ISIS: The 'Enemy' The US Created, Armed, & Funded
Submitted by Robert Fantina via TheAntiMedia.org,
Out of nowhere, it seems, Daesh, also commonly referred to as ISIL or ISIS, spontaneously formed, a group that perverts aspects of Islam for its own violent ends, and threatens, we are told, all that the civilized world holds dear.
The “war on terror,” governments inform their citizens, has a new front. And that front is Daesh.
Let us not be too hasty. Things are not always what they appear. Daesh is well-financed, and that money must be coming from somewhere other than a ragtag band of malcontents. Daesh soldiers have advanced weaponry and sophisticated communications methods. They have tanks and Humvees. None of these can be obtained without significant funding. Though the source is quite illusive, there is some evidence that will lead to a trail.
First, we must look at Daesh’s origins, and even that is not easily discernible. Writing for The Guardian in August 2014, Ali Khedery suggests:
“Principally, Isis is the product of a genocide that continued unabated as the world stood back and watched. It is the illegitimate child born of pure hate and pure fear – the result of 200,000 murdered Syrians and of millions more displaced and divorced from their hopes and dreams. Isis’s rise is also a reminder of how Bashar al-Assad’s Machiavellian embrace of al-Qaida would come back to haunt him.
Facing Assad’s army and intelligence services, Lebanon’s Hezbollah, Iraq’s Shia Islamist militias and their grand patron, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, Syria’s initially peaceful protesters quickly became disenchanted, disillusioned and disenfranchised – and then radicalised and violently militant.”
It is interesting that Mr. Khedery says that Assad’s “embrace of al-Qaida” came back to haunt him. It brings to mind a parallel situation in the United States. (Actually, there are many, but we will look at only one.)
Examining the theories of the origins of Daesh
In the early 1960s, when the U.S.-supported leadership of Iraq was becoming just a bit too big for its britches — at least in the United States’ view — in wanting to challenge Israel as a major player in the Middle East, the U.S. decided that its leader, Abdel Karim Kassem, had to go. Selecting a virulent anti-communist party to throw its support to, the U.S. worked closely with a young man named Saddam Hussein. We all know how well that ultimately worked out. The source of much, but not all, of the unrest in the Middle East today can be traced back to that U.S. decision.
Other theories on the formation of Daesh are also worth considering. Yasmina Haifi, a senior employee of the Dutch Justice Ministry’s National Cyber Security Center, asserted that Daesh was created by Zionists seeking to give Islam a bad reputation. “ISIS has nothing to do with Islam. It’s part of a plan by Zionists who are deliberately trying to blacken Islam’s name,” she wrote on Twitter in August 2014.
And finally, it has been more than suggested that Daesh “is made-in-the-USA, an instrument of terror designed to divide and conquer the oil-rich Middle East and to counter Iran’s growing influence in the region,” as Garikai Chengu, a research scholar at Harvard University, put it in September 2014.
Yet if the United States’ role wasn’t that blatant, it certainly existed, according to Seumas Milne, a columnist and associate editor at The Guardian. He argued in a June opinion piece:
“[T]he U.S. and its allies weren’t only supporting and arming an opposition they knew to be dominated by extreme sectarian groups; they were prepared to countenance the creation of some sort of ‘Islamic state’ – despite the ‘grave danger’ to Iraq’s unity – as a Sunni buffer to weaken Syria.”
No matter how one looks at it, there are many possible causes that spawned Daesh. As we look at its funding sources, it may all become clearer.
Funding and materiel, courtesy of Uncle Sam and his friends
In Daesh’s role as opposing Syria (just one of its many roles) the terrorist outfit is believed to have received funding from Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, as part of their opposition to the Assad regime.
But it also generates its own income, having taken control of local businesses, taxing others, and selling oil. Among its customers, incredibly, is Syria. Since Daesh controls much of the oil-production infrastructure in the country, Syria has little choice but to purchase oil from the very group that seeks to overthrow its government.
Reports also indicate that Israel is a main buyer of Daesh oil. The sale is not direct; oil is smuggled by Kurdish and Turkish smugglers, and then Turkish and Israeli negotiators determine the price. As a result of these oil sales, Daesh has annual revenues estimated at $500 million, according to data compiled by the U.S. Treasury.
In November of this year, Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that Daesh is being financed by at least 40 countries — including G20 members. With such widespread financing, it will be difficult to defeat Deash.
