- Al Gore’s climate-changers at EPA hearings foiled by cool temperatures
- Army’s 3-D printed bombs will create ‘a whole new universe’ of deadly capabilities
- Hamas calls on Hezbollah to join in fight against Israel
- Senators to FIFA, others: Don’t reward Putin with the World Cup in 2018
- U.S. condemns Israeli shelling of shelter in Gaza
- Obamacare shoots premiums up by 88 percent in California
- Chicken pox outbreak puts illegal immigrant facility on lockdown
- Obama to Republicans: ‘Stop just hatin’ all the time’
- U.S. chemical sites vulnerable despite millions spent on security: Congress
- Driverless cars to hit the British streets by 2015
House, Senate intelligence panels OK military aid for Syrian rebels
Question of the Day
Congress’ intelligence committees have approved CIA plans to ship weapons to Syrian rebels, despite concerns that the arms might fall into the hands of extremists and that the aid will not be enough to shift the stalemate in the country’s civil war.
“The House intelligence committee has very strong concerns about the strength of the administration’s plans in Syria and its chances for success,” said Rep. Mike Rogers, Michigan Republican and chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. “After much discussion and review, we got a consensus that we could move forward with what the administration plans.”
According to congressional officials, the deal with the oversight committees allows the CIA to use previously appropriated funds to pay for the weapons supplies, which President Obama authorized last month after concluding that Syria’s government had used chemical weapons against the opposition.
Media reports have revealed the existence of a CIA operation in Jordan that already has been providing training and nonlethal aid to rebel brigades identified by U.S. intelligence as “moderates.”
Weapons shipments should begin within weeks, a congressional official told The Washington Times.
Some lawmakers are concerned that the United States should not get drawn into the Syrian conflict, but many hawkish Republicans have argued that direct U.S. military involvement will be necessary to dislodge Syrian President Bashar Assad’s regime.
But U.S. military intervention in Syria likely would cost billions of dollars and carry several risks for the forces involved, Army Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said in letter that was released Monday.
© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Shaun Waterman is an award-winning reporter for The Washington Times, covering foreign affairs, defense and cybersecurity. He was a senior editor and correspondent for United Press International for nearly a decade, and has covered the Department of Homeland Security since 2003. His reporting on the Sept. 11 Commission and the tortuous process by which some of its recommendations finally became ...
- Senator's memo shows Iran links in Homeland Security's troubled immigration program
- Help wanted: Homeland Security plagued by vacancies at the top
- Dems back bill to fix problems in investor visa program
- Democrats proceed with Mayorkas vote despite pending investigation
- NSA monitored 'World of Warcraft' players
Latest Blog Entries
TWT Video Picks
- Geraldo Rivera: Matt Drudge 'doing his best to stir up a civil war'
- Lois Lerner hated conservatives, new emails show
- Catholic League slams Obama: 'Do Christian lives mean so little to you?'
- HURT: Impeaching Obama is a losing strategy for the GOP
- CARSON: Rudderless U.S. foreign policy
- Patent workers paid to exercise, shop, do chores: report
- Federal judge grants 90-day stay in D.C. gun case
- Fla. mom arrested for allowing 7-year-old son to walk to park alone
- Senate overcomes first filibuster of Obama's border-spending bill
- Obama thanks Muslims for 'building the very fabric of our nation'
Obama's biggest White House 'fails'
Celebrities turned politicians
Athletes turned actors
20 gadgets that changed the world