General Wesley Clark: ISIS Serves Interests Of US Allies Turkey And Saudi Arabia

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Claire Bernish via,

"Let’s be very clear: ISIS is not just a terrorist organization; it is a Sunni terrorist organization. That means it blocks and targets Shi’a. And that means it’s serving the interests of Turkey and Saudi Arabia - even as it poses a threat to them." - Retired Gen. Wesley Clark

Former NATO Supreme Allied Commander General and retired U.S. General Wesley Clark revealed in an interview with CNN that the Islamic State (Daesh, ISIS) remains geostrategically imperative to Sunni nations, Turkey and Saudi Arabia, as they clamor for strategic power over Shi’a nations, Syria, Iraq, and Iran. He explained that “neither Turkey nor Saudi Arabia want an Iran-Iraq-Syria-Lebanon ‘bridge’ that isolates Turkey, and cuts Saudi Arabia off.”

When asked by the CNN host if Russian President Vladimir Putin’s suggestion that Turkey was “aiding ISIS” had any validity, he responded:

“All along there’s always been the idea that Turkey was supporting ISIS in some way. We know they’ve funneled people going through Turkey to ISIS. Someone’s buying that oil that ISIS is selling; it’s going through somewhere - it looks to me like it’s probably going through Turkey - but the Turks haven’t acknowledged that.”

After explaining this virtual gateway for the Islamic State’s oil, Clark was quick to emphasize that Putin’s allegations about Turkey’s support for terrorist organization, ISIS, aren’t without their own hypocrisy. Russia, of course, has been upholding President Bashar al-Assad’s administration in Syria against rebel groups backed by the U.S. — despite continuing denials by U.S. officials that that particular theater is its primary interest in the region.

He said, “Putin would like to dirty Turkey by saying it’s supporting terrorists, but the truth is that he’s supporting terrorists. I mean, the tactics used by the Assad regime have been terror tactics. They’re dropping barrel bombs on innocent civilians.”

Clark concludes the interview with a statement that encapsulates growing sentiment of many Westerners who’ve grown war-weary with such geopolitical wrangling overseas:

“There’s no good guy in this - this is a power struggle for the future of the Middle East.”

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Yen Cross's picture

  Here we go... NATO is beginning to distance itself, from Erdoghan.

BennyBoy's picture

And who do Turkey and Saudi Arabia serve the interest of?



Occident Mortal's picture

It's a good job there are no terrorist harbouring Sunni Muslim countries that have nuclear weapons... What? Pakistan?



mvsjcl's picture

Don't believe a thing this douche sez. A total tool of the enemy.


"And that means it’s serving the interests of Turkey and Saudi Arabia - even as it poses a threat to them."


What fucking bull shit. Can't throw more confusion out there if you tried.

The Pope's picture

Wesley Clark = REGGIE LOVE (now u know)

knukles's picture

Well, that sure clears that shit up.
Now, who the fuck is on whose side?
       Glad I came today

Yen Cross's picture

lol... Knuks, if you live long enough, you get to tell your friends what it feels like to be "fucked sideways". :-)

y3maxx's picture

ISIS equals Shia


NATO equals illegal oil transport company.

Axie's picture

Wesley Clark's army dropped cluster bombs on civilians, they dropped them on a city centre (hospital wing, bus station) in 1999.  Talk me about terrorist supporter...


TRM's picture

And the constant "barrel bomb" references like that is a chem/bio weapon of mass destruction or something. How is that different than all those napalm bombs the USA dropped on civilians?

Which brings me to the point of since when has the USA been so concerned about civilian casualties? Only when it suits them like now. Certainly not WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Iraq twice, and on and on. 90% of the victims of drones are innocent civilians.

wee-weed up's picture

So... is Wussley Clark (Clinton's perfumed general) now considering another run for President?

847328_3527's picture

No worries; Barry is importing 100,000 of them but promises to "Vet" them with some tough questions:


Q: "Are you a tearrists?"


A: "No."


Q: "Then you can pass."


