Plan to aid Syria rebels delayed
Congressional committees are holding up a plan to send weapons to rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar Assad because of fears that such deliveries will not be decisive and the arms might end up in the hands of Islamist militants, five national security sources said.
Behind closed doors, the Senate and House intelligence committees have expressed reservations about the effort by President Obama's administration to support the insurgents by sending them military hardware. None of the military aid that the United States announced weeks ago has arrived in Syria, according to an official from an Arab country and Syrian opposition sources.
Democrats and Republicans on the committees are concerned that weapons could reach factions such as the Nusra Front, which is one of the most effective rebel groups but has been labeled by the United States as a front for al-Qaida in Iraq.
Meanwhile, Syrian government forces made significant progress in recapturing Homs from the rebel forces that have held the city for more than a year, according to rebel commanders and military officials in neighboring Lebanon.
Homs has been a symbolic and strategic asset to both sides since it became one of the first major cities in Syria to have several neighborhoods wrested from regime control. It lies at a crucial crossroads between Damascus and the coast, home to Syria's ports and ethnic villages that are home to supporters of the regime of President Bashar Assad.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Airstrikes against Islamic State fail to stop flow of jihadists into Syria
- Missing American siblings found dead in Mexico
- Burkina Faso’s parliament stormed by protesters
- Israel limits prayers at Al-Aqsa site
- Kerry admits American official’s use of barnyard vulgarity is ‘damaging’
- For more Asians, money delivers more happiness
- Activists’ families on hunger strike
- Malala donates prize money to rebuild Gaza school
- Everything is America’s fault, Putin says
- Iraq: Key town taken from Islamic State
- Gestapo impostor tricked British fascists, secret files show