-10 reasons to oppose MB Obama’s ISIS war
-What a mess MB Obama has got the US into
-Panetta: ‘We Pay The Price’ For Obama Not Arming Rebels In 2012
-Syrian Child Soldier: “I’ve Gotten Used to Killing Soldiers.”
-Syria Hysteria Dooms MB Obama’s Plan To Destroy ISIS
-MB Obama’s UN Ambassador Admits Fight Against ISIS Designed to Take Out Assad in Syria
-ISIS: Creation Of The CIA
>>>>Supporting ISIS to Fight ISIS<<<<
Number of Syrians Fleeing the Heavy Fighting Into Turkey Reaches 130,000
Sept. 22, 2014 By Joe Parkinson And Ayla Albayrak
As many as 130,000 Syrians, mostly Kurds, have flooded into Turkey, fleeing an IS group offensive that has pushed the conflict even closer to the border. WSJ’s Mark Kelly reports.
ISTANBUL—Syrian Kurdish forces fighting a bid by Islamic State insurgents to capture a key Syrian border city said Monday they had stopped one column of advancing rebels but were still besieged by the extremist group on three other fronts.
Kurdish militia commanders said heavy fighting was raging around Ayn al-Arab, where jihadists of Islamic State, backed by tanks and other heavy armor, have seized scores of villages and forced the evacuation of dozens more.
Authorities in the city, known in Kurdish as Kobani, were “very worried” it could still fall to Islamic State, said an official in the nearby Turkish town of Suruc.
“The circle is closing down on Kobani. The clashes are now only some three to four kilometers outside the city, and it’s a matter of a day or two for Kobani to fall,” said the official, Orhan Sansal.
Kurdish leaders in the region have appealed for international intervention to halt Islamic State’s offensive, another illustration of the group’s formidable military strength since it upended the region’s political landscape with its lightning campaign in neighboring Iraq in May.
As Kurdish militia tried to stave off the Islamic State advance on Ayn al-Arab, the number of Syrians fleeing the fighting into Turkey rose to 130,000, said Nurman Kurtulmus, Turkey’s deputy prime minister.
The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees said most of those fleeing Syria are Kurdish women, children and elderly, and warns that they make up one of the largest wave of refugees since the rebellion against the government of President Bashar al-Assad began in March 2011.
Turkey is already providing temporary shelter to many of the 1.3 million Syrians who have fled their country, according to the government.
As thousands of newly-uprooted people escaped Syria, hundreds of Kurdish fighters and volunteers were hurrying into the country to help their Kurdish brethren prevent Islamic State rebels from taking Ayn al-Arab.
Syrian refugees cross the Syrian-Turkish border near Sanliurfa, Turkey on Monday. European Pressphoto Agency
On Sunday, Turkish security forces fired tear gas to disperse protesters angered by what they perceived as attempts by authorities at the border to bar the outside reinforcements.
The Kurdish militia in Syria, operating under the banner of the Syrian Kurdish People’s Defense Units, or YPG, said dozens of Kurds had been killed in fighting to defend Ayn al-Arab.
The YPG’s call for the youth of Turkey’s mostly Kurdish southeast to come to Ayn al-Arab’s defense has been joined by the Kurdistan Workers’ Party, or PKK. The PKK, listed as a terror organization by Washington and Turkey, has spent three decades fighting for autonomy for Turkey’s Kurds.
The siege of Ayn al-Arab follows repeated onslaughts by Islamic State forces aimed at taking control of a majority-Kurdish area in northeastern Syria. The city had an estimated prewar population of 200,000 people and sits along Syria’s 565-mile border with Turkey.
The YPG’s close links to the PKK poses a potential diplomatic problem for the U.S., which envisions Kurdish fighters in Syria and Iraq as the vanguard of a possible ground campaign against jihadists.