Fish Gone Bad's picture

ISIS killed all those innocent French peoples. Turkey likes ISIS. Therefore Turkey likes killing French people. I used to think Wesley Clark was a stand up guy. Now he's an apologist.

Anonymous User's picture
Anonymous User (not verified) Fish Gone Bad Dec 3, 2015 9:48 PM

Turkey is Uncle Sam's bitch.  

ISIS is just "the other woman" they just happen to share

jeff montanye's picture

i don't understand all the up votes for ""And that means it’s serving the interests of Turkey and Saudi Arabia - even as it poses a threat to them."

What fucking bull shit. Can't throw more confusion out there if you tried."

wesley clarke may be any number of bad things but daesh is serving the interests of turkey and saudi as those countries understand their interests.  clarke even notes the threat daesh is to those countries, a threat becoming more real each day, thanks to the transparency forced on the sunnis and the west by putin.

p.s. anonymous above is right about turkey, isis and the u.s., imo.  where he must be wrong (downvotes) is in the porn sequence he links.  at least it's on point and the girl appears to be arab and quite good looking.  skin's running a bit thin here for a fight club, methinks.

Gazooks's picture

'i don't understand all the up votes for "And that means it’s serving the interests of Turkey and Saudi Arabia - even as it poses a threat to them." 'What fucking bull shit. Can't throw more confusion out there if you tried."


Simply because IS poses absolutely no current threat to Turkey or the fucking murderous Saudi's as proxy for both, well as proxy for Israel & US hegemonic interests. 


Clark's role is deflecting awareness of rampant duplicity. Fucking bullshit, in sum.

Troll Magnet's picture

I sniffed some glue and this like makes total sense, dude.

COL Jackson's picture

Q:  "What is your name"

A: "Aachmed"

Q: "What is your quest"

A: "I seek the land of the great satan"

Q: "Are you a terrorist"


Dental Floss Tycoon's picture

With allies like the saudis and Turkey who needs enemies?

Anasteus's picture

Obama: Russia should be more focused on ISIS and less on the US supporting them via moderate rebels.

Johnny Horscaulk's picture
Johnny Horscaulk (not verified) TRM Dec 3, 2015 11:59 PM


The us, israel, saudis and brits have zero right to lecture anybody on war crimes. And most though not necessarily all of the reports I have seen were false or not substantiated at all, like the repeated claims of assad gassing--- his own alawite supporters near the inspectors he allowed in.

i think the control and lockdown of the corporate, zionist msm should be a much larger story and worry than it appears to be.

We do not have a free press when 90% unpacks the same neocon Orwellization of the facts.

PeakOil's picture

We sure as hell don't have a free press - anywhere in the West. However, through the internet & diffusion, the masses are slowly starting to realize that something the fuck does not add up.

In Canada have been closely watching an institution I used to respect. Our Ministry of Truth, a.k.a. the CBC, to its utter horror, now understands that natives are getting very restless. A majority of commenters on recent ME stories trust Putin more than they do the statements of NATO. 

Interesting times.


Meat Hammer's picture

Hey, look over there! A bad guy!


You're dead. Idiot.

J Jason Djfmam's picture

Ah, the fog of the lead-up to war.

lincolnsteffens's picture

Assad is no friend of mine but when Clark brings up "barrel bombs on innocent civilians" to point out how evil Assad is, Clark falls a little short in not identifying the actions of Uncle Sam since 2001 as the greater dispenser of death.

Clark is a tool for mind control. What was his role in Viet Nam? What did he say about innocent civilians being bombed?? Did Viet Nam attack the USA???

chiswickcat's picture

Barrel bomb, cruise missile, drone, what's the evil difference? Killing those innocents abroad ir at home, what's the moral difference?

Doubleguns's picture

The problem begins when we try to turn war into something moral. It can't be done.


Folks want to pick the person they kill, usually someone elses son sent there by his country. So how is that more moral than the old man/woman/mother/you name it, working in the factory making the bombs and bullets or feeding the front line force etc..... There is nothing moral in this hell hole. It can not be made moral and thinking it can be will only lead to insanity. 

