Massive Disparity Between Military and Humanitarian Aid to Syria

humanitarian crisis and you're sending lots and lots of, you know, whether it's food or fuel to the opposition, I mean, there's no guarantee that that's going to get to the people who need it most inside Syria.

But on top of that, the United States has also been actively funding a CIA program to basically arm the opposition. We don't know how much has been spent on that, because it's been mostly covert. They've also--according to various news reports, the U.S. has been, you know, covertly training Syrian rebels. So we don't know how much that's costing us either, but I would imagine it's not cheap.

And so, you know--and then, also, if you look at the Syrian refugee crisis that has resulted, the United States has only taken in 33 Syrian refugees at this point. I mean, that's a pretty pathetically low number. And overall the U.S. has offered to take in a total of 2,000 Syrian refugees, which is also a pathetically low number.

So, a yeah, you see this huge disparity.

And the same goes for, you know, [incompr.] the two countries that have really been, you know, spending the most money on arming the opposition in Syria, which are Qatar and Saudi Arabia. I mean, with Qatar they've spent $3 billion on arming the rebels, and compare that to $2.7 million, I believe, which is going to humanitarian aid for Syrians, and that's a huge difference.

And the same thing with Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia spent something like $50 million or maybe a little bit more than that on humanitarian aid, and, you know, they haven't taken in any refugees as far as I know. And they've spent, you know, billions and billions of dollars. They've been one of the main backers. We don't know exactly how much, but it's more than Qatar is spending, so it's billions of dollars, on arming the opposition. And, you know, it goes both ways.

Also, with Russia and Iran, which had been, you know, steadfastly supporting the Assad regime. You know, it wouldn't be possible for Assad to commit all the violence and brutality he's committed without weapons that have been--you know, that he's been able to buy from Russia. And, that was really crucial when the uprising first began. I mean, for a while, Russia stopped arming or stopped sending weapons to the Assad regime, but after diplomatic talks broke down a few months ago, they started sending arms again. So we know Russia's--I mean, they're--spent around--or not spent, but Russia's at least given $1 billion in arms to Syrian troops. I imagine it's probably more than that. And, you know, Russia's also spent very little money on humanitarian aid, only about--I think it's, like, under $20 million. And plus Russia's also basically used its veto power to protect the Assad regime from the UN Security Council, and I don't know that you can really put a price on that.

And then, you know, the same thing with Iran. Iran has spent--Iran has given tons of surveillance technology to the Assad regime that was crucial to suppressing the uprising when it first began, when it was still nonviolent, even. You know that Assad wouldn't have been able to keep a tab on protesters without that technology and to shut it down the way he did. And the same with the arms. They're still giving arms. And, I mean, Iran--I couldn't even find Iran on the list of countries giving humanitarian aid to Syrians.

So it's the same pattern with all these countries that are involved. It's--they're more invested by far, by billions of dollars--they're more interested in fueling the horrific violence in Syria and are doing very, very little, if--you know, some of them are doing nothing to contribute to aiding Syrian refugees, who are really--I mean, they're in some of the most inhumane circumstances right now, and it's really, really tragic. So I think it's important to look at that contrast and point it out, 'cause it should elicit, I think, outrage among people who care about this conflict.

Source: therealnews.com