The move on Ayn al-Arab follows the seizure by Islamic State insurgents this past week of a strategic bridge over the Euphrates River. The capture enabled the rebels to march on the city from the west and rain down artillery shells on the city’s streets, said Syrian Kurdish officials.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/islamic-state-siege-on-syrian-city-halted-kurdish-forces-say-1411387943?
—-
Islamic State urges attacks on U.S., French citizens, taunts Obama
Sep 22, 2014 By Yara Bayoumy
(Reuters) – Islamic State urged its followers on Monday to attack citizens of the United States, France and other countries which have joined a coalition to destroy the militant group.
Islamic State spokesman Abu Muhammad al-Adnani also taunted U.S. President Barack Obama and other Western “crusaders” in a statement carried by the SITE monitoring website, saying their forces faced inevitable defeat at the militants’ hands.
The United States is building an international coalition to combat the radical Sunni Muslim group, which has seized swathes of territory in Iraq and Syria and proclaimed a caliphate in the heart of the Middle East.
Adnani said the intervention by the U.S.-led coalition would be the “final campaign of the crusaders”, according to SITE’s English-language transcript of an audio recording in Arabic.
“It will be broken and defeated, just as all your previous campaigns were broken and defeated,” Adnani said in the statement, which urged followers to attack U.S., French, Canadian, Australian and other nationals.
U.S. and French warplanes have struck Islamic State targets in Iraq and on Sunday the United States said other countries had indicated a willingness to join it if it goes ahead with air strikes against the group in Syria too.
Washington has also committed $500 million to arm and train Syrian rebels and has sent 1,600 U.S. troops back into Iraq to fight the group..
In his statement, Adnani mocked Western leaders over their deepening military engagement in the region and said Obama was repeating the mistakes of his predecessor, George W. Bush.
“If you fight it (Islamic State), it becomes stronger and tougher. If you leave it alone, it grows and expands. If Obama has promised you with defeating the Islamic State, then Bush has also lied before him,” Adnani said, according to the transcript.
“DRAGGED TO DESTRUCTION”
Addressing Obama directly, Adnani added: “O mule of the Jews, you claimed today that America would not be drawn into a war on the ground. No, it will be drawn and dragged … to its death, grave and destruction.”
Obama, who has spent much of his tenure extracting the United States from Iraq after its costly 2003 invasion and occupation, is sensitive to charges that he is being drawn into another long campaign that risks U.S. soldiers’ lives.
While Obama has ruled out a combat mission, military officials say the reality of a protracted campaign in Iraq and possibly Syria may ultimately require greater use of U.S. troops, including tactical air strike spotters or front-line advisers embedded with Iraqi forces.
In his statement, Adnani criticised Kurdish fighters who are battling the Islamic State militants in both Syria and Iraq.
“We do not fight Kurds because they are Kurds. Rather we fight the disbelievers amongst them, the allies of the crusaders and Jews in their war against the Muslims,” Adnani said, adding that there were many Muslim Kurds within the ranks of the Islamic State army.
On Monday, Syrian Kurdish fighters halted an advance by Islamic State to the east of a predominantly Kurdish town near the border with Turkey, a spokesman for the main Kurdish group said.
Adnani also condemned Saudi Arabia, whose senior Muslim clergy have denounced Islamic State and whose ruling royal family has joined other Arab states in a pledge to tackle militant ideology as part of a strategy to counter the group.
Adnani slammed Western inaction over the conflict in Syria, where President Bashar al-Assad’s forces have been embroiled in a three-year-old civil war with mainly Sunni Muslim fighters. He said the West had “looked the other way” when barrel bombs were dropped and chemical weapons were used against Muslim civilians.
“So know that – by Allah – we fear not the swarms of planes, nor ballistic missiles, nor drones, nor satellites, nor battleships, nor weapons of mass destruction,” he said.
