via The Atlantic.
I see a weird alliance here. You have Neo-Cons in the US being frustrated by an American public that is tired of the mess in the Middle East, a scared Saudi Arabia and Qatar that are looking to end the crisis in Syria and then the birth of a monster that turned on its master in the form of ISIS.
Remember John McCain wanted to arm the rebels in Syria?
Remember everyone saying that there are no good guys in that conflict?
It looks to me like the plan went forward and spun wildly out of control. Read the entire article. Its eye opening.
Qatar’s military and economic largesse has made its way to Jabhat al-Nusra, to the point that a senior Qatari official told me he can identify al-Nusra commanders by the blocks they control in various Syrian cities. But ISIS is another matter. As one senior Qatari official stated, “ISIS has been a Saudi project.”Put your partisan hat in your pocket for a minute. Its time to speak clearly and do a little puzzle fitting.
ISIS, in fact, may have been a major part of Bandar’s covert-ops strategy in Syria. The Saudi government, for its part, has denied allegations, including claims made by Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, that it has directly supported ISIS. But there are also signs that the kingdom recently shifted its assistance—whether direct or indirect—away from extremist factions in Syria and toward more moderate opposition groups.
I see a weird alliance here. You have Neo-Cons in the US being frustrated by an American public that is tired of the mess in the Middle East, a scared Saudi Arabia and Qatar that are looking to end the crisis in Syria and then the birth of a monster that turned on its master in the form of ISIS.
Remember John McCain wanted to arm the rebels in Syria?
Remember everyone saying that there are no good guys in that conflict?
It looks to me like the plan went forward and spun wildly out of control. Read the entire article. Its eye opening.
Wasnt he refered to as "Bandar Bush" when he was the Saudi Ambassador to USA. Wasnt he the same person who pleaded a case for the Bin Laden Family to be immediatly evacuated from USA so that they wouldnt be racially attacked by specialy providing Air Planes when all of US AirSpace was Grounded ?
ReplyDeleteIs he the same guy ?
Sounds like USA is trying to make another deal with the Devil.....or as the arabs call it......Shaitan.
So when the article says "ISIS has been a Saudi Project", it fails to mention that it STILL IS a Saudi Project. Saudi's matching defence expenditure increase which i mentioned in the previous Iraq blog is proof that they are still funding it.
DeleteISIS is only one of the many monsters that we have discovered. Discovered....no. Slept till it bit us in the ass......Yes. Who know what other organizations they are funding.
We have all heard of small terrorist sleeper cells with lots of patience and carefull planning before they finnaly struck. Those cells were 10 man operations at max. This is a bloody 3000 man sleeper cell operation.
In effect, what you have is Saudi Arabia now acting like another Pakistan. Funding foreign Proxies, curtailing the same proxies in own territory, two faced diplomacy with their most valuable ally (USA), generally de-stabilizing their neighbourhood, harcore sunni to boot, a military more political than profesisonal.
DeleteI know that if i say this Solomon will delete my post but....here it goes...
The Bush Family has Saddled USA with great bunch of friends.
I had mentioned earlier when the Israeli Armored Truck had come out that what if the US diverts all F-35 funding to prop up irregular forces that move with speed like Ghengis Khans Mongol Hoard. I did not know that i was indirectly referencing to the Saudi Arabian Playbook for the middle east and then.....maybe the entire world. ISnt that the whole objective behind these movements.
ReplyDeleteOle ways logic is at play here guys. "The only thing sweeter than getting to kill your enemy is getting tow enemies to kill eachother".
ReplyDeleteExample:
-Iraq/Iran war we gave Saddam support until he stabalized then when he turned the tide Iran/contra gave replacement parts to Iran to keep them in the game. By the end of it we had two strong enemies that had turned themselves into two weak enemies.
-Mujahadeen/Soviet Union. two enemies that we let bleed eachother down taking both groups off the threat table for over a decade.
Since 9-11 some have realized that like it or not there is a percentage strong single to low double digit percentage of the Muslim gen pop that is radical or lean radical. It is well obvious we do not have the stomach to go invade the enitre ME to kill 5-15% of the muslim population, nor do we have the patience to keep the meat grinder going in a central point to grind them out over time (Iraq). What do you do? Well you figure out a way to force them to handle their own business.
Let the Sunni radicals and the Shia radicals grind eachother into irrelevance. Keep the drones over top with open paperwork so we can spot check any that wish to expand their AOR to US. Don't let either side win but instead just grind eachother down. Support the moderates and prepare them and ourselves to support seize the ending when the radicals wear eachother out.
The world is not pretty reality is nasty ugly and brutal. WW1 & WW2 we stood on the sidelines while radicals of both european camps bleed eachother out then only interviened to prevent either side from victory we could not control. After WW1 we just went home at the end after WW2 we were ready to seize the ending with the moderates of that day.
To all you Bush neocon bashers whatever crap.
ReplyDeleteAfter 9-11 we were looking at a single Muslim pop of Sunni/Shia that had ugly ancient beefs that were cold enough to allow a potential temporary alignment to fight the great and greater satan. Iran has supported off/on AQ/ISIS(admitted) and the Taliban so all you Sunni Saddam would never have made a temporary pact with the Shia Iran to fight the US/Israel need to open your eyes. That is over a billion potential enemies of who 5-15% of the gen pop was radicalized ripe. You want to know what a world war would look like try the US/Israel locked in a war from the Algeria in a swoosh to the Hindu Kush.
