So, the CIA Doesn't Like the Idea

At a recent closed-door congressional briefing on the administration's new strategy to combat the Islamic State, a top CIA official left little doubt among those in the room about the agency's attitude toward the project.

[...]

First, the CIA has already been covertly equipping Syrian rebels at the instruction of the White House, but has come to find the fighters increasingly disorganized and radicalized as the conflict goes on, with U.S.-supplied arms winding up in the hands of more radical fighters.

Meanwhile, some turf issues are at play. While officials in the CIA are skeptical of the broader strategy to arm and train the rebels, they are also wary of a plan that would give the Pentagon a responsibility that has so far rested with their agency.

One Democratic member of Congress said that the CIA has made it clear that it doubts the possibility that the administration's strategy could succeed.

[...]

”CIA thinks that it is impossible to train and equip a force of pro-Western Syrian nationals that can fight and defeat Assad, al-Nusra and ISIS, regardless of whatever air support that force may receive."

He added that, as the CIA sees it, the ramped-up backing of rebels is an expansion of a strategy that is already not working. "The CIA also believes that its previous assignment to accomplish this was basically a fool’s errand, and they are well aware of the fact that many of the arms that they provided ended up in the wrong hands," the congressman said, echoing intelligence sources.

CIA spokesman Ryan Trapani disputed the validity and accuracy of those assertions.

  HuffPo

He would, though, wouldn’t he?

 Really, hopefully this enlightens people who are not currently aware that whatever the government says it is doing or not doing has little or no meaning if the CIA can do the opposite in secret. What a clever setup we have.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.