War will never be moral.


SgtShaftoe's picture

I beg to differ.  War is moral if someone that has the capability and intent to kill you attacks you and you fight back.  Discussions of moral high ground used to be military doctrine.  He who holds the moral high ground usually wins the conflict.  It comes down to the non-agression principle.  "Do not initiate violence against any human being."  If someone attacks you, you have the natural right to defend yourself. 


BTW, Clarke did say one thing interesting a long time ago:

jeff montanye's picture

you make at least three excellent points.  indeed self defense is moral.  and believing in the morality of one's cause does increase morale which, all other things being equal or at least in the same order of magnitude, often ushers victory.  that so many of the "enemies" of israel and the u.s. have been orders of magnitude weaker accounts for what victories they have found (fewer and fewer as time passes).

and third, boy howdy is clarke's revelation about the plan to invade seven countires in five years that came down from rumsfeld and wolfowitz (and, probably, tel aviv) of supreme importance in understanding u.s./israeli foreign policy since 2001.

Ghordius's picture

further, war can be justified. never "just", only justified by circumstances

and, more important then a lot of other considerations, wars can be fought in a manner as civilized as possible

and this is one of the greatest fears of some weasels that dwell in Washington

that what the barbarians of Daesh/ISIS call "The Coalition of Devils" is going to wage a civilized war against them

Like treating prisoners as POWs, or respecting age-old rules, or even respecting the Geneva Conventions

Indeed, this could go as far as recognizing Daesh/ISIS as sovereign, with an army, a government, a flag and a territory (the usual qualifications)...

... and then proceed to take every and each of those attributes of sovereignty away from them, up to "sovereign extinction"

and this leads the whole back to moral high ground

Doubleguns's picture

War is moral if someone that has the capability and intent to kill you attacks you and you fight back. 


And when you end up killing the children of those attackers you feel that is moral? It is not. 


War can be less evil but war is evil and if we enter into it all efforts to end it as fast as possible should be used, even if that means using bombs across the entire country like we did to Germany or Japan. There is nothing moral about any of it so just get it over as fast as possible. Crush the enemy and end it. Do not try to make it a moral endevor. It cant be done. 


We have been fighting and killing folks in Afganistan for 14 years now. That is so much worse than getting in there and ending it in 2-3 years and being done with it. Nope we have to fight a "moral' fight and drag this on for the familys, children etc.... of that country for 14 years. THAT is more immoral. 


War can not be made moral. Period. Folks that think so are nuts. Wars could go on fo ever if we try to make them moral. 

runswithscissors's picture

Clark is the same TRAITOR who wants to put Americans who disagree with the government into re-education camps

justdues's picture

Is Clark jewish ? just asking

COL Jackson's picture

How else do you think he made 4 stars.  He's not that bright.

caconhma's picture

" Here we go... NATO is beginning to distance itself, from Erdogan"

No. A Turkey F-16 could not by itself locate, track, activate his weapon system, and fire his missiles in just 10-20 second the Russian jet was supposedly it Turkey airspace.

According to various sources, it was a combined US, Turkey, and Saudi operation. This operation was prepared and approved well in advance  by Turkey president and the White House. 

It was a very complicated operation:

- US AWACS spy aircraft together with US intelligent satellites in realtime were tracking the Russian jet from the moment it took off from a Syrian airfield. Saudi AWACS aircraft also participated in the operation. This tracking info was in realtime fed to the Turkish F-16 flight and weapon-control systems. This info was used to guide/direct Turkish F-16 to the Russian aircraft and at the appropriate moment activate F-16 weapon fire system.

- However, a Turkish pilot somehow did not follow the US tracking & control guidance accurately. Consequently, it fired his weapon systems when Russian aircraft was well inside the Syrian airspace.

