So it's being reported that the US has essentially stopped funding and arming who we thought were pro-western, America-friendly Syrian rebel groups. We first paid them to resist the al-Assad regime, and them we paid them to resist ISIS too. But we know that they'll just morph into another radical-Islamic splinter group of anti-western terrorism. Sooner or later they all do.
My surprise isn't that we stopped sending them tens of millions of taxpayer money and weapons, my surprised is that we were stupid enough to think there is such a thing as pro-western Islamic militants, to begin with. The only people in the middle east who we can "trust" to look out for our interests are the strong-man dictators who we generously bribe to do so. If they mistreat their people, do we really care, as long as it keeps our gasoline cheap and Israel relatively peaceful? I know I don't.
Saddam Hussein, Hosni Mubarak, Moammar Qaddafi, and currently Bashar al-Assad all are or were, ruthless dictators, but who were moderate secularists who could be bribed with US money to behave as we wanted. They also kept a tight leash on the Muslim radicals in their countries.
Why the US feels the need to meddle in these countries just because the peasants there are unhappy is anybody's guess. Are we really that desperate to appear to the world to be humanitarians who deliver freedom and democracy like Santa Clause, to the third world?