(Additional reporting by Ali Abdelaty in Cairo; Writing by Yara Bayoumy; Editing by Gareth Jones)
http://in.reuters.com/article/2014/09/22/iraq-crisis-adnani-idINKCN0HH17120140922
—–
10 reasons to oppose MB Obama’s ISIS war
Joseph Farah reveals why president ‘cannot be trusted’ to handle crisis
September 21, 2014 by Joseph Farah
I take a backseat to no one in my realistic assessment of the threat posed to life, liberty and security posed by the ascendance of Islamic jihadism.
I am the grandson of Arab Christians who sought a life of liberty and security and opportunity in the U.S. after living under domination by Islam.
I am a former Middle East correspondent who has seen the reality of Islamic rule first hand – up-close and personal.
I would like to grant every ISIS member and sympathizer their wildest dream – an immediate one-way ticket to what they mistakenly believe to be paradise.
If I were in charge of the U.S. military, I would ask the generals to concoct a real plan to extinguish every single ISIS combatant using every weapon in our arsenal in the shortest time period possible – with the end of the year being the outside edge of acceptability.
Yet, I cannot even begin to support the plan concocted by Barack Obama to, as he says it, “degrade and destroy ISIS.”
Why?
First, it’s not sincere. One cannot solve a crisis you yourself created without first acknowledging your own mistakes. Obama fails that test miserably. If any one person in the world could be credited, if that’s the right word, with creating the monster ISIS, it would be Obama. How did he do it? He gleefully ignited and fueled the so-called “Arab spring,” which sought to topple stable, authoritarian, non-jihadist regimes in the Middle East – from Egypt to Libya to Syria – setting off a wild, uncontrolled revolutionary spirit that could only serve the interests of the Muslim Brotherhood and other radical interests. In Syria, where ISIS was birthed, Obama exaggerated the offenses of the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad, led a fight to bomb it, sent arms and funding to Sunni Muslim rebels and then watched as those arms fell into the hands of ISIS – literally launching these demons into a regional threat. Now his response and strategy to stop ISIS is, essentially, to do more of the same. His insistence that ISIS is not Islamic and that Islam is, inherently and fundamentally, a “religion of peace,” suggests he cannot escape his politically correct assumptions nor face reality.
Second, when you’re in a real fight to destroy an enemy, you take help anywhere you can get it. In World War II, Britain and the U.S. allied with the Soviet Union’s Josef Stalin to defeat Adolf Hitler. Was Stalin morally better than Hitler? No. But Hitler represented the immediate existential threat. Today, if ISIS is the immediate threat, we need to recognize Syria and Assad are on the front lines of fighting ISIS. Yet, Obama not only plans to aid Assad’s mortal enemies, but will, according to his generals, even use the opportunity to militarily take on Syria in the process. This is insanity. We don’t have a viable plan to destroy ISIS, let along fight a regional war on multiple fronts.
Third, Obama seems only interested in aiding Sunni Muslim opposition to ISIS, arming groups whose sympathies are both questionable and subject to change overnight. He refuses to aid the most reliable allies – Christians, Kurds and Shiite opposition, those who are facing the gravest and most immediate threat from these beasts. The problem in the Middle East is not that Sunni Muslims don’t have enough arms. It’s that Sunni Muslims have too many – and too much power.
Fourth, Obama’s rules of engagement will make his so-called “offensive” against ISIS as ineffective as his war on al-Qaida has been, as ineffective as his war on Syria has been and as ineffective as his rhetoric and threats against Russia have been.
Fifth, by ruling out America “boots on the ground” as an option, he has telegraphed to ISIS exactly what they have to do to win this conflict. In fact, he has signaled to them that America is not serious about defeating ISIS. He could have boosted ISIS’ morale no more if he waved the white flag of surrender over the White House.
Sixth, Obama’s conduct of the Iraq war and Afghanistan war is like a blueprint for victory for any enemy of the U.S. The strategy for beating the U.S. is simple: Just wait them out. Just resist until the next election cycle. Just keep attacking until the politicians tire of their policy of containment – they can’t afford to escalate and they don’t have the stomach to increase the terror, shock and awe the U.S. military alone can demonstrate.
