Sure.

At some point along their journey the weapons may have been transferred into the hands of people who value IS money more than they do the defeat of Assad.

could sell arms among themselves. Though more likely Nusra > Isis or the reverse rather than FSA.

this is just what is going to happen.

Not that the weapons makers and their privately-owned political hacks give much a damn who ultimately pays their blood money.

From Wiki:

On 13 June (2013), government officials state that the Obama administration, after days of high-level meetings, has approved providing lethal arms to the Supreme Military Council (SMC). The SMC is a rebel command structure that includes representatives from most major rebel groups, and excludes the Islamic extremist elements. The decision was made shortly after the administration has concluded that the Assad government has used chemical weapons on opposition forces, thus crossing the "red line" drawn by Obama earlier in 2012. The arms will include small arms and ammunition, and possibly anti-tank weapons. However, they will not include anti-aircraft weapons, something repeatedly requested by the armed opposition. Further such weapons would be supplied by the US "on our own timeline". The United States is also considering a no-fly zone in southern Syria, which would allow a safe place to equip and train rebels.

During September 2013, it was reported by US officials that under "a covert CIA program," small arms and anti tank weapons had begun reaching some moderate rebel groups. Although Free Syrian Army Commander Salim Idriss denied receiving lethal aid, some analysts commented that information on US arms may not have reached Idriss due to poor communications as the Free Syrian Army command was based in Northern Syria whilst weapons were reportedly reaching rebel groups in the south.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_involvement_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

Last edited Mon Sep 8, 2014, 03:01 PM - Edit history (1)

The Islamic Front raided warehouses holding the equipment which caused the U.S. to suspend non-lethal deliveries in December 2013. This is the problem when you provide weapons and assistance in unstable regions. You lose control of that equipment as soon as you hand it over and may end up fighting against people armed with your weapons.

And taken the weapons, supplied by the USA. More military industrial complex corporate profits!!

We would make more progress funding education and agriculture in this region than supplying arms to continue the fight. How about putting the money toward basic infrastructure improvements instead of killing implements.

Welcome to DU

our investments in education and agriculture. Without military intervention and their total annihilation, they will make life impossible to live for peaceful people.

I agree that once they have been substantially eliminated, we should invest in infrastructure and education for the masses.