It Can't Be Refuted: ISIS Was Born Of U.S. Intervention In Iraq & Covert In Syria

[Red Terror Dr.]

The imperial mafia of the Obama administration is trying to hide its role in creating a major Frankenstein!

ISIS gained its foothold directly in the region through the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey and Jordan funding and arming ISIS's predecessors in Syria.

[Sasha]

Kind of, though a bit simplistic, Qatar and Turkey yes probably, other nations funded more competing groups that switched sides or got forcibly absorbed.
But one could easily say the exact same about Assad.
IS gained a foothold in Syria because before the uprising he gave ISIL all the room to undermine the US in Iraq and even after the civil war started Assads forces tactically refused to seriously engage IS because it was in their intrest that the opposition would be dominated by extremist sectarians.

[The Feral Underclass]

I found the news that the Turkish government deliberately misinformed French intelligence of the destination of three wanted ISIL combatants particularly amusing. Coming at a time when news of direct Turkish armament shipments arriving in Raqqa is emerging, it does leave one wondering what is going on.

Perhaps someone with a greater understanding could shed light on these intrigues.

[Sasha]

Erdogan no 1 priority is bringing down Assad and replace him with a Sunni dominated regime so that they can function in the same role for Turkeys regional and global intrests as the current regime does for Iran.
Their no 2 priority is not allowing a PKK dominated Kurdish state on their borders.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Do you have a link to an article about those shipments? That sounds pretty interesting.

I thought it was entertaining to watch Obama channel GWB and Rumsfield at the UN "This kind of evil only responds to the language of force" "networks of DEATH!!!" blablabla. It was also funny when he chastised Russia's actions in Ukraine by saying large countries shouldn't go around bullying small countries. Reality is shit.

[Chomskyan]

Of course. This is obvious stuff. The US created ISIS.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Yup saw it on fox news, Obama you terrist

[Martin Luther]

They have fed it from the start. In order to divide and conquer Iraq, the US placed a Shiite sectarian government in power and alienated the Sunnis, inflaming every religious tension that defines current events. While the occupiers threw enough money around to divide and conquer the Iraqi Sunnis themselves (who by that point made up most of the resistance) through the "Awakening" militias, there was still plenty of ground for groups like ISIL to thrive.

Iraq was its beginnings, but the most important war in ISIL's history is the proxy civil war in Syria. The US once again seized on religious divisions to foster a Sunni rebellion against Assad's national bourgeois regime, which draws most of its support from Shiites and Christians. The rebellion's innate impulse towards religious sectarianism led to the eclipse of the legitimate demands shared with all of the Arab uprisings and their replacement by calls for death to non-Sunnis, in the minds of the rebels represented most of all by Assad. ISIL was for a long time one of many Islamist groups that dominated the rebels.

Recently, ISIL completely overtook all the Syrian rebel groups, and while it still cooperates with some Syrian rebels, it now looks out for its own interests and is the only real threat to Assad. This year they returned to their country of birth and began an orgy of slaughter that is still going on. The US is taking little steps to curb their power now because they have come to be completely outside of the control of the US and its Gulf allies, and they threaten every state in the region.

I don't think it was created by anyone, but at every point in its development, ISIL and its now absorbed allies have been enabled by some combination of the Saudis, the Qataris, the Americans, the Turks, and the Zionists.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Yup saw it on fox news, Obama you terrist

Fox News are reactionary idiots.

Obama is a reactionary idiot who is at the same time the commander-in-chief of American imperialism and is directly responsible for escalating American involvement in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Some perspective is in order, good grief. Particularly as much of the American "left" can't let go of Obama (I suspect the "left" will abandon Obama long after the liberals have done so), and is currently throwing one giant hissyfit over ISIS and how Something Needs To Be Done (TM).

[Tim Cornelis]

The ghost revolutionary Left in 870's head indeed can't let go of Obama.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Fox News are reactionary idiots.

Obama is a reactionary idiot who is at the same time the commander-in-chief of American imperialism and is directly responsible for escalating American involvement in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Some perspective is in order, good grief. Particularly as much of the American "left" can't let go of Obama (I suspect the "left" will abandon Obama long after the liberals have done so), and is currently throwing one giant hissyfit over ISIS and how Something Needs To Be Done (TM).

And is "Obama done created ISIS himself!" the proper perspective for a communist to have? I'm not sure what the rest of your post is in response to, are you accusing me of "not letting go" of Obama?

[Lord Testicles]

Yup saw it on fox news, Obama you terrist

So America and it's allies weren't giving guns and funding to ISIS to fight Assad a couple of years ago?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Is funding and arming the same thing as creating? I'm confused

[Lord Testicles]

Is funding and arming the same thing as creating? I'm confused

That's unfortunate.

