most of these weapon's though are not american, with the small handful being stolen from an iraq base

For example ISIS did attack an Iraq base and steal some weapons, but most of the weapon's in the world come from Russia and other socialist/communist countries, rather than the U.S.

it's pretty unlikely Suadi Arabia is the source of their weapon's, since Suadi Arabia doesn't really need to be

There's no obvious link

maybe a few weapon's end up missing or something, but it's hardly substantial

@everybodydothatdinosaur https://www.thedailybeast.com/americas-allies-are-funding-isis?ref=home

false, technically speaking

Essentially a small number of weapon's ended up in their hands

This is a liberal source

>no obvious link
>literally the exact same sect of islam

SAying they're the same religion so they must be connected is pretty dumb, or else you are suggesting the pope supports the IRA

And salafiasm and wahabism are actually pretty different, although similiar

As one might imagine, the headlines on left-wing articles are usually very misleading

.......... salafism isn't a sect, its a doctrine, and its often employed by wahabists.... how fucking out of touch are you?!

"“There are private individuals in the Gulf that do support extremist groups there,” along with other funding sources, countered Mouaz Moustafa, executive director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force, a Syrian-American organization that supports the opposition"

and "left-wing" articles consider jihadists "warriors of peace" so fuck straight off with that

This is a left-wing sight

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-qa-is-saudi-arabia-funding-isis

Here's both John Podesta and the State Department saying that the Saudis are funding Isis

The dailybeast is notoriously bad

There are random individuals in the country doing it, not the Suadi governmeant

unlike based wikipedia, right?

@everybodydothatdinosaur Are they not Saudis?

It's misleading

Not all Saudis are members of the house of Saud

Not really

it's honestly not misleading

There are british people who joined ISIS as well, but saying Britain is funding them is clearly misleading

Did said british people fund them?

Saying "Suadi funded them" is just as stupid as saying the British funded them

It's a dumb argument to say a random person from a country is representative of that country

DID those British people fund them?

also, consider which citizens in Saudi Arabia have the financial and social means to ***donate fucking weapons and funds*** to anyone

Yes, those random people did, but that's not Britain, the governmeant funding them

it's just wordsmithing the argument

When you know the headline is misleading

It's misleading to say "The House of Saud funded ISIS"

Random Saudi citizens are still Saudis

It's clearly trying to imply one thing

Not really

Let's not pretend here

TBH