Obama and
Clinton Created ISIS – Too Bad Trump Can’t Explain
How It Happened
It is an
historical fact that the U.S. and Saudi Arabia
created the international jihadist network from
which al Qaida and ISIS sprang, almost four decades
ago.
By Glen
Ford
August 19,
2013 "Information
Clearing House"
- "BAR"
- Donald Trump has backtracked -- sort of --
on his assertion that President Obama and Hillary
Clinton are “the founders” of ISIS, or the “most
valuable players” on the Islamic State team.
“Obviously, I’m being sarcastic,” said the
self-styled “America-Firster” – quickly adding, “but
not that sarcastic, to be honest with you.”
Trump
cannot articulate or fully grasp the horrific truth
of his original statement because that would require
a much more fundamental indictment of U.S. imperial
policy in the Muslim world since the last days of
1979, when Zbigniew Brzezinski convinced President
Jimmy Carter to set the jihadist dogs loose in
Afghanistan. As stated in his memoir
From the Shadow, Brzezinski advised Carter
to aid the right-wing Muslim resistance to the
leftist, secular government in Afghanistan in order
to “induce a Soviet military intervention” and thus
embroil the USSR in a Vietnam-like quagmire.
Brzezinski viewed the so-called Mujahadeen as
potential foot soldiers of U.S. global policy. “What
is most important to the history of the world? The
Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some
stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central
Europe and the end of the cold war?” Brzezinski
asked, rhetorically, decades later.
Having
acted in accordance with Brzezinski’s counsel,
President Carter can accurately be described as a
founding “creator” of al Qaida, along with fellow
“most valuable player” Ronald Reagan, whose CIA
partnered with Saudi Arabia to spend billions
drawing Muslims from around the globe into the war
in Afghanistan. Together, the U.S. and the Saudis
gave birth to the international Islamic jihadist
movement – a phenomenon that had not previously
existed in world history. The jihadists would become
an essential weapon in the U.S. imperial armory, a
ghastly tool for regime change in the Muslim world
which also doubled as justification for the never
ending American quest for planetary dominance, now
that the Soviet boogeyman was gone.
“In 2011,
Obama launched the Mother of All Proxy Wars.”
Brzezinski
became Barack Obama’s foreign policy guru, with
consequences that should have been predictable for
U.S. Middle East policy but were largely ignored by
liberals and so-called progressives in their
euphoria at the exit of George W. Bush.
Clearly,
the U.S. public would not tolerate another episode
of massive, direct U.S. troop involvement in the
region; that was no longer an option. But what
force, then, was available to execute Washington’s
unfinished agenda for conquest in this part of the
world? In 2011, Obama launched the
Mother of All Proxy Wars, first against Muammar
Gaddafi’s government in Libya, then swiftly
mobilizing the totality of the international
jihadist network that had been created out of whole
cloth under Carter and Reagan nearly 30 years
before. Washington and its NATO partners in the
Libya aggression, in close concert with Saudi
Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, turned
Syria into a cauldron of death, funneling billions
of dollars in weapons to literally hundreds of
Salafist and outright mercenary militias, with Al
Qaida’s regional affiliate, al Nusra, at the core.
This was Obama’s idea of a “smart” war: a frenzied
terror offensive cloaked in lies and deception.
The
criminal foreign policy pursued by Obama and
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is rooted in the
same worldview arrogantly articulated by Brzezinski
when he derided those who fretted over the blowback
that might result from deploying “some stirred-up
Moslems” as foot soldiers of imperialism. As the
U.S. and its allies literally competed with each
other to flood Syria with the weapons, funds,
intelligence resources and diplomatic and media
cover to bring down the government in Damascus, they
collectively created both the material basis and
political space for the jihadists to pursue their
own ideological objectives. ISIS emerged, to
establish a caliphate of its own in Syria and Iraq.
No one should have expected otherwise.
“This was
Obama’s idea of a ‘smart”’war: a frenzied terror
offensive cloaked in lies and deception.”
Back in
July of 2014, we at Black Agenda Report described
the rise of ISIS as signaling “the final collapse of
U.S. imperial strategy in the Muslim world --
certainly, in the Arab regions of Islam.” We
wrote:
“Think of
it as a Salafist declaration of independence...from
the Arab monarchies and western intelligence
agencies that have nurtured the international
jihadist network for almost two generations. The
Caliphate threatens, not only its immediate
adversaries in the Shiite-dominated governments of
Syria and Iraq, but the potentates of the Arab
Emirates, Qatar, Kuwait and the Mother of All
Monarchist Corruption in the Arab Sunni heartland,
the Saudi royal family. The threat is not
inferential, but literal, against ‘all emirates,
groups, states and organizations’ that do not
recognize that ISIS in its new incarnation is the
embodiment of Islam at war.’”
