How will the Obama administration respond? When Russia used its air power against ISIS and Nusra -- inflicting more damage in one week than the US was able to do in one year -- our media overflowed with deceptive propaganda which tried to convince the world that Russia had targeted "moderates." (Ridiculous. The "moderates" were always a joke, and Russian intervention has indeed turned the tide.)
Will the administration ramp up a new propaganda offensive against China? How will that play out? When the NYT suddenly tells you to hate China because China is fighting ISIS, isn't there a danger that the American people might wake up and understand what ISIS actually is?
When, when, when will DC give up on the sick dream of regime change in Syria? How much damage must we inflict on the world -- and on ourselves -- before we stop dancing to the neocons' tune?
Added note: After writing the above, this very relevant piece came to my attention. I'll cut to the chase...
The US and its allies could at any day expose and cut ISIS' supply lines leading from their various subsidiaries and fronts around the world, back to Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and its other state-sponsors. Instead, the US protects and cover up this extensive, global state-sponsorship of terrorism. As such, when "ISIS attacks," it is really an extension of US foreign policy, and not merely ISIS alone that is committing this violence, nor for ISIS and its own agenda alone that it is being carried out.
Most ironic of all, perhaps, is the possibility that because of America's dwindling credibility worldwide, and its waning influence in Asia, its complicity in the violence being carried out against the governments and peoples of Southeast Asia may - instead of creating a unified front against China - end up creating a unified front displacing Washington's influence form the region. In many ways this is already underway, and Thursday's attack in Jakarta may only stand to accelerate this process.
8 comments:
The source of the Chinese forces claim is Sorcha Faal. Independent confirmation is needed.
Just for fun.
This might be about petroleum and natural gas and without the support of the pro ISIS countries the US would have little game in the Middle East and surrounding regions. All the more reason to ramp up all alternative energy sources.
Just how much petrol does it take to convert petrol to gasoline? I think it's a LOT higher than claimed when we see all the wars fought over petrol, plus it does take quite a bit of energy to search, pump, transport and process. Plus Petrol actually has other useful properties besides being turned into fuel.
Then add up all the bases around the world that function to protect "our interests". I would guess for every barrel that is extracted from the ground it takes 2 or 3 barrels of wasted petroleum to make it happen.
fred, are you sure that Sorcha Faal is involved? I don't know that much about him, but I did touch on him once before, in a previous post. As I recall, he was an idiot.
If you follow your first link and click on its link to "Whatdoesitmean.com" it will take you to here. That's Sorcha Faal.
The china thingy is BS. I haven't seen it any were else, China has said that when Syria is stable they would help with the rebuilding. I do believe China is also helping Russia supply arms. They like Russia do not want the ugkers coming back.
I am watching the debate. I am liking Hillary less and less. Jesus! She is a pompous ass. God help the US. Is the choice between miss pompous and mr idiot?
M
Clearly Angleton was right: China and Russia are two faces of a single beast -- otherwise, why else would they both 'independently' take action to oppose us?
(I assume you know me at least well enough to know I'm j/k)
Post a Comment