The ISIS terrorists are Islamic in name only, and their victims have been primarily the Muslim populations of Syria and Iraq that have had the bad luck to be in the path of their rampages.
Advertisement
In fact, Abdelhamid Abbaoud, a key figure in the Paris attacks, was openly flaunting his role in establishing cells to conduct attacks in Europe in an interview with ISIS’s magazine Dabiq in February. Speaker of the House Paul Ryan exclaimed, “This is war.” Sen.
Tellingly, Hillary Clinton didn’t take issue with Sanders’ analysis.
He said the US would fight, dismantle and “ultimately destroy them” without losing America’s values and principles. Before marching headlong into another all out war in the Middle East, mere years after our last catastrophic fiasco there, three questions need to be asked and answered.
Last weekend’s terrorist attacks in Paris drove home a reality Western leaders have been trying to avoid: The barbarism of the Islamic State and other such fanatics will not wither under a patient strategy of containment, and the ideology that fuels their brutality can’t be negotiated away. Now they have to live with a global threat. “Their aim is our total destruction”.
Obama was speaking at the Asia-Pacific Summit where the urgent terrorist threat to the worldwide community has dominated talks. Is it really wise to commit to a costly and perilous military campaign to snuff out a minor threat? They pointed to territory ISIS had lost. Their profits from oil revenue and internal extortion are rapidly dwindling. At the end of the day, the USA has faced much more serious foes in the past. But that doesn’t mean it’s wise. A massive military overreaction is exactly what ISIS is hoping for.
Imposing a no-fly zone is problematic for several reasons. First of all, France and Russian Federation are also in the skies dropping bombs on ISIS. Is the USA obligated to shoot down Russian planes that defy the no-fly edict? But the most important one is, why would you believe when mainstream media and its masters, including politicians, tell you they have a plan to fight ISIS, when they themselves were the instigators of this terrorist group? “It might over a longer period of time if Bashar Assad is not in power”.
A statement posted on Twitter claimed responsibility for the attack on behalf of al-Mourabitoun, a millitant group which has links to al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb’s Saharan Emirate.
But what of the less extreme reactions, the ones that express concern that US intelligence is simply not up to the task of preventing a few jihadists from using the refugee resettlement program to burrow into American society and either wreak havoc or recruit others to do so?
ISIS emerged in the vacuum created by the unjustified and immoral invasion of Iraq and the dismantling of Saddam Hussein’s army.
In short, our military options may roll back ISIS in the short-term, but they will mostly be effective in multiplying our problems and intensifying regional instability.
One obvious recent experience to start with is, of course, Iraq.
“If we follow it and keep our eye on the ball, then it has more of a chance of working than a lot of these other alternatives that various people are talking about right now”. Chances are high the elite will use this Paris shooting – which has all the appearances of a manufactured crisis and a false flag operation – to further the New World Order agenda.
Followers of ISIS still pledge loyalty to Zarqawi, who was killed in a US airstrike in Iraq in 2006. Before his death, AQI leaders published a book called The Management of Savagery. They were so determined to take down Assad and essentially have a proxy Sunni-Shia war, what did they do? “That does give power to hardliners involved in policy making”, he said.
This is his moment to show he is better than everybody who wants his job, not out-debate them.
Arnold Ahlert analyzed the threat of al-Qa’ida and Islamic State Jihadis masquerading as Middle Eastern refugees, while Paul Albaugh evaluated the risk of Obama’s immigration “Trojan Horse“.
Advertisement
Although these wars have already proven to be endless and winless, our leaders feel we can’t lose, can’t win and can’t leave.
