The ISIS offensive is a threat to Iraq, not the US. This is a case of two US-backed forces fighting each other. The US directly funds, equips, arms and trains Iraqi forces, and it indirectly funds, equips, arms and trains ISIS forces. The only reason the US indirectly does this, providing arms to ISIS allies who immediately pass them on to ISIS, is to give the US "plausible deniability" that's not in the least bit plausible.
"Consider. We are now providing weapons to the Free Syrian Army to oust Bashar Assad. “Assad must go!” blared Barack Obama in one of his many ignored ultimata.This is the part of the war for the dollar.
But should Assad fall, the result will be the persecution of the Syrian Christians, a massacre of the Alawites, and a possible takeover of the country by the al-Qaida-linked al-Nusra Front and ISIS.
Is any of that in America’s interests?"
"We may be entering the early stages of a sectarian war between Sunni and Shia across the Middle East. The ISIS claim of having executed 1,700 captured Shia soldiers in Iraq is surely intended to ignite one.Critics of the Iraq war warned us this would happen.
If it happens, this war could spread to Lebanon, Jordan and down into the Gulf states where Shia outnumber Sunnis in Bahrain and in the oil-producing provinces of the Saudi northeast.
Does the Middle East today – Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Libya, Lebanon – look like what we were promised by George Bush and his neocon advisers when they were beating the drums for a U.S. invasion of Iraq?"
US talks to Iran about war in Iraq.
The Afghan war destabilized Pakistan.
US ranks 101 out of 162 nations in peace. It's hard to imagine 61 nations in more wars than the US.
Putin advisor proposes anti-dollar alliance to stop US aggression abroad.
No comments:
Post a Comment