The U.S., in its misguided and destructive foreign policy toward the Middle East (its misguided and destructive foreign policies toward the rest of the world are topics for a separate discussion), also provided Daesh with a vast arsenal.
Last year, the Department of Defense, bragging about advances against this new “enemy” in Iraq, issued a press release: “The three strikes destroyed three ISIL armed vehicles, and ISIL vehicle-mounted anti-aircraft artillery gun, an ISIL checkpoint and an IED emplacement.” Commenting on that statement in Alternet, Alex Kane wrote:
“What went unmentioned by the Pentagon is that those armed vehicles and artillery guns they bombed were likely paid for with American tax dollars. The arms ISIS possesses are another grim form of blowback from the American invasion of the country (Iraq) in 2003. It’s similar to how U.S. intervention in Libya, which overthrew the dictator Muammar Gaddafi but also destabilized the country, let to a flood of arms to militants in Mali, where France and the U.S. waged war in 2013.”
The U.S. left untold amounts of weaponry in Iraq, and as that country descended into civil war following the United States’ odd salvation of it, that weaponry was free for the taking.
So even if, as suggested above, the U.S. didn’t give birth to Daesh, it has certainly nourished it.
A merry-go-round that never stops spinning
It is interesting to note that U.S. taxpayers are spending $615,482 every hour to fight a “war” in which the “enemy” is being well-financed by countries with whom the U.S. has full diplomatic relations. Does this not make it appear that “victory” over this enemy is not the goal? With many countries financing and supplying Daesh, might the world’s largest supplier of weaponry, the U.S., not be too interested in losing such a lucrative market? It’s worth noting that the United States’ “foreign military sales rose to a record high of $46.6 billion for fiscal 2015.” With such a healthy cash cow, would the country’s power-brokers really want to end war? Why kill the goose that is laying such pretty golden eggs?
As the U.S. and its hapless allies continue this “war on terror,” an ill-defined and nebulous “enemy” if ever there was one, Syria and Yemen seem to be bearing the brunt of the violence. As in every modern war at least since World War I, innocent men, women and children are the most frequent victims, suffering unspeakably and dying horrible deaths. And, somehow, the world’s most powerful military machine, owned and operated by the U.S., is unable to defeat Daesh. It must, therefore, continue to arm its allies, which are arming Daesh. So the U.S. provides funding to countries to fight Deash; some of those countries transfer money and armaments to Daesh, who the U.S. is bombing. And it seems that this deadly merry-go-round will continue its endless spinning.
And why shouldn’t it? The U.S. can, with ever-decreasing credibility, pretend to stand as a beacon of freedom and liberty, arming revolutionaries and destabilizing governments that displease it, while arming allies of the country in revolution, which in turn assist that country. So this “war on terror” never ends, and neither do the abundant profits from war-making.
And when possession of the moral high ground is just an illusion, when rhetoric spewed from the mouths of hypocritical politicians to get the citizenry to wrap themselves in the flag and shed a tear for apple pie, motherhood and Old Glory, and when the almighty dollar is always the bottom line, nothing is going to change.
(34 votes)
»
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
ya dumbphuck
Does not change the fact that Obama funded ISIS and Putin has now blown it all up...
Lots and lots of unemployed, angry young men in the ME will fight for anybody for food and a small wage. However by now the US/NATO coalition has far underestimated the ever building anger of the real Mid Eastern young man (not the highly paid mercs.). The US has been enriching their own politicians, military, the defense contractors and the Saudi's just a bit too long. The worm is turning and there really is no such thing as a "glut" of oil. What there is may soon be on fire. The US is spread too thinly and people of many countries, including many in the US are fed up. Millions just want to go "home". However those who perpetrated 9-11 and many other treasonous things since are not done. They want war. All this hatred of Muslims has been a master manipulation that has suckered in most Americans, including many on ZH. It keeps your eyes on the circuses. You've been suckered.
No truer words have ever been spoken...But I will say, on a percentage basis, I find those on ZH are far more aware than most sites, certainly any main stream site.
Yeh... but not exactly....
Abhoring or hating DAESH/ISIS does not exlcude the contempt and righteous indignation we feel for our Internal Enemies, nor does it stop us from keeping score, track of names, etc.
Remember that part that says "... to protect it from all enemies - foreign and domestic"?