Yes, funding an arming can be considered the same thing as creating in this instance if ISIS would have been unable to achieve what it has without that arming and funding.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

No I don't think it is, unless you're suggesting the CIA created, as in founded, ISIS which are the kind of claims I'm making fun of in that post. Do you also think the CIA did 9/11?

[Lord Testicles]

No I don't think it is, unless you're suggesting the CIA created, as in founded, ISIS which are the kind of claims I'm making fun of in that post. Do you also think the CIA did 9/11?

No, what does 9/11 have to do with anything?

The CIA probably didn't found ISIS, but why would they need to when they can just pick one of many groups which were in Syria at the time and throw gratuitous amounts of guns and money at them.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Dude you don't actually seem to grasp what I'm making fun of. I'm gonna stop responding to you now.

[Lord Testicles]

Dude you don't actually seem to grasp what I'm making fun of. I'm gonna stop responding to you now.

Well, if that's the case the fault lies with your lack of articulation not my lack of comprehension.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

And is "Obama done created ISIS himself!" the proper perspective for a communist to have? I'm not sure what the rest of your post is in response to, are you accusing me of "not letting go" of Obama?

Good grief, it's shorthand. Do you also go around correcting the people, who make up the majority on RevLeft, who say that "Stalin and Mao" did this and that?

[Dagoth Ur]

So the taliban was an organic people's movement too amirite?
http://www.globalresearch.ca/isis-leader-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi-trained-by-israeli-mossad-nsa-documents-reveal/5391593

I'm not sure that is true but the CIA and Mossad have been training salafists for decades. First against the Soviets and local communists to today where we use them against any independent arab leadership.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

yeah actually

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

yeah actually

Then you get the Tim Cornelis Pointless Correction award.

But yeah, it's a bit suspicious that you would bother to correct people on this - and link people who dislike Obama with Fox News, rural cretinism ("terrist") and so on - just as many people on RevLeft are wringing their hands trying not to explicitly support the latest imperialist adventure of American capital but not condemn it either.

[Slavic]

Dude you don't actually seem to grasp what I'm making fun of. I'm gonna stop responding to you now.

I get your joke.

People like to blame the man on top as if he was and is the sole authority and "The Decider" on all matter of domestic and foreign policy.

Obama didn't "create" ISIS; a decade of US policy funding religious extremists in Iraq and Syria to gain allies on the ground "created" ISIS.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

you're right that is major suspicious, which group have i fallen into you think?

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

One of the constant right wing myths in the US is that obama is secretly a muslim terrorist. Recently some of the more creative members of our community have suggested that ISIS is a cia false flag operation. I thought it would be funny to combine these two thoughts into a joke. I was wrong, deepest sympathies, xoxo

[Lord Testicles]

I get your joke.

People like to blame the man on top as if he was and is the sole authority and "The Decider" on all matter of domestic and foreign policy.

Obama didn't "create" ISIS; a decade of US policy funding religious extremists in Iraq and Syria to gain allies on the ground "created" ISIS.

If this is what you meant, then I get it. I was burdening under the impression that you were trying to deny American involvement in the current shit-storm that's ripping through the middle-east.

[Ethics Gradient, Traitor For All Ages]

Our decedents will have access to huge databases of information pertaining to their ancestors. Ass loads of facebook posts, photos, and dangerous political ramblings. My progeny will look back and appreciate the posts made here, dismissed with such cruelty in my own time, with the sophistication gained by inhabiting whatever suffocating generation ship or force labor asteroid colony they're viewing this from.

Edit: am high

[Tim Cornelis]

God, I'd like to punch 870 in his fucking face.

[Rafiq]

But yeah, it's a bit suspicious that you would bother to correct people on this - and link people who dislike Obama with Fox News, rural cretinism ("terrist") and so on - just as many people on RevLeft are wringing their hands trying not to explicitly support the latest imperialist adventure of American capital but not condemn it either.

While it is arguable that US intervention causes instability and could make things worse, this isn't an "adventure of American capital" in the same way WWI was. The US already had its adventure in 2004 - why would the US want to go back to Iraq if not for ISIS? It's not some direct conspiracy. I am sure the US is going back grudgingly - ISIS is a pest to them, not an obstacle. The only obstacle is the Syria-Iran axis.

Also, why is Arab league, Turkish intervention (countries like Saudi Arabia are eons worse than the US in terms of regional instability) better than US intervention? Are the "natives" better at dealing with "their own" problems? What a stupid and ignorant mentality. If you stay silent when the Arab league attacks ISIS, but start sloganeering as soon as the US shows it's head, you're just an insecure, western guilt archetype.

Don't be fooled by 870's attempts at Left nobility. His opposition is not genuine, and certainly is not grounded in the opposition that defined Zimmerwald, and later Comintern anti imperialism. It is petty bourgeois. I'm sure Ron Paul opposes intervention too. it's not the same as OUR opposition.

