intentions however their Frankenstein is now out of control waging war in various countries. Wouldn't that be something?

Makes sense, Al-Bahdadi was someone they used to solve tensions or conflicts in the military prison he was held.

>found (verb)
>2. equipped, outfitted, or furnished

funding falls under that deifnition

Except that is not what it means faggot, "obama founded ISIS" means that ISIS was an unintended, but forseeable consequence of Obama's action in the middle east.

What would the US have to gain from intentionally creating ISIS? If they didn't, then another group would have popped up, as a result of the destabilisation and power vacuum, among other things, that the US government has caused, therefore there would have been no need to risk actually putting money into it.

Because ISIS started at camp Bucca during one of President Bush's surges

That was exposed in the leaks. Some of the """moderate rebels""" that were funded became ISIS.

What is Libya regime change and why?
What is Benghazi?
We created ISIS to destabilize/destroy Syria so we could run a pipeline through there.

Yiu retards make it sound like isis just came frome a hole in the ground, as if what we now call ISIS isn't simply the al qaida branch we've been fighting in Iraq the whole time, now with a name change after splitting off from Osamas control

Not saying I don't believe it, there is proposed US pipelines trough Syria.

It is however hard to believe all this is for that purpose. Mainly because I fail to see a best case scenario with regime destablisation that allows for foreign investment in such infrastructure.

Al Quaida sprouted from Afghani combatants initially armed by US to fight USSR

ISIS sprouted from Libyan rebels armed by US

So yes.

Picrelated is what the war is about.

US is trying to cut Russia off it's gas money

This!

Also anyone who understands ISIS knows that they have no interest in regime change, only in expanding territory

Isis was a thino LONG before they sprouted up in Libya

The US did when it invaded Iraq, you moron.

IS are just the displaced Sunnis that you kicked out of government (and the Iran-backed Shia have taken over now).

IS are ex-Baathists, ex-Iraqi military, and Sunni tribals/villagers, for the most part, with some globetrotting jihadis to fill out the ranks.

They're the ghost of Saddam in other words.

before Libya ISIS was just a handful of Jackasses on Mad Max gun trucks.

After Lybia it became something actually worth talking about.

Not at all

They came from the Iraqi insurgency, and when the US left, they were free to run wild because the US was the only ones keeping them in line

IS has spread to other areas just like Al-Q did (and IS was Al-Q in Iraq before changing to IS).

Their heavy weapons they've captured from the IA and SAA for the most part.

And ISIS was in Libya AFTER the rebels overthrew ghadaffi. NOT BEFORE. to say that isis was created by arming Libyan rebels is ludicrous

>pour the guns into the region
>they end up in wrong hands
>not related at all

>some ass holes get hands on a thing that was donated over a year ago to completely different people
>founded

Not the same, brah

Whoa, hold the fuck up! I'VE ALWAYS THOUGHT IRAN WAS UNDER AND TO THE LEFT OF IRAQ AND GOLF COAST ON THE RIGHT OF IRAQ. AND AFGHANISTAN ABOVE IRAQ?! WHAT THE FUCK.

Anyway.
I've seen this before but still, if they wanted this, why support ISIS? They make it impossible to safely construct that or operate.

The US don't need foreign oil anymore, I see it as much more likely that they've supported ISIS to turn Syria into something like Somalia, which it now is in certain relevant parts, so success! Making it impossible for the Russian backed pipeline to be operated without sabotage. Hurting both Iran and Russia for many years, possibly decades.

I don't see what interest the US would have in stabilising Syria without an extremely US friendly govnerment. Which would be a lot harder than to just fuck shit up.

I've never seen even a hint of a US best case scenario unfolding, maybe the FSA at it's height. I'm sure there's some plans and drafts for a real success, but I see no reason for the US to support ISIS without having no interest in stabilizing Syria. So I don't believe they did it for US oil profits, but to stop Iran and Russia to profit.

well the pint is that ISIS is a direct outcome of murrikan activities in the middle east.

>I've seen this before but still, if they wanted this, why support ISIS? They make it impossible to safely construct that or operate.

Cut off all support and they will disperse.
They cant even make their own bullets or get their own food.
When support stops they gonna get hungry pack their bags and go back home.

Actually, that would be Reagan and the brilliant Iran Contra scheme to build up anti-russian forces. That's where Al-Qaeda came from, which is what ISIS actually is

That is true. But it was not founded by the US. The very important takeaway is that the rise of isis isn't due to some machievellian conspiracy, but rather sheer incompetence

While I've seen plenty rebel munition factories I don't think I've ever seen an affiliated ISIS one. So you are right but ISIS seems to be highly mobile and to have support by teenage edgelords and old school extremists. So dispersing won't neccesarily be stopping the idealism from spreading.

The support isn't all from the US. Most is from gulf states, and I don't think they will stop their funding anytime soon. Especially now when they didn't get Hillary in, with all her gulf connections, I think they're loosing any control they ever had of ISIS. Might be why CIA is in seemingly panic mode and Obama suddenly becoming supercharged.

In a sense. Isis was the version of AQ directed by some local fuck stain that made it so extreme that even alqaeda proper wanted nothing to do with them

Gulf states are pulling strings, they an extinguish that shit when the goal is ahieved.

isis are cia backed forces just as the taliban were in the 80's

It's not, selling arms is pretty much what your country has been doing in every war in the last 100 years.

for example: ww2 was a local conflict until that kike FDR decided to start everyone and their grandmas, most americans were against the US getting involved