Seventh, if Obama even has a vision of victory against ISIS, he hasn’t defined it. I don’t think he has one. I don’t think he even cares about ISIS. It took the American people’s shock and disgust over the hostage-taking and beheading of Americans by ISIS to get Obama to the point of addressing what he had dismissed as a “jayvee” threat.
Eighth, Obama fundamentally does not believe in using the power of the U.S. military in the proper, constitutional, traditional American way – to unleash hell on enemies until they unconditionally surrender or die. He believes in diplomacy. He believes in negotiated solutions. He believes in compromises. He believes in half-measures. He believes the U.S. military has been a danger to the world under the control of anyone but inspired new-age, one-world socialists like himself. Even if all the other problems I cited here were eliminated, anything short of a total victory approach against ISIS would ultimately fail.
Ninth, the Syrian rebels who represent the key to Obama’s anti-ISIS strategy are a fractious lot, and they cannot be trusted. They have one goal in mind – toppling Syria’s regime. To most of them, ISIS represents an ally in that cause, not an enemy. More support for them will only worsen the ISIS crisis – making an already complex theater more chaotic.
Tenth, I worry that Obama’s strategy has nothing to do with destroying ISIS but everything to do with toppling Syria’s Assad. How can we forget that just one year ago Obama was hell-bent on a belligerent, senseless bombing campaign against the Assad regime – a bulwark against radical Sunni domination in the Middle East and a surprisingly good protector of minority religious groups like Christians and Druze. Obama’s focus on support for anti-Assad forces in Syria suggests his real objective is something other than the destruction of ISIS.
Can Barack Obama be trusted to handle the ISIS crisis?
The answer to that question is an unequivocal “no.”
Obama will only make things worse with his plan. That’s what he has done since taking office. Why would we expect a different result now?
Joseph Farah is founder, editor and CEO of WND and a nationally syndicated columnist with Creators News Service.. He is the author or co-author of 13 books, including his latest, “The Tea Party Manifesto,” and his classic, “Taking America Back,” now in its third edition and 14th printing. Farah is the former editor of the legendary Sacramento Union and other major-market dailies.
Media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, please contact media@wnd.com.
http://www.wnd.com/2014/09/10-reasons-to-oppose-obamas-isis-war/
—
What a mess MB Obama has got the US into
September 14, 2014 By Ted Belman
When Obama took office he set about undermining Gaddafi, Mubarak and Assad. He worked in concert with Qatar, Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood.
The Libyan tribe that revolted against Gaddafi, probably instigated by the CIA, could easily have been crushed by Gaddafi had the matter been treated as an internal matter. But this coalition began a propaganda assault on Gaddafi claiming that there was an impending massacre. This justified Qatar in starting a movement in the UN to impose a no-fly zone over Libya. Pres Obama immediately imposed it and more while leading from behind. The end result is that Gaddafi is dead and chaos reigns.
In Egypt, Obama rehabilitated the Muslim Brotherhood by insisting that Mubarak allow them to attend his Cairo speech. Mubarak chose not to attend. From that moment on the handwriting was on the wall.
The NYT reported in 2011 that U.S. Groups Helped Nurture Arab Uprisings :
“But as American officials and others look back at the uprisings of the Arab Spring, they are seeing that the United States’ democracy-building campaigns played a bigger role in fomenting protests than was previously known, with key leaders of the movements having been trained by the Americans in campaigning, organizing through new media tools and monitoring elections.”
Various groups in Libya and Egypt “received training and financing from groups like the International Republican Institute, the National Democratic Institute and Freedom House, a nonprofit human rights organization based in Washington”
It is safe to assume that the CIA was involved as Pres Obama wanted to depose Gaddafi and Mubarak. After all, it is the job of the CIA to foment rebellion in countries where the US governments want to make unstable or unseat the government in power.
