US Arms to Sunni Fighters

As if US efforts in Iraq weren't frustrating enough already, news that we're arming both sides of a conflict that didn't exist before we ousted Saddam, dismantled the existing political, military and social structures and specifically picked the side that was politically convenient to American interests in the region (narrowly), comes as little surprise. The problem, however, is that these decisions of convenience don't remain convenient for long.

As the New York Times points out,

Americans officers acknowledge that providing weapons to breakaway rebel groups is not new in counterinsurgency warfare, and that in places where it has been tried before, including the French colonial war in Algeria, the British-led fight against insurgents in Malaya in the early 1950s, and in Vietnam, the effort often backfired, with weapons given to the rebels being turned against the forces providing them.

Not only has our government put US troops between warring factions, but we're now arming both sides of the conflict. How long until Sunni fighters level US-provided weapons against the largely Shiite government our troops are supposedly ensconced in the region to protect? Tell me again how we're supporting the troops?