Operation Fast and Furious was NOT the only gun running operation by the Obama Administration

[Tigermike 4,082]

How the Taliban got their hands on modern US missiles

By Kenneth R. Timmerman

June 8, 2014 | 3:55am

Modal Trigger

Taliban militia stand in the back of a pickup truck with heat-seeking Stinger missiles. Photo: Getty Images

In his new book, “Dark Forces: The Truth About What Happened in Ben­ghazi” (Broadside Books), writer Kenneth R. Timmerman explains how the US government’s efforts to arm the Libyan rebels backfired, flooding weapons into Syria, and as he ­reveals here, Afghanistan:

The Obama administration isn’t only giving the Taliban back its commanders — it’s giving them weapons.

Miliary records and sources reveal that on July 25, 2012, Taliban fighters in Kunar province successfully targeted a US Army CH-47 helicopter with a new generation Stinger missile.

They thought they had a surefire kill. But instead of bursting into flames, the Chinook just disappeared into the darkness as the American pilot recovered control of the aircraft and brought it to the ground in a hard landing.

The assault team jumped out the open doors and ran clear in case it exploded. Less than 30 seconds later, the Taliban gunner and his comrade erupted into flames as an American gunship overhead locked onto their position and opened fire.

The next day, an explosive ordnance disposal team arrived to pick through the wreckage and found unexploded pieces of a missile casing that could only belong to a Stinger missile.

Modal Trigger

The Taliban took out a US Chinook helicopter in 2012 with a Stinger missile signed out by the CIA around the time of the attack.Photo: Reuters

Lodged in the right nacelle, they found one fragment that contained an entire serial number.

The investigation took time. Arms were twisted, noses put out of joint. But when the results came back, they were stunning: The Stinger tracked back to a lot that had been signed out by the CIA recently, not during the anti-Soviet ­jihad.

Reports of the Stinger reached the highest echelons of the US command in Afghanistan and became a source of intense speculation, but no action.

Everyone knew the war was winding down. Revealing that the Taliban had US-made Stingers risked demoralizing coalition troops. Because there were no coalition casualties, government officials made no public announcement of the attack.

My sources in the US Special Operations community believe the Stinger fired against the Chinook was part of the same lot the CIA turned over to the ­Qataris in early 2011, weapons Hillary Rodham Clinton’s State Department intended for anti-Khadafy forces in Libya.

Modal Trigger

U.S. Army Staff Sgt. Luis Trochez demonstrates how to use a Stinger on the National Mall in 2005.Photo: Getty Images

They believe the Qataris delivered between 50 and 60 of those same Stingers to the Taliban in early 2012, and an additional 200 SA-24 Igla-S surface-to-air missiles.

Qatar now is expected to hold five Taliban commanders released from Guantanamo for a year before allowing them to go to Afghanistan.

But if we can’t trust the Qataris not to give our weapons to the Taliban, how can we trust them with this?

link

The Stinger missiles were supplied to al-Qaeda via the government of Qatar,. Maybe you recall Qatar has accepted custody of the five Taliban leaders released by the Obama Administration.

[autigeremt 7,458]

Nothing to see here. Move along.

[cptau 169]

There are no adults in charge in this government.

[Strychnine 1,811]

I'm rather surprised that anyone here thinks that Obama (or his administration) is actually in charge of the CIA.

[icanthearyou 4,468]

I'm rather surprised that anyone here thinks that Obama (or his administration) is actually in charge of the CIA.

King Oblammer is incharge of everthing.

[autigeremt 7,458]

I'm rather surprised that anyone here thinks that Obama (or his administration) is actually in charge of the CIA.

One day......never mind.

[Tigermike 4,082]

I'm rather surprised that anyone here thinks that Obama (or his administration) is actually in charge of the CIA.

I'm surprised that's the only thing you got from the info.

[Tigermike 4,082]

I'm rather surprised that anyone here thinks that Obama (or his administration) is actually in charge of the CIA.

King Oblammer is incharge of everthing.

Obviously you don't keep up,,,, Obama always shifts blame. ALWAYS.

[Strychnine 1,811]

I'm rather surprised that anyone here thinks that Obama (or his administration) is actually in charge of the CIA.

I'm surprised that's the only thing you got from the info.

It isn't. I got that the CIA signed out some Stingers that were intended to be sent to Libya, but somehow found their way into the wrong hands. When you move weapons clandestinely, you cannot be surprised when they do not actually reach their intended destination. Obama and Hillary's involvement was likely no more than the instruction: "Get those Libyan rebels some weapons..." Much like Fast and Furious itself, where the sting operations of purposely allowed straw purchases (Operation Wide Receiver) were commenced in 2006 (well before Obama's inauguration).