It wasn’t long before Obama demanded that Mubarak resign. He then pushed for early elections to enable the Muslim Brotherhood to win. The opposition had no chance to mobilize. But unfortunately for Obama, Morsi, the leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, overplayed his hand and was deposed by the Egyptian army lead by General el Sisi. Saudi Arabia and UAE financially backed the coup and the US was left in the awkward position of dealing with the new government while still trying to protect the Muslim Brotherhood. As a result the US has lost influence and credibility in Egypt and worldwide so much so that she was on the outside looking in as Israel and Egypt dominated the cease fire process.
Obama had a grand, or should I say grandiose, plan for deposing Assad. It all started when the Bush Jr Administration decided to align with the Sunni states to challenge Iran’s hegemony.
In 2007, Seymor Hersh reported in depth on it in Redirections published by The New Yorker, calling it a “strategic shift”.
http://www.economicsvoodoo.com/wp-content/uploads/2007-03-05-Annals-of-National-Security-The-Redirection-Covert-actions-against-Syria-Iran_The-New-Yorker.pdf
“In the past few months, as the situation in Iraq has deteriorated, the Bush Administration, in both its public diplomacy and its covert operations, has significantly shifted its Middle East strategy. The “redirection,” as some inside the White House have called the new strategy, has brought the United States closer to an open confrontation with Iran and, in parts of the region, propelled it into a widening sectarian conflict between Shiite and Sunni Muslims. [..]
One contradictory aspect of the new strategy is that, in Iraq, most of the insurgent violence directed at the American military has come from Sunni forces, and not from Shiites. But, from the Administration’s perspective, the most profound—and unintended—strategic consequence of the Iraq war is the empowerment of Iran.
The Saudis shared this concern and joined with the US to reduce Iranian influence in Lebanon, Syria and Iraq.
The protests arising from a water shortage in 2010 were leveraged into a full scale rebellion in 2011. Working with his coalition above mentioned, he attempted to mobilize those forces who were challenging Assad but insisted that the opposition forces be centered on the Muslim Brotherhood. He went so far as to deny the Kurds and other democratic groups from participating. Iran, Hezbollah and Russia came to the defense of Assad. Had Obama used superior force, he could have brought Assad to his knees in no time. But no, he tried to do so on the cheap using other people’s boots on the ground. According to the UN the death toll now exceeds 190,000. Had Obama not attempted to overthrow Assad, Assad could easily have suppressed the rebellion with less than 10% of the current death toll. So Obama is responsible for the carnage.
The creation of ISIS is due in part to the efforts of this coalition who needed it to help overthrow Assad. Saudi Arabia, whose primary goal was to reduce Iranian hegemony, joined the effort. ISIS has become a rallying point for Sunnis to conquer Iraq and Syria and perhaps Lebanon.
Obama later decided to seek some kind of détente with Iran. He undermined the sanctions that were in place and stopped calling for the removal of Assad. He went so far as to seek the assistance of Iran in defeating ISIS. Iran turned him down. Saudi Arabia felt betrayed.
Recently, Obama made a major speech in which he announced his intention to create a new coalition of countries that would work with him to destroy ISIS. But he has no takers. The UK, France and Germany have turned him down. Turkey has turned him down. Egypt and Saudi Arabia have also turned him down. Essentially he is asking the Sunnis to take up arms against ISIS which is also Sunni. It’s not going to happen. ISIS is taking over large swaths of Syria and Iraq which is exactly what the Saudis want. Thus Iranian hegemony is being curtailed.
Obama tried to deal with this problem by declaring that ISIS is not Islamic. But the Sunnis know better.
Obama’s machinations have caused the death of almost 200,000 Syrians. He did nothing to curtail the killing. ISIS comes along and kills much less than 10,000. For some reason, it’s enough to move Obama to try to rally other people’s troops to destroy them. He tried to distinguish between fighting ISIS in Iraq but not in Syria. Perhaps this reflects his desire to prevent Iraq from fracturing and his former desire to bring Assad down. This distinction cannot hold.
