Leave a Reply --Link to Moderation Policy--
Only Logged in users can comment.
New Commentators Register here to comment.
Saker Message:
Only Logged in users can comment.
New Commentators Register here to comment.
An analysis here by Elijah J. Magnier that fleshes out some more what NasrAllah is saying.
https://t.co/FiLk6GIUMR
Mainstream media accused the US President Barak Obama of being “weak, indecisive, hesitant and even cowardly” in relation to the lack of full military intervention, not only in Syria against President Bashar al-Assad, but also in Iraq. Actually, Obama is quite the opposite. The President’s Middle East policy has been the most thoughtful and successful so far, and in the best interests of the US. Obama has refused to send troops on the ground to fight on behalf of the countries in the region. He has limited his involvement to a few thousand advisors, he has used local forces willing to fight and die to further the interests of the US and its allies, and he has managed to sell more weapons especially to Saudi Arabia. In fact, one way or another, he has waged his own style “war on terror”.
I have to say I have trouble with his analysis. I like Magnier, but in this particular piece I disagreed with a lot of what he said, and the way he said it.
He seems awfully forgiving of Obama and US policy in general with regard to how Daesh came into being and what the US has been doing in Syria. It seems most odd to me that he would write such a surface-appearances piece, in contradiction to so much that we actually know.
I suggest people take their critical thinking with them when they read it. Personally, when it comes to the origin of the Takfiri plague of rats, I’ll stick with Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah.
Over time there have been different commentators who believe Obama is more moderate than the likes of the McCain crowd. My take from Magnier’s analysis is that that Obama or whoever is behind Obama policy is far more dangerous than the in your face McCain types.
It is a policy where the US can bleed its enemies without having to send troops away and have domestic opposition. It is a long term strategy that Russia ect does have to react to.
Apart from the title Magniers analysis on why and how the terrorist organizations where set up is the same as Nasralla
On Sakers thread I also put up this link http://atimes.com/2016/08/iran-taps-into-turkish-russian-reset/#comment-2837433889 an analysis of Russia Turkey Iran – Eurasia.
By a commenter under an Asia times article but well worth reading. An analysis of how Eurasia is countering the US strategy outlined by Magnier.
Mr. Nasrallah is essentially correct. Regardless how many group names we see, ISIS / ISIL / Daesh began with some of the graduates of Camp Bucca prison in Iraq, about 2004. I quote one paragraph from facts and questions assembled by Peter Chamberlain two years ago:
“If it is true that alleged ISIS leader ‘Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi’ was ever in Camp Bucca then he went through the Camp 134 Process, subjecting him to a ‘behavior modification’ process, part of a ‘proactive counterinsurgency strategy’ for detention operations (according to Detention Operations, Behavior Modification, and Counterinsurgency, from the US ARMY COMBINED ARMS CENTER). If al-Baghdadi or other ISIS members were at Bucca, they were herded through a dividing process, which identified the ‘unreconcilable’ insurgents, in order to sequester them away from the general population. ‘Moderates or former extremists moving toward moderation’ were separated for special treatment intended turn them away from extremist beliefs, before ‘releas[ing] them to return to their homes as ‘moderate missiles of the mind.’ The mission at Bucca was to ‘modify the behavior of detainees so that when they re-enter Iraqi society, they are no longer threats to the Iraqi government and coalition forces but rather agents of change for the future of Iraq.”
https://therearenosunglasses.wordpress.com/2014/09/03/what-is-the-truth-about-isis/
Great Nasrallah!
20 years after, probably we will be talking about him as “one of the greatest revolutionaries of the Post Cold War era”
An excellent article on why Obama and Hillary became founders of ISIS:
http://www.blackagendareport.com/obama_clinton_created_isis
Still the opposition to US imperialism hasn’t grasped what ISIS is and how it was created.
ISI/ISIS was created by CENTCOM of course – and had usual suspects: the house of Saud, the Hashemite’s, Israel, the AKP etc all working it.
But it was The Iranians (ok I know it sounds insane) who are the hidden partner in all this. And the Secretary General, Syrians, Russians and everyone on the other side are refusing to bring this fact out into the open.
To understand how this was possible – and how complicated a trap CENTCOM set for its enemies you have to understand the impossible goal that Washington had given the American military in 1991 and which was finally resolved with a successful strategy in 2003.
Russia will find itself ensnared unless it can bring itself to stand up to the Iranians and force them to accept an independent Iraq.
Anyone who is interested please reply and i’ll add a comment explaining.
Yes Jon, interesting, please explain.