Funny how ISIS never threatens Turkey or another unnamed country that controls CON-Grezz-io and the White Hut..
What can people do to stop this madness? Any idea?
Judging by the way banks were handled, I would be inclined to suggest a different approach.
Google Ghandi.
Well sounds like ISIS qualifies for a listing on the LSE. They love muslims there. Keeps the RE prices in London up, brokers rich, the poor poor, and artisans looking to prostitute themselvs for a shot at the big time $$.
What could be healthier for the "British" ...? Whut whut..?
-
Those responsible for this treason need to be brought before real justice ASAP.
Their actual non-Western/Arabic name is the acronym DAESH, which is a loose acronym for “al-Dawla al-Islamiya fi Iraq wa al-Sham” ("Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham").
They don't like that name, because it sounds similar 'Daes', which means “One who crushes something underfoot." It also sounds similar to Dahes, which means “One who sows discord.”
Unlike US media, which calls them ISIS, or its President who calls it ISIL, the French government has called it DAESH even before the Paris attacks.
ISIS....ISIL....DAESH.
"A rose is a rose is a rose."
Gertrude Stein
All to take away your rights in order to protect you. Want to know their motivation?
Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.
'Hillary Clinton created ISIS with Obama' - Donald Trump
http://thenewsdoctors.com/hillary-clinton-created-isis-with-obama-donald-trump/
Trump is amusing. His comments about Iran wanting to take over Saudi Arabia and take Saudi oil are about as divorced from reality as can be. Yet he manages to understand that America played a massive role in building ISIS.
In any event, his comments on Saturday will send an earthquake through talking head land on Sunday. Grab your popcorn...
you bet
I wouldn't be considering voting for him if he wasn't. Who cares what he says as long as he makes funny faces and contorts his mouth and lips when he dictates American Policy.
Bring him on!
I completely agree and thus I agree with this post...He rubs the Rino's, Looney Democrats and the LameStream Media the wrong way. That's a good thing! http://www.usmessageboard.com/threads/bill-bennett-they-will-kill-trump-...
Remember all the furor and rehetoric against Russia for standing up to the coup in Ukraine, ultimately bringing about severe economic sanctions by every single western nation? Yet not a single country has ever been sanctioned for supporting ISIS, a far worse crime (and it can be argued Russia'a actions in Ukraine were not a crime at all). In fact, all of the main parties fighting ISIS directly - Syria, Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah - are all listed as "enemies of America" and are all currently being economically punished in one way or another by America and it's vassals. It's pretty clear which side of the fight we are on...
So what else is new?
Salvador Dali
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q-HAyqUPmeo
ISIS
based on a Gothic novel by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley
What aspects of Islam does ISIS pervert?
"Out of nowhere, it seems, Daesh, also commonly referred to as ISIL or ISIS, spontaneously formed, a group that perverts aspects of Islam for its own violent ends, and threatens, we are told, all that the civilized world holds dear."
I like to refer to them as "literalists". It is those who don't follow the teachings of the Koran who are the revolutionaries.
Let me guess: You have never met a Moslem, much less have any ongoing social interactions with one. Am I right? I bet you had the same attitude about blacks when you were a little kid, until you met a few of them.
As to your question, I suggest you walk into the nearest Mosque and ask it. Then maybe you will begin to find out what a fool you are.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but a mosque is the last place one is likely to find a truth. After all, it is a religious site, best known for delusion and deceit.
What aspect of common sense is lacking in this kind of conversation?
Christianity is big. Over one billion Christians. Some are Catholics... actually most of them. Some aren't, some belong to well known branches, and some are even fundamentalists of their branch. Some are sectarian. Some, frankly, are a bit... strange. And if we had a crusade called out by enough christian religious leaders, some dozen divisions could be formed by bright-eyed zealot volunteers, easy. Some Christians, by the way, want you to repent now, others would burn you for your heretic thoughts. Some stage protests, some fight abortion... some with violence. Some did things like the Inquisition, others burned witches locally, abhoring centralism. Some are crazy, some are violently crazy, and some are constantly harping about the End of Times. Christianity is big, and divided, and a broad category, practically making impossible to claim that "Christianity is..." whatever
Islam is big. Over one billion Muslims. Some are...
Ghordius, I take from your above comment that you think...
