U.S. program to train Syrians rebels to fight ISIS is losing ground. Is the program worth continuing?

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 04:34:15 -0400

The U.S. military's program to train and equip thousands of moderate Syrian rebels is faltering, with fewer than 100 volunteers, raising questions about whether the effort can produce enough capable fighters quickly enough to make a difference in the war against the Islamic State.

The stated U.S. goal is to train and equip 5,400 rebels per year, and military officials said last week that they still hope for 3,000 by year's end. Privately, they acknowledge the trend is moving in the wrong direction.

On June 26, 2014, the White House said it was asking Congress for $500 million for a three-year train-and-equip program. The training, however, only got started in May after months of recruiting and vetting of volunteers.

That program, together with a more advanced but also troubled parallel effort to rebuild the Iraqi army, is central to the U.S.-led effort to create ground forces capable of fighting IS without involving U.S. ground combat troops.

The Syria initiative is intended to enable moderate opposition forces to defend their own towns against the IS militants, not to form a national resistance army. Expectations for the Iraqis are much higher; the goal is to have them roll back IS and restore the Iraq-Syria border.

The main problem thus far has been finding enough Syrian recruits untainted by extremist affiliations or disqualified by physical or other flaws. Of approximately 6,000 volunteers, about 1,500 have passed muster and await movement to training camps in other countries. Citing security concerns, the Pentagon will not say exactly how many are in training.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/us-program-to-train-syrian-rebels-losing-ground/ar-AAciJmt

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Jun 30 at 2015 6:06 AM

SCPO David Lockwood — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 06:06:35 -0400

Unfortunately I think this will end up like other programs to train and equip middle eastern fighters in that the fighters will run off and IS will have our weapons in their posession. If we really want to hinder IS from gaining anymore territory we need boots on the ground and congress and media stay out of the fight, period.

Response by PO3 David Fries made Jun 30 at 2015 6:45 AM

PO3 David Fries — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 06:45:37 -0400

Afghanistan against the Russians. That is all.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Jun 30 at 2015 6:48 AM

Cpl Jeff N. — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 06:48:20 -0400

Wasn't this the Presidents plan to raise an army of 5,000+ to fight ISIS? This was just another lie in a long line of them. This army was our solution to "boots on the ground". If you want something done right, you have to do it yourself.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 30 at 2015 7:15 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 07:15:04 -0400

We, the people, really need to stop our politicians from continuing this kind of practice. Our track record is not the best, as it were. Our government trained rebels to fight against Fidel Castro and that turned out so well for us. We then tried the same thing with Saddam where we trained his people, supplied all kinds of stuff and helped put him in the seat he was in. And look where that got us. When the Russians were invading Afghanistan, we THREW money, equipment and training at the Mujahideen to fight the Russians. And that turned out to be such a BRILLIANT plan for us in the long run. And if memory serves, was it not our government that, when the civil war started in Syria, the US was sending equipment and training to help the rebels fight against Assad? And didn't some of those rebels branch off and found ISIL/ISIS? And if that did happen, what is the thought process of sending money, equipment and trainers to people that will be fighting the same people we trained and supplied?

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 30 at 2015 8:35 AM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 08:35:17 -0400

Outside of the ME, didn't the US do something similar in Mexico? The Los Zeta's were trained as anti-drug paramilitary units by the US, et. al. and became one of the most ruthless drug cartels in Mexico. (Page 33 of the linked pdf) The word "backfire" comes to mind.

http://usacac.army.mil/CAC2/MilitaryReview/Archives/English/MilitaryReview_20110430_art007.pdf

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 30 at 2015 10:22 AM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 10:22:38 -0400

If the Lord Helps Those Who Help Themselves, what makes us think we can do more for those who will not help themselves?

Response by MSG Floyd Williams made Jun 30 at 2015 10:31 AM

MSG Floyd Williams — Tue, 30 Jun 2015 10:31:26 -0400

GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad. . . We have already loss ground allowing other countries to pimp the U.S, a huge amount of U.S currency and resources is giving away and we get snake bite in return.

Response by GySgt Jim Bishop made Jul 6 at 2015 11:08 AM

GySgt Jim Bishop — Mon, 06 Jul 2015 11:08:21 -0400

We need to reevaluate the system in this, simply put how well can we be sure we aren't training some of the very people we fight against. They get the training then take it to train more, raid the arms and we have equipped and trained our enemy. If Syria wants to be like Iraq then let them have it.

Response by SFC William Farrell made Feb 8 at 2017 11:51 PM

SFC William Farrell — Wed, 08 Feb 2017 23:51:59 -0500

Any effort to kill one savage is worth it to me GySgt Wayne A. Ekblad