On Sept 15 the NYT published an article titled To Crush ISIS, Make a Deal With Assad:
”by insisting on a Sunni coalition, the West will only appear to be joining a gulf-led war on the Shiites of Iraq, Syria and Iran. (It bears noting that neither Hezbollah, the Iranian-backed Shiite movement based in Lebanon, nor Iran has declared a global war on the West and non-Muslims, unlike Saudi-inspired salafists and their jihadist brethren.)”
But isn’t that what the fight against Assad was all about.
“Supporting the Syrian “moderates” would make some military sense only if it would make any difference on the ground. But in the absence of any large-scale Western or regional commitment to deploy troops, the only real “boots on the ground” capable of destroying ISIS are the Syrian Army and its local allies, including Hezbollah.”
This article recommended throwing Saudi Arabia under the bus and went so far as to say:
“the West must overcome its reluctance to offend the Saudis, and speak out much more forcefully against the insidious influence of Wahhabism and the ideological support it offers violent extremism. The Arab gulf states must choose a side. They cannot continue to finance terrorism and use fundamentalism as a policy tool and yet claim to be fighting it abroad. Saudi Arabia is both a sponsor and a target of jihad — it should wish to be neither.”
Wouldn’t that be a pretty turn of events. Obama started out trying to form a Sunni alliance to take down Shiite Assad and now the NYT suggests that he should form a Shiite alliance to take down Sunni ISIS.
http://www.israpundit.org/archives/63600441
—-
Panetta: ‘We Pay The Price’ For Obama Not Arming Rebels In 2012
September 22, 2014
Former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta says the U.S. is now “paying the price” for not arming Syrian rebels in 2012.
Panetta touted his new book, Worthy Fights, Sunday night on 60 Minutes and discussed how the U.S. could have stopped the Islamic State ( ISIS) from becoming the threat it is today.
Pelley referenced the passage where Panetta wrote that advisers urged President Obama to arm Syrian rebels in 2012 to contain ISIL:
“In a new book, ‘Worthy Fights,’ former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta writes that in a meeting in the fall of 2012, he, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the director of the C.I.A., and the chairman of the joint chiefs all urged President Obama to arm moderate Syrians who had started the revolution against the dictatorship to begin with. That might have left no room for ISIS to grow.”
“The real key was how can we develop a leadership group among the opposition that would be able to take control,” Panetta said of Syria’s crisis in 2012. “And my view was to have leverage to do that, we would have to provide the weapons and the training in order for them to really be willing to work with us in that effort.”
But while Panetta and other advisers unanimously agreed on arming Syrians, President Obama decided not to. Panetta said Obama was afraid of who would ultimately get the weapons. “My view was, ‘you have to begin somewhere,’ Panetta said.
“I think that would’ve helped,” he added. “And I think, in part, we pay the price for not doing that in what we see happening with ISIS.”
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/panetta-we-pay-the-price-for-obama-not-arming-rebels-in-2012/
—-
Syrian Child Soldier: “I’ve Gotten Used to Killing Soldiers.”
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/lauretta-brown/syrian-child-sniper-when-i-killed-him-i-didn-t-feel-anything-0
—-
Syria Hysteria Dooms MB Obama’s Plan To Destroy ISIS
September 21, 2014 By David Singer
Syria Hysteria Dooms Obama’s Plan To Destroy ISIS
President Obama’s failed policies in Iraq, Libya, Syria, Afghanistan, Egypt and the West Bank do not bode well for the success of the President’s current plans to end the threat to world peace posed by the meteoric rise of both the Islamic State in Syria (ISIS) and the Al-Nusrah Front (ANF).