...that assholery is not limited to any stripe or persuation
The origins of ISIS, its recruitment, training, funding, vehicle supply, arming and logistical support has involved numerous countries including the US, UK, Turkey, Saudi, Qatar, UAE, Kuwait and - as Russia/Putin has revealed - many other G20 countries.
But the one thing that allowed all that to happen was "U.S. & Western Foreign Policy" under Obola, the ghastly and incompetent lying bitch Clinton and the CIA. Behind that is Israel, which effectively dominates US foreign policy via the CIA and Neocons. All for its own ends.
Washington has played a central role in ISIS and used it as a weapon against Assad to bring about regime change in Syria.
Blowback is now in full flow.
The Republicans have done nothing to stop it. McCain, Graham, Rubio, Ryan, Corker and doznes more are owned by Soros, Zukerberg, Braman, Adelson and the rest of the AIPAC and PNAC gang.
The RINOs owned by the zios are more than the rst of Republicans by far. The Democrats are just evil. There are not real elections.
Right on Freddie. They're all evil and up to their necks in it.
The differences between political parties are evaporating and becoming nothing more than nuances.
Forget about ISIS - the USSA is !!!ITSELF!!! a Rogue Entity - preaching Freedom & Democracy, Kindness & Light while, in fact, being nothing more than a Hit-Man for the NeoCON ZIO-SCUMMM* - with names like Paul "Rat Face" Wolfowitz, "Mad Dog" Mc McCain, The KKK (KAGAN Kriminal Kabal) - on behalf of the foreign, alien, criminal entity ISISrael.
"ISIS" is just the USSA/ISISrael current aggressor "proxy du jour". Maybe next week it'll be Al Quaeda again - or some other "out of the blue / who coulda possibly knowed?" fabricated Trrrr'ist Group.
(SCUMMM* - Satanic Cabal Underwriting Mass-Murder & Mayhem)
A rogue entity preaching one set of rules and applying another.
"We funded some folks"
I see that as soon as we read about Daesh, mentions of "hapless allies" and "funding by allies" of the US abound
from the perspective of one set of the allies of the US, I also note that it's often bundled all together into "Western" und "NATO" wrappers
evidence to the contrary: there are now two anti-Daesh alliances operating against it. one "US-led", one "Russia-led"
note the lack of any article meant for the US public of any relations between those two sets of allies
"It is interesting to note that U.S. taxpayers are spending $615,482 every hour to fight a “war” in which the “enemy” is being well-financed by countries with whom the U.S. has full diplomatic relations. Does this not make it appear that “victory” over this enemy is not the goal? With many countries financing and supplying Daesh, might the world’s largest supplier of weaponry, the U.S., not be too interested in losing such a lucrative market? It’s worth noting that the United States’ “foreign military sales rose to a record high of $46.6 billion for fiscal 2015.” With such a healthy cash cow, would the country’s power-brokers really want to end war? Why kill the goose that is laying such pretty golden eggs? "
here, the for-rest-of-the-world-strange-sounding "Daesh well-financed by countries with which the US has diplomatic relationships"
for all countries except one having diplomatic relationships with other countries is not optional. it might sound internationalistic, bordering to the globalist, but there it is. anyway, the countries that do not enjoy diplomatic relationships with the US tend to be dubbed as evil, don't they? with all it's consequences
but a word with my esteemed US-Libertarians friends here on ZH on their ideology and the ME:
- I can't prove it, but imo most of the funds that Daesh gets from those countries are private. Instead of "statist" state-funds gathered with taxes. The ME is lousy with "oligarchs", i.e. princes, many of which have territories they control in a nearly... familial fashion
- A lot of weapons that went to Iraq were... completely uncontrolled, unmarked, not numbered, not traceable... for two reasons. the first is business, of course. But the second is... ideological. As in "let's apply the 2nd Amendment in the ME", libertarian style
- All in all, the ME is a bastion of libertarianism. first, many tenets of what is nowadays libertarianism did originate there, mostly by Arab traders that plied the Indian Ocean tradeways. second, most of the times the ME was under the rule of imperial masters in the Roman style, which left many local and trade issues untouched by central authority. this made those traders fashion free-trade agreements with local lords, often in the form of harbour-cum-market leases or arrangements. third, the oil-cash-rich in the ME have a deep distrust in anything that even remotely resembles a polity in any republican and democratic fashion. they prefer their families to their polities... in Saudi Arabia, the difference between the two, for example, is slight bordering to negligible
picture a man with an aquiline nose, a not-that-dark complexion, assets up to one billion invested all over the world, a family connection to a king or emir, flying private jets, with a deep distrust of anything that looks like "state", and a willingness to send funds to Daesh, out of some complex mix of religion, spite, wish to see something break down, business interest reasons and "because he can". question: does he have a counterpart in some of those points in your country?
