The CIA first aligned itself with extremist Islam during the Cold War era. Back then, America saw the world in fairly simple terms: on both sides, the Soviet Union and Third World nationalism, that America considered a Soviet instrument; on the opposing side, Western states and militant political Islam, which America considered an ally in the battle against the Soviet Union.
The director of the National Security Agency under Ronald Reagan, General William Odom recently commented,”by almost any measure the U.S. has used terrorism. In 1978-79 the Senate was trying to pass a law against global terrorism — in every version they produced, the lawyers said the U.S. will be in violation.”
Throughout the 1970’s that the CIA used the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt as a barrier, both to thwart Soviet expansion and prevent the spread of Marxist ideology among the Arab masses. America also openly supported Sarekat Islam against Sukarno in Indonesia, also affirmed the Jamaat-e-Islami terror group against Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto in Pakistan. Last but definitely not least, there is Al Qaeda.
Former British Foreign Secretary, Robin Cook, told the House of Commons which Al Qaeda was clearly a product of Western intelligence agencies. Mr. Cook explained that Al Qaeda, that literally signifies an abbreviation of”the database” in Arabic, was originally the personal database of the tens of thousands of Islamist extremists, who were trained by the CIA and funded by the Saudis, in order to defeat the Russians from Afghanistan.
America’s relationship with Al Qaeda has always been a love-hate affair. Depending on whether a specific Al Qaeda terrorist group in a given region furthers American interests or not, the U.S. State Department either capital or harshly targets that terrorist group. Even as American foreign policy manufacturers claim to oppose Muslim extremism, they intentionally foment it as a weapon of foreign policy.
The Islamic State is its most recent weapon which, much like Al Qaeda, is unquestionably backfiring. ISIS lately rose to international prominence following its thugs started beheading American journalists. Now the terrorist team controls an area the size of the uk.
In order to understand why the Islamic State has grown and thrived so quickly, one must take a look at the company’s American-backed roots. America, rather unwisely, destroyed Saddam Hussein’s secular state machinery and replaced it with a predominantly Shiite administration. The U.S. job caused enormous unemployment in Sunni areas, by rejecting socialism and shutting down factories in the naive expectation that the magical hands of the free market would create jobs. Beneath the new U.S.-backed Shiite regime, working class Sunni’s lost thousands and thousands of occupations. Contrary to the white Afrikaners in South Africa, that had been permitted to maintain their wealth after regime change, upper course Sunni’s were systematically dispossessed of their resources and dropped their political sway. As opposed to promoting religious unity and integration, American policy in Iraq exacerbated sectarian divisions and created a fertile breading ground for Sunni discontent, where Al Qaeda in Iraq took root.
The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) used to have another name: Al Qaeda in Iraq. After 2010 the group rebranded and refocused its efforts on Syria.
There are essentially three wars being waged in Syria: 1 between the authorities and the rebels, another involving Iran and Saudi Arabia, and yet another between America and Russia. It’s this third, neo-Cold War conflict that made U.S. foreign policy makers decide to take the danger of arming Islamist rebels from Syria, since Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad, is an integral Russian ally. Rather embarrassingly, many of these Syrian rebels have now turned out to be ISIS thugs, who are publicly brandishing American-made M16 Assault rifles.
America’s Middle East policy revolves around oil and Israel. The invasion of Iraq has partially fulfilled Washington’s thirst for oil, but ongoing air strikes in Syria and economic sanctions on Iran have all related to Israel.
ISIS is not only an instrument of terror used by America to overthrow the Syrian authorities; it is also used to put pressure on Iran.
The last time Iran invaded another nation was in 1738. Since independence in 1776, the U.S. has been participated in over 53 army invasions and expeditions. Despite what the Western media’s war cries would have you think, Iran is clearly not the danger to regional security, Washington is. An Intelligence Report printed in 2012, endorsed by all sixteen U.S. intelligence bureaus, confirms that Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Truth is, any Iranian nuclear ambition, real or imagined, is as a result of American hostility towards Iran, and not the other way round.
America is using ISIS in 3 ways: to attack its enemies in the Middle East, to serve as a pretext to get U.S. military intervention overseas, and in the home to foment a fabricated domestic hazard, used to justify the unprecedented expansion of invasive domestic surveillance.
By quickly increasing both government secrecy and surveillance, Mr. Obama’s government is raising its power to see its own citizens, while decreasing its citizens’ power to watch their government.
The so-called”War on Terror” must be viewed for what it really is: a pretext for keeping a dangerously oversize U.S. military. The two strongest groups in the U.S. foreign policy establishment would be the Israel lobby, which leads U.S. Middle East policy, and the Military-Industrial-Complex, which profits from the prior group’s actions. Since George W. Bush declared the”War on Terror” in October 2001, it has cost the American taxpayer approximately 6.6 trillion dollars and thousands of fallen sons and daughters; however, the wars have also surfaced in tens of thousands of dollars for Washington’s military elite.
In reality, more than seventy American companies and individuals have won up to $27 billion in contracts for work in postwar Iraq and Afghanistan within the past 3 decades, according to a recent study by the Center for Public Integrity. According to the study, nearly 75 percent of these private businesses had employees or board members, who had served , or had close ties to, the executive division of the Republican and Democratic administrations, members of Congress, or even the highest levels of the army
Back in 1997, a U.S. Department of Defense report stated,”the data show a strong correlation between U.S. involvement abroad and an increase in terrorist attacks against the U.S.” Truth isthe only way America could win the”War On Terror” is if it quits giving terrorists the motivation and the tools to attack America. Terrorism is the symptom; American imperialism in the Middle East is the cancer. To put it differently, the War on Terror is terrorism; only, it’s conducted on a far larger scale by individuals with jets and missiles.