That threat was articulated by UN Security Council Resolution 2701 – passed on 15 August – which expressed:
” its gravest concern that territory in parts of Iraq and Syria is under the control of Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIS) and Al Nusrah Front (ANF) “
Acting under Chapter VII of the UN Charter—the Security Council strongly condemned:
“the indiscriminate killing and deliberate targeting of civilians, numerous atrocities, mass executions and extrajudicial killings, including of soldiers, persecution of individuals and entire communities on the basis of their religion or belief, kidnapping of civilians, forced displacement of members of minority groups, killing and maiming of children, recruitment and use of children, rape and other forms of sexual violence, arbitrary detention, attacks on schools and hospitals, destruction of cultural and religious sites and obstructing the exercise of economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to education, especially in the Syrian governorates of Ar-Raqqah, Deir ez-Zor, Aleppo and Idlib, in northern Iraq, especially in Tamim, Salaheddine and Niniveh Provinces;”
America has subsequently acted as though Resolution 2701 had never been passed.
In his speech to the American nation on 11 September Obama declared:
“Now let’s make two things clear: ISIS is not “Islamic.” No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of ISIS’ victims have been Muslim. And ISIS is certainly not a state… It is recognized by no government, nor the people it subjugates.”
The Islamic State is not only a terrorist group. It is an extremist, Islamist, political and military organization that holds a radical interpretation of Islam
The President is wrong on both counts.
Firstly—ISIS is Islamic—as its formal Declaration of Statehood on 29 June 2014 proclaims – and this analysis asserts:
“The Islamic State is not only a terrorist group. It is an extremist, Islamist, political and military organization that holds a radical interpretation of Islam as a political philosophy and seeks to impose that worldview by force on Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Expelled from al-Qaeda for being too extreme, the Islamic State claims to be the legitimate ruler of all Sunni Muslims worldwide. They have established what they regard as a state which includes large swaths of territory in Syria and Iraq, governed from Raqqa in Syria.
It advances a number of theological opinions to support its claims. Its adherents hold that they are merely practicing Islam fully, pronouncing those who disagree with them takfir (heretics).
This design
Nation is used as religious justification for killing the Islamic State’s opponents”
Secondly – ISIS is a State – meeting the legal requirements of Article 1 of the 1933 Montevideo Convention:
“The state as a person of international law should possess the following qualifications:
(a) a permanent population; (b) a defined territory; (c) government; and (d) capacity to enter into relations with the other states.”
Obama’s claim that ISIS is recognized by no other government is irrelevant—as article 3 of the Montevideo Convention makes indisputably clear:
“The political existence of the state is independent of recognition by the other states.
Obama’s false assumptions are a recipe for policy failure—as the goals enunciated by Obama in the same address clearly demonstrated:
“Our objective is clear: we will degrade, and ultimately destroy, ISIS through a comprehensive and sustained counter-terrorism strategy.”
Destroying the UN condemned Al Nusrah Front did not rate a mention. A lukewarm response from 57 Islamic States to help defeat ISIS’ declared world threat to peace was not factored into Obama’s thinking.
Four days later an international conference held in Paris made it clear that Syria was not even part of the battleground where ISIS was to be confronted, degraded and destroyed.
Mouram Daoud—a member of the National Coordination Committee for Democratic Change in Syria—an internal opposition coalition—opined that ISIS cannot be defeated militarily without Syria and Turkey’s backing:
“The US administration should first pressure the Turkish partner to stop the flow of jihadists through its airports and stop buying oil from IS. According to [United Nations] Resolution 2170, the US will not be able to strike IS sites in Syria without the approval of the Syrian government, which is eagerly awaiting this type of cooperation to restore its international legitimacy. But the US will not include the Syrian government in this war, and will not recognize the government either. This means that the US will stick to its decision to only provide weapons to the Syrian [rebel] factions.”
Obama’s mantra – first delivered in August 2011 – remains unchanged:
“The future of Syria must be determined by its people, but President Bashar al-Assad is standing in their way. For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside.”
Not even 200000 deaths and the creation of millions of Syrian civilian refugees since 2011 have produced any momentum for rapprochement between Obama and Assad that would enable Assad to extend – and Obama to accept – any invitation to confront ISIS in occupied Syria.