Saudi Arabia alone has over one thousand of them. as a reminder, the UK had a long story of distress in Northern Ireland because of Irish-American sponsors of the Irish Republican Army. it took ages for the US as a polity and society to decide not to sponsor what for the UK was terrorism, and this despite a lot of British diplomatic action (in the case of the IRA, fund-raising in the US reached even the lower echelons of the middle-classes)
yes, states can do terrible things, indeed. but violence exists without the state, too. and oligarchs... well, the old sense of the word is this: someone that can field his own mercenary (or family) military outfit, possibly even from his own bases, thanks to his wealth
libertarianism in this is an ideology that prefers, as end-result, "oligarchic mercenary wars" to state wars
Daesh is a good example for that, and a good example of a failure of states to cope with private war funding. a failure of states to maintain a monopoly on violence, something they are supposed to do so that less violence is the result
as such, the US here emerges with two sets of allies, a tendency to occupy territories which then are open to the completely unhindered weapons trade, a tendency of favouring private over state thanks to it's influence from libertarian tenets, and one set of allies that is completely fine with it, thinking in a similar manner in many things
sorry, but you can't have your cake and eat it too. freedom, unfettered, spawns the oligarch and the mercenary war. and the problem with mercenary wars is how to return a territory to a peace... without the use of the state as a tool for that.
it starts with the conundrum of freedom... of sponsoring privately outfits like the IRA or Daesh
moar freedom of that kind? for the future? well, how about a web-based sponsoring of specific actions? from plastering a Prime Minister with dung to stealing all bricks of the FED buildings to blowing up bridges, buildings, people? many possibilities there, from the humourous to the horrible
does this mean that statism is "good"? no. only that there is no such thing as a free lunch or an ideology can promote peace as such. the US Libertarian "if everybody would do so, then it would be peaceful" is as self-serving and self-lying as any other ideological structure claiming that
Spot on! Could not have said that better. So many don't want to face such that basic fact, mainly because if they did most of the silly rhetoric they love to wield would be seen to be made up drivel.
As for not going after ISIL, US DOD have been keeping rigorous detailed stats on all strikes in Iraq, and in Syria, for that reason. And they have been announcing all of them soon after they have taken place. And we know it is happening as they say because people keep posting videos from near where they hit, and the respective coalition air forces are recording an releasing a lot of detailed footage of the attacks.
Operation Inherent Resolve bombing statistics are here:
http://www.defense.gov/News/Special-Reports/0814_Inherent-Resolve
News of each new coalition attack is released here daily:
http://www.defense.gov/News
Some of the detailed footage video being released:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xCyJHdFNwiE
So the US created/trained/funded ISIS
...Which means the entire US Govt has COMMITTED TREASON!
Treason... against whom? In which jurisdiction, according to which laws?
take the example of Saddam Hussein. sponsoring him was treason against Iraq... until his revolution. then, it became... patriotic
George Washington was treasonous, too. towards the Crown. even oathbreaking was involved, him being an officer
The victors write the history books.
Hang the bastards' portraits upside down! That's why Hillary wears pantsuits...in case she's hung upside down.
They committed treason when they guaranteed pensions on taxpayers.
Can anybody here name an enemy of Christian civilization Wall Street and DC didn't bankroll at some point? Because I really can't think of any.
The CIA is Edgar Bergen .... Obama is Charlie McCarthy .... the Muslims are the butt of the joke ?
At times Obama does look like someone has their hand up his ass.
you can bet your ass the road to ISIS or ISIL as one person in the US calls it went through Benghazi and got some innocents killed.
Yasmina Haifi is a muslim with double nationality and split loyalty. For her idiotic remarks she has been fired and rightly so. We Dutch already have enough traitors and liers in government and Media.
IS/ISIS/Daesh also serves another purpose now not just as a weapon to create regime change.
A tool to terrorise and subdue western populations into doing their puppet governments bidding.