Putin knows this but did not want to start a major escalation with the USA and Turkey. Russia is military weak. It uses old 1980s vintage aircrafts and is not in a position for a conventional conflict with US and NATO. Yes, Russia is a nuclear superpower but naturally Putin could not and did not want to escalate this incident into a major nuclear confrontation. Russia today is not the Soviet Union.

It was not an accident. Putin was tested and he lost. The White House also knows this but it also does not want further escalation at this time.

Finally, as long as Russia and Iran do not closely coordinate their military operations in Syria, Russia is cooked!

jeff montanye's picture

you may be correct on the genesis and operation of the russian plane shootdown but i don't know that you are right on the military capabilities of russia vs. the u.s.

russia is close to being the equal of the u.s. in missiles: conventional, nuclear, cruise, anti-aircraft, ballistic, whatever.

in addition russia appears to have a jamming weapon that renders nearly powerless whatever opposing weapons system it targets.

trulz4lulz's picture

in addition russia appears to have a jamming weapon that renders nearly powerless whatever opposing weapons system it targets.

yeah well isis or whatever it is has swords and horses and shit. i dont care how good your electronic warfare is, its not affecting a horse...isis comming at you....russia....

gonetogalt's picture

I've often wondered if this is literal:

Rev 38. 4 I will turn you around, put hooks into your jaws, and lead you out, with all your army, horses, and horsemen, all splendidly clothed, a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords. and again:
Rev 38. 15 Then you will come from your place out of the far north, you and many peoples with you, all of them riding on horses, a great company and a mighty army.

  But the politics don't seem quite right yet... Beware the Lamb!!!


Mentaliusanything's picture

ISIS is a Sunni terrorist organization. That means it blocks and targets Shi’a. And that means it’s serving the interests of Turkey and Saudi Arabia.

Well I'll be an OBozo clown. WE SUPPORT Terrorists. Reap what you sow you confused brain dead Man. Your actions are a crime against humanity because without your backing some 14 USA citizens would be alive in the USA and millions would not be displaced. Who do you serve Sir? Stupid is as Stupid does old Son.

Johnny Horscaulk's picture
Johnny Horscaulk (not verified) mvsjcl Dec 3, 2015 6:55 PM

This was definitely not supposed to happen. It seems that an Israeli military man with the rank of colonel was “caught with IS pants down.” By that I mean he was captured amid a gaggle of so-called IS – or Islamic State or ISIS or DAESH depending on your preference – terrorists, by soldiers of the Iraqi army. Under interrogation by the Iraqi intelligence he apparently said a lot regarding the role of Netanyahu’s IDF in supporting IS.

samsara's picture

You had some great posts in the last 5 weeks Johnny.  Welcome to ZH. 

Thanks.   (liked your bio btw.)

Johnny Horscaulk's picture
Johnny Horscaulk (not verified) samsara Dec 4, 2015 12:05 AM

Thank you, Sir!

Supafly's picture

Sandwiching!  Like your boss does when you're fucking up.  "You're doing a great job, but theres is this little problem.  You're doing a great job."  Keeping your focus on the "positive".

JustObserving's picture

there are no terrorist harbouring Sunni Muslim countries that have nuclear weapons... What? Pakistan?

Kargil war: Pakistan planned to drop nuclear bomb on India during conflict, says former CIA officer

Gonzogal's picture

The US has placed nukes in Turkey along with the bombers to deliver them! 

Babalooee's picture

And as it should be known...USISIS

Baby Bladeface's picture
Baby Bladeface (not verified) Babalooee Dec 3, 2015 6:01 PM

Clark is perform damage control for Vichy DC. They know Russia has conclusive evidence on ties between Erdogan and ISIS. They afraid of what other info might seek light of day.

This statement shows US knows all arguments it has to support Erdogan lack even flimsiest grip on credibility. So Clark job is to throw under bus while still hammering the US propaganda "barrel bombs", "Assad must go", "killing of own people".

Is last ditch desperate attempt to somehow tar Russia as "supports terrorist Assad". Grasping for straws, stench of desperation, final screechs of monkey sinking below quicksand.