ISIS did
not exist when President Obama took office and put
Hillary Clinton in charge at Foggy Bottom. His (and
her) regime change in Libya and massive, terroristic
pivot to Syria “created” ISIS. And, let’s get the
history right, on this score: the U.S. did not
reject the jihadist death cult that became ISIS;
rather, the Islamic State divorced itself from the
U.S. and its European and royal allies. Yet, it
still took the Russian intervention in Syria in
September of last year to push Washington to mount
more than token air assaults against ISIS.
Apparently, the U.S. wants to avoid killing too many
Islamic State fighters, in hopes that there will be
lots of them left to join U.S.-sanctioned jihadist
outfits when it gets too hot for ISIS. (Al Nusra has
changed its name and resigned from al Qaida -- with
the blessing of al Qaida’s leadership in Pakistan --
so as to better blend in with the other jihadist
outfits on western payrolls.)
“U.S. military
intelligence saw clearly the imminent rise of ISIS.”
You don’t
need to take Donald Trump’s word for it, that Obama
and Clinton have been “most valuable players” for
ISIS. The U.S. military’s Defense Intelligence
Agency (DIA) came to much the same conclusion, back
in 2012. The military spooks’ reports, declassified
last year, showed the DIA had warned that “the West,
Gulf countries, and Turkey [which] support the
[Syrian] opposition” believe “there is the
possibility of establishing a declared or undeclared
Salafist principality in eastern Syria (Hasaka and
Der Zor), and this is exactly what the supporting
powers to the opposition want, in order to isolate
the Syrian regime.”
The
DIA was alarmed that
“...the
deterioration of the situation has dire consequences
on the Iraqi situation and are as follows:
“This
creates the ideal situation for AQI [al Qaida in
Iraq, which became ISIS] to return to its old
pockets in Mosul and Ramadi, and will provide a
renewed momentum under the presumption of unifying
the jihad among Sunni Iraq and Syria, and the rest
of the Sunnis in the Arab world against what it
considers one enemy, the dissenters [meaning, Shia
Muslims]. ISI could also declare an Islamic State
through its union with other terrorist organizations
in Iraq and Syria, which will create grave danger in
regards to unifying Iraq and the protection of its
territory.”
Thus, a
year after Obama and his European and Arab friends
brought down Libya’s Gaddafi and shifted their proxy
war of regime change to Syria, U.S. military
intelligence saw clearly the imminent rise of ISIS
-- and that “this is exactly” what “the West, Gulf
countries and Turkey...want, in order to isolate the
Syrian regime.”
Yes, Obama
created ISIS, with the enthusiastic assistance of
Hillary Clinton, and he is still nurturing al Nusra,
the erstwhile affiliate of al Qaida, which was mid-wifed
into existence by Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew
Brzezinski. In the intervening years, the jihadists
have become indispensable to U.S. imperial policy,
but especially so since George W. Bush’s defeat in
Iraq, which soured the American public on “dumb”
wars – meaning, in Obama-Speak, wars in which large
numbers of Americans die. Proxy wars are ideal --
“smart,” because only Arabs and Africans and people
that Americans have never heard of, die. Libya
wasn’t even a war, according to Obama, since no U.S.
personnel perished.
“The jihadists
have become indispensable to U.S. imperial policy.”
The truth
about ISIS and the Obama administration is so
obvious that even Donald Trump has a hazy idea of
what happened in Syria and Libya. However, the
spoiled man-brat white nationalist billionaire from
Queens is incapable of putting the
Obama/Clinton/ISIS connection in the historical
context of U.S. imperial policy. Sadly, most
“liberals” and far too many “progressives”
(including Black ones) are afflicted with the same
disease as Trump: extreme imperial chauvinism --
which is practically inseparable from white
supremacism. Extreme imperial chauvinism allows
Americans to send to the White House people that
should, instead, be sent to the gallows or a firing
squad (after a trial, of course). It allows
Americans that claim to be on the “left’ side of the
spectrum to recoil in horror at Donald Trump (who
hasn’t killed anybody that we know of, and who says
he will not engage in regime change as president),
yet will vote for a woman whose career is soaked in
the blood of hundreds of thousands in the Middle
East and the northern tier of Africa, and whose
husband set in motion a genocide that has
killed six million people in the Democratic
Republic of Congo.
One
candidate, Trump, most resembles the late Alabama
governor George Wallace with a “let’s make a deal”
foreign policy. The other, Clinton, is a genocidal
maniac, whose crimes as president will be Hitlerian
in scale.
What is
scarier than Clinton or Trump, is that Americans
seem to have no visceral aversion to genocide (of
non-white peoples). But, unless you’re a Green or
some shade of Red, genocide isn’t even an election
issue.
|