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

Is funding and arming the same thing as creating? I'm confused

It's the same thing. The administration also talks about finding and 'vetting' 'rebels' who Premier Obama and his regime can use. This has included rebel groups whom have been recently recorded removing a heart and liver from an enemy combatant and eating it (reactionary cannibalism). It's the same as the mujahideen in Afghanistan. They funded, trained and poured several million dollars into them, a group, which would later become known as "al-Qaeda." That's totally creating them bruh

[Hrafn]

It's the same thing. The administration also talks about finding and 'vetting' 'rebels' who Premier Obama and his regime can use. This has included rebel groups whom have been recently recorded removing a heart and liver from an enemy combatant and eating it (reactionary cannibalism). It's the same as the mujahideen in Afghanistan. They funded, trained and poured several million dollars into them, a group, which would later become known as "al-Qaeda." That's totally creating them bruh

As opposed to revolutionary cannibalism?

[Lord Testicles]

As opposed to revolutionary cannibalism?


http://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i/keep-calm-and-eat-the-rich-6.png

[Devrim]

Also, why is Arab league, Turkish intervention (countries like Saudi Arabia are eons worse than the US in terms of regional instability) better than US intervention? Are the "natives" better at dealing with "their own" problems? What a stupid and ignorant mentality. If you stay silent when the Arab league attacks ISIS, but start sloganeering as soon as the US shows it's head, you're just an insecure, western guilt archetype.

I'm against Turkish (and Arab League) intervention. The reason that the discussion tends towards American intervention is that a large number of people on these boards are America, including some supporting intervention.

Devrim

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

I'm against Turkish (and Arab League) intervention. The reason that the discussion tends towards American intervention is that a large number of people on these boards are America, including some supporting intervention.

Devrim

And if Rafiq's comment was pointed at me (I don't think the third-world socialist comes has anything interesting to say, so I have him on ignore), if he bothered to look at my posts he would have noticed I oppose intervention by the US, by Turkey, by the PKK and by idiotic leftists who want to play International Brigades and so on. The thing is, though, I don't have the time to follow the events in the region that closely (although I am far closer to them than someone in bloody Michigan), in fact I probably wouldn't even have commented if there wasn't a noticeable pro-intervention sentiment on this site, which I alternately find hilarious and deeply disgusting.

[Rafiq]

I'm against Turkish (and Arab League) intervention. The reason that the discussion tends towards American intervention is that a large number of people on these boards are America, including some supporting intervention.

Devrim

Yes but I wasn't referring to you, but 870 among others like him. You live in Turkey, no? - you know how this all works. You know the fierce hypocritical nature of these saviors, you know that in the process of stopping ISIS the standards for Islamism get worse, the strength of reactionary Arab states are reinforced. While people get executed for apostasy, while women remain slaves king Abdullah makes himself look so good fighting them. While Turkey comes to save the day, it is forgotten that a reactionary even by Turkish right nationalist standards is in power slowly threatening the countries secular tradition - while countries Bahrain laments in their victory as a friend to world peace and human rights their bloodthirsty record of suppression of protesters is rendered trivial. And thats nothing to say of European countries like France and the UK of which far right parties are winning in the poles.

We know ISIS is nothing. They are a passing storm. We know they are temporal. What we should primarily concern ourselves with are the legitimate, recognized states that are here to stay.
(To 870:)
Don't put me on ignore if you're going to try and respond to me. Don't be a coward. Frankly, if the Arab league alone decided to attack I'm sure you'd think nothing of it at all - even if it meant people on this board supporting them actively.

No wonder so many neoconservatives were Trotskyists: 870 tries so hard to resist embracing the hegemonic liberal order, it seriously is too obvious. It's not a question of righteous positions for him. Like the Islamic State fighters, he isn't fighting to exalt his beliefs. He's opposing and fighting his own temptations, he's insecure. Your position is lazy and while the conclusions sounds just about correct, it is simplistic and wrong. Yes you claim to oppose intervention, but why? Not for our reasons.

[Rafiq]

870s honesty : I am a third worldist. Look at this garbage everyone. Really? Then get me restricted, 870. Make a case, see how many won't laugh at you. I'm a harmless clown, AND dangerous madman... Make up your mind, am I a western chauvinist social democrat, a pro state apologist for the west, an apologist for colonialism or a third worldist? I cannot be both, surely.

How does he still post? What goes through his head that compels him to think "No, no, I can totally say this. I know what I'm talking about"? Why is he still here? We all know he's a dishonest troll. What can he even say in his defense here. No really, what the fuck can he even say?

[Trap Queen Voxxy]

As opposed to revolutionary cannibalism?

Yes, quite right.