Trump Critics of Syria Withdrawal Fueled Rise of ISIS
- Total Posts: 2,022
Too many of those protesting the removal of U.S. forces are authors of the catastrophe that tore Syria to pieces, reports Max Blumenthal for Consortium News.
By Max Blumenthal
Special to Consortium News
President Donald Trump’s announcement of an imminent withdrawal of US troops from northeastern Syria summoned a predictable paroxysm of outrage from Washington’s foreign policy establishment. Former Secretary of State and self-described “hair icon” Hillary Clinton perfectly distilled the bipartisan freakout into a single tweet, accusing Trump of “isolationism” and “playing into Russia and Iran’s hands.”
Michelle Flournoy, the DC apparatchik who would have been Hillary’s Secretary of Defense, slammed the pull-out as “foreign policy malpractice,” while Hillary’s successor at the State Department, John Kerry, threw bits of red meat to the Russiagate-crazed Democratic base by branding Trump’s decision “a Christmas gift to Putin.” From the halls of Congress to the K Street corridors of Gulf-funded think tanks, a chorus of protest proclaimed that removing US troops from Syria would simultaneously abet Iran and bring ISIS back from the grave.
Yet few of those thundering condemnations of the president’s move seemed able to explain just why a few thousand U.S. troops had been deployed to the Syrian hinterlands in the first place. If the mission was to destroy ISIS, then why did ISIS rise in the first place? And why was the jihadist organization still festering right in the midst of the U.S. military occupation?
Too many critics of withdrawal had played central roles in the Syrian crisis to answer these questions honestly. They had either served as media cheerleaders for intervention, or crafted the policies aimed at collapsing Syria’s government that fueled the rise of ISIS. The Syrian catastrophe was their legacy, and they were out to defend it at any cost.
Birthing ISIS From the Womb of Regime Change
"Poverty is the parent of revolution and crime" - Aristotle "The more I see of the moneyed peoples, the more I understand the guillotine" - George Bernard Shaw "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, will make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK "If wars can be started by lies, they can be stopped by truth." ~ Julian Assange #SurviveAndRevolt
December 29, 2018 at 12:31 AM #6039jerry611Participant
- Total Posts: 1,229
In fact, had she been elected president, we may very well be in the middle of a war right now.
You need to understand that this intervention foreign policy is something that both parties have shared for decades. You can go back to the 1990s and you will find plenty of Democrats advocating for the removal of Saddam Hussein. One reason Democrats did nothing to Bush in 2006 for that war is largely because most Democrats favored the war. Most voted for it.
During Obama, the policy was largely the same. The execution was different. Bush was all “shock and awe” but Obama was more subtle and provoking or supporting uprisings. Hillary and Kerry both voted for the Iraq war. Both served as Obama’s secretary of state. They were able to overthrow Qaddafi. And they were trying very hard to get Assad.
And to be clear, I don’t support these dictators. Far from it. But our policy in dealing with them is completely stupid and reckless. We end up arguably doing more harm to these countries than good. How many people have died in that Syria civil war? And what was gained? And what was the goal anyway? If we overthrow Assad, how do we know we will be able to control the next guy? War is something that never goes to plan. We always seem to like to make a mess, and we are good at doing that. But we are really bad at cleaning it up.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.