Afghanistan was their chose of battlefield. Land locked, illiterate, mountainous, lacking in every type of basic infrastructure, and had border states strong enough to deter US incursion yet weak enough to allow their free movement. Infantry battle man to man we still win but without our advantages of tech and armor, that means it cost blood, it is the jihadis meat grinder.
Iraq. Iraq had a ruler that was a unwavering enemy, desert flat land spotted with cities and pockets of vegetation, developed basic infrastructure, literate population, exiting US supply routes. Iraq was our chose of battle field because we could leverage our armor and tech to grind the enemy, it was our meat grinder. It was also a perfect location to play the middle and drain both camps of radicals.
Look at history the winners always choose the field to play to all their advantages and hit all the enemies disadvantages. Losers just run into the enemies choice of field and if they do win it is at great cost.
The great university debate squad lead by O abandoned the meat grinder we built in Iraq (they were ready for the ground game all they needed was us to hold the air game, logistics management, and some upper leadership mentoring until they got to that level), and ran to the "good war" Afghanistan which we have spent years more in and is in the same place as we were looking to go back to the ole strategy of just holding the lid down ala 01-07.
Fair, just, right, setting imaginary bars, hearts minds, etc... all have no place in war. War is and should be hell, brutal, and with only one rule "two man enter one man leave".
It's bullshit, the US gave birth to ISIS and also they left out the US-Saudi (and Qatar) ties in supporting the government-fighters which has gone on since the Carter days. Even Senator Paul has recently stated that the US has supported ISIS.
ReplyDeleteThe US (more than just McCain) supported the takfiris in Syria. That's how ambassador Stevens got nailed. He was in far-off Benghazi with the CIA contingent coordinating arms shipments to Syria via Turkey. H. Clinton is taking the fall for that. In Iraq, the ISIS/Sunni forces have been on the move for almost six months and the US hasn't done diddly. Don't those airplanes work any more?
Regarding the actual funding being a "Saudi project" that may be technically incorrect. Reportedly there are dozens of Saudi princes who have more cash on hand than the average small country.
The general US strategy is as C-Low says, divide-and-conquer. Weaken all regional rivals, which is why we have US-caused mayhem from India to the Med, and in northern Africa. The US wants to extend it to Asia-Pacific next.
As for blaming Bush, hey, Obama was just in Riyadh where he "didn't have time" to talk to the king about human rights abuses. Half the citizens there can't vote or even drive -- I mean the people of a female persuasion. Nevertheless, the US friendship with Saudi Arabia in the "terrorism" has been strong and enduring, under all US administrations, including what was it, 28 pages on Saudi Arabia redacted from the 9/11 report, an event in NYC that featured mostly Saudis.
As far as I know, ISIS was Syrian&Iran intelligence project intented to tie down USA resources in Iraq, so that Syria and Iran would be left alone. At the same time Iran supported Taliban for the same logic. Enemy of my enemy is my friend.
ReplyDeleteWhen Syrian civil war started, ISIS was re-launched to ruin the rebellion:
1)to eliminate all rebel units
2)gather support around Assad by ISIS brutality
3)to alienate Western countries so they would not arm rebels
Of course nothing prevents rich Saudi individuals to fund ISIS too.
My prediction for Iraq is that in coming years Iranian army will move in and all Sunni towns and villages lay ruin or live under Taleban like rule in stone age. Again ISIS brings only misery for Sunnis, pre-planned or running out of control like Pakistan's Taliban monster.
well, With the Mosul Bank money they wont need any financiers anytime soon. They have billions of dollars of US and British equipment to capture from the Iraqi Army. They also have an entire country to loot, steal and salvage from. Anyway, since the Kurds have settled down nicely with the Turks, I bet that's a nice place to start stabalizing this country from.
DeleteAnd then came the three hundred -- I wonder if they speak Arabic?
ReplyDeleteAnd to think, before Operation Iraqi Freedom, I was buying a Litre of Petrol at 40 Rupees in 2003. Now I am buying a Litre at 75 Rupees. And just when I was about to buy that new Triumph Speed Triple.
ReplyDeleteDamn, you have no idea how hard it is to maintain high economic growth and build billions of dollars of infrastructure when almost all your energy needs are being met with ever expensive fuel coming from dodgy supply lines.
DeleteISIS admitted working with being supported by Iran. They achieved allot in Syria as Jokuvaan mentioned by driving the minorities Christian, Kurd, into the Assad camp then taking the rebels rear to reap the rewards while draining rebel resources, and finally giving the west a reason to not support the moderates. I wouldn't go as far as to say they are a proxy or puppet of Iran more so that Iran felt safe in supporting them because while they are great at reaping destruction/chaos they are of a zealotry that is self destructive, example, Syria and 2006-2008 Iraq.
ReplyDeleteThe Soviets and now the Russians did the same to the west with supporting groups like the Greens, environmental, pacifist, racial politics. It is obvious when you sit back and look at how the environmental movement protest and scream against drilling oil off FL or Fracking in Europe but you never hear of a protest or complaint about Cuba drilling oil 45miles off the Keys, Russian drilling, Brazil offshore drilling ect... If it was really about the environment it would be bad to drill everywhere especially in areas were the safety regulations are weaker and not just in the "West".
I don't believe Iran would support ISIS who is acting against Iran allies Syria and Iraq. It's a US-Saudi project, probably with Israel as a minor player. But as with the takfiris the US supported in Pakistan long ago, these creatures take on an enduring, and changing, life.
DeleteZbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser, in 1998:
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?