Last week German newspaper Köelner Stadt-Anzeiger published an interview with Abu Al Ezz, a commander in the Nusra Front, the al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria.

According to Al Ezz, U.S. materiel has been key in turning the tide against Syrian army forces:

“Due to these rockets [American-made TOW anti-tank missiles], we reached a balance with the regime. Our tanks came from Libya via Turkey, joined by the [BM-21] multiple rocket launchers.”  

“The [Assad] government forces have an advantage because of aircraft and missile launchers, but “we have the American-made TOW missiles, and the situation in some areas is under control,” Al Ezz added.

When asked if the TOW missiles were initially intended for Jabhat Al-Nusra or if the group obtained them from the moderate Free Syrian Army, the jihadist clarified: “No, the missiles were given to us directly.”

But Al Ezz went on to add that training on how to use these weapons came directly from the US and its allies. When Jabhat Al-Nusra was besieged, Al Ezz said they “had officers from Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Israel and America here… Experts in the use of satellites, rockets, reconnaissance and thermal security cameras.”
The German journalist asked if US instructors were really present among the jihadists’ ranks. Al Ezz replied: “The Americans are on our side.”

Increasingly, the so-called "moderates" are drawing closer to al-Qaeda. In fact, they're so “intermingled” that the State Department has admitted that it can't separate them.
Fifteen years of so-called GWOT is still seems amazing to think that we would be directly arming al-Qaeda, yet that appears to be exactly what is happening.
This was shown in no uncertain terms in a report from last week.

A new report citing former CIA officers has revealed that the agency was knowingly providing weapons, including tow missiles to fighters that were effectively part of al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front, continuing to arm “moderates” so long as they at least nominally kept their moderate names.

The report reveals that the vetting process amounted to little more than checking the names of fighters they were given against outdated terrorist databases, and that often they didn’t even have real names to check in the first place. It was in this way that the “moderate” Free Syrian Army (FSA) started getting arms in the first place.

But as the war continued, the FSA fighters were defecting en masse to the Nusra Front. Even being directly affiliated with al-Qaeda’s affiliate didn’t stop the arms flow to these groups, either, so long as they retained their FSA name so the CIA could feign arming “moderates.”

The report concludes that the FSA was quickly becoming a cover name for Nusra, a fact which apparently didn’t phase the CIA, which was just as eager to use this pretense, so long as they were arming a group that was fighting against the Syrian government.

Russian Deputy FM Mikhail Bogdanov warned against Washington's plan to arm Syrian rebel factions with shoulder-mounted anti-aircraft missiles, saying that the rebels the US are backing are liable to do the same thing that al-Qaeda did to America on 9/11.
That doesn't seem to bother those in Washington.

Two weeks ago, Secretary Kerry demanded Russia and the Syrian government stop bombing al-Qaeda occupied areas.
Yesterday Russia warned the United States against bombing Syrian troops, like we did a few weeks ago.

The rhetoric has really turned up in recent days.
Kerry admitted that he is in the pro-war in Syria camp, much like the rest of the State Department and the entire Hillary Clinton campaign.

It's beyond ironic that the pro-war people are claiming the moral high ground, while also arming al-Qaeda terrorists.
Who do they think are allies are? Who do they think will take over in Syria once we overthrow Assad? What do they think al-Qaeda will do to the minority groups there once Assad is gone? Why do they think this will turn out any better than Iraq?
And why does no one talk about Iran, who will not tolerate the overthrow of the Assad government?

Or is this just a game of make believe?