In other words, a partisan administration slam is being made where none exists. There is plenty to legitimately criticize them for, you don't need to make reaches to manufacture more. Obama probably knew as much about both as the relative agencies' directors did, which is not likely to be very much at all about the actual execution of their directives.

That said, if you would like to make the assertion that we should not have been supporting Libyan rebels, I would agree with you. In the mid-2000's Gaddafi was actually making good progress with repairing their relations with the rest of the world. However, he still wasn't singing the tune we wanted. I think a lot of this South-South cooperation has been perceived as threatening (specifically since we are frequently referred to as imperialists), and the Libyan rebels presented a great opportunity to neutralize one of its chief proponents. Personally, I think South-South cooperation is a good thing, and a great opportunity for us to make a better connection to emerging nations that have not always thought highly of us.

[Tigermike 4,082]

The weapons went to what country only to end up with the Taliban? The five released Taliban prisoners were released to what country?

[Strychnine 1,811]

The weapons went to what country only to end up with the Taliban? The five released Taliban prisoners were released to what country?

Qatar. Qatar is basically the only intermediary we have with the Taliban. Remember the peace talks we tried to have with them years ago? Those were in Qatar. The Taliban themselves consider it a neutral location, as Qatar has reasonably good relations with almost everyone. In fact, they have an office there.

My point is that the CIA's decision to route clandestine arms shipments through Qatar had nothing to do with the "Obama administration". I guarantee that the logistics of how to get those weapons to their intended destination were never a concern of Obama or Hillary Clinton or John Brennon or James Clapper. Somewhere along the chain, someone's asset wasn't on the side they were thought to be. Or the Libyan rebels sent them to the Taliban themselves. Once they were out of our physical custody and into whatever chain was supposed to deliver them to Libya, we had no control over it. That's the risk you assume in clandestine arms deals, and why we cannot be outraged after we find them in the wrong hands.

Qatar was the only real option of a destination to send the Taliban prisoners we exchanged, unless you'd prefer we sent them to Afghanistan or Pakistan directly. No one else would take them. Qatar was willing to, as they already have Taliban members residing there. Perhaps you should look into the recent history of our talks with the Taliban for a peaceful exit from Afghanistan.

Ultimately, one thing has nothing to do with the other. There is no scandal or trail of incompetence that leads back to Obama's desk as the source. The same holds true with Operation Fast and Furious. If it's Obama's fault, then it's Bush's fault too. However, the reality is that neither of them are to blame for it.

[Tigermike 4,082]

Fast and Furious is Bush's fault too? But no one is to blame? A border patrolman was killed and no one is to blame? Who knows how many Mexican policemen and civilians were killed and no one is to blame? One of those stinger missiles took down a U.S helicopter and no one is to blame? How convenient.

[homersapien 12,658]

Heck, Reagan didn't even make the mistake of providing weapons to a shaky ally, he gave them straight to the Taliban. How do you know any given missile used to shoot down a US plane wasn't one Reagan gave them?

http://www.nytimes.c...inger_ed3_.html

http://online.wsj.co...598851109446780

http://www.telegraph...s-Stingers.html

Maybe this is not an issue of who is to "blame". Maybe this is more of an issue of U.S. policy and assumptions in general.

[Strychnine 1,811]

Fast and Furious is Bush's fault too? But no one is to blame? A border patrolman was killed and no one is to blame? Who knows how many Mexican policemen and civilians were killed and no one is to blame? One of those stinger missiles took down a U.S helicopter and no one is to blame? How convenient.

You are missing the point. No one can tell you who individually authorized Operation Fast and Furious. This tells you that it was most likely concocted by the relevant field offices as the best strategy to accomplish the director's goals, instead of a directive that came from DC. Aside from that, gun-walking has long been an investigation method used by the ATF. They were trying to be creative in attacking what is a severe problem for both the United States and Mexico: Mexican drug cartels. Why would the details of an operation between a few field offices warrant the complete attention of the ATF's director, the Attorney General, or the President of the United States? To them, it was a low-level operation that would warrant their attention for commendations if it succeeded. If you must hold someone responsible for Operation Fast and Furious, look for the agent in charge of the ATF's Phoenix field division (which is where it started).

If you want to blame something for the Taliban having new Stingers that were originally meant for Libya, then blame our tendency to provide clandestine support for foreign rebels when it suits us. If we must know who has their hands on weapons that we have manufactured, then perhaps we should just keep our hands on them. None of this is distinct to Obama. While it may certainly be a bad course of action, at the worst, all he did was act in accordance with long established precedents. We don't get to decide one day to start hanging the President for doing the same things his predecessors did.