Any expectation that Assad and his backers—Russia, Iran and Hezbollah—will help Obama by destroying ISIS in Syria – is a pipe dream.
Syria hysteria seems destined to entrap Obama in yet another political quagmire.
–
David Singer is an Australian Lawyer, a Foundation Member of the International Analyst Network and Convenor of Jordan is Palestine International—an organization calling for sovereignty of the West Bank and Gaza to be allocated between Israel and Jordan as the two successor States to the Mandate for Palestine. Previous articles written by him can be found at: jordanispalestine.blogspot.com David can be reached at: letters@canadafreepress.com
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/66168
—-
MB Obama’s UN Ambassador Admits Fight Against ISIS Designed to Take Out Assad in Syria
The CIA’s hydra: ISIS, al-Nusra and FSA
September 22, 2014 by Kurt Nimmo
Obama’s United Nations ambassador Samantha Power told Chuck Todd of NBC on Sunday the real purpose of the fight against ISIS is to overthrow al-Assad and the Syrian government.
Power said the “moderate” Free Syrian Army (FSA) will receive an “infusion of support” in its battle against both ISIS and the Syrian government which is, according to Power and the United States, “backed by Hezbollah, Iran, Russia, etc.”
CIA’s Hydra: FSA, al-Nusra and ISIS
Omitted from the discussion is the fact ISIS, al-Nusra and the FSA have merged forces.
“We are collaborating with the Islamic State and the Nusra Front by attacking the Syrian Army’s gatherings in… Qalamoun,” Bassel Idriss, the commander of an FSA-aligned rebel brigade, told the Lebanese Daily Star earlier this month.
The FSA has lost troops to al-Nusra and other hardcore Islamist groups for more than a year.
In June al-Nusra and ISIS joined forces at Albu Kamal in Syria and al-Qaim in Iraq.
“Fighters feel proud to join al-Nusra because that means power and influence,” Abu Ahmed, the commander of an FSA brigade near Aleppo, told The Guardian in May of 2013.
In September, 2013, one of the largest FSA brigades, the 11th Division, joined al-Nusra.
“This means that the FSA has suddenly lost serious amounts of loyal fighters… it’s basically being swallowed up by Nusra,” an Al Jazeera correspondent in Antakya, Turkey, reported on September 21, 2013.
Reuters, citing sources inside Syria, reported other members of the FSA have joined ISIS.
The Ahl al-Athar, Ibin al-Qa’im, and Aisha factions within the FSA pledged allegiance to ISIS in July, according to Zaman Alwasl, a newspaper based in Homs.
“Al Nusra Front and the state [ISIS] will fully control FSA brigades, fusing them within their extreme and Jihadi ideologies,” the newspaper reported.
>>>>Supporting ISIS to Fight ISIS<<<<
Obama and Power are attempting to keep the illusion alive that there is a distinction between al-Nusra, ISIS and the FSA when in fact all are creations of U.S., British and Israeli intelligence.
On Sunday The New York Times carried a report saying Iraqis – from people on the street to officials in the highest level of government – believe the CIA is behind ISIS. They fear the manufactured ISIS threat will be used to reintroduce troops in Iraq.
Last August the leader of al-Nusra, Abu-Mohammad al-Jolani, met with two CIA officers and the Saudi deputy minister of defense Prince Salman bin Sultan in Amman, according to former Austrian general, Matthias Ghalem, who quoted Colonel Ahmed al-Naameh, head of the rebel Revolutionary Military Council in southern Syria.
Al-Naameh said two deputies of Robert Stephen Ford, the former U.S. ambassador to Syria, also attended the meeting. It was decided al-Nusra and the FSA would cooperate in the proxy war to depose al-Assad and turn Syria into a failed state like Iraq and Libya.
Ford played a key role in orchestrating the Syrian “resistance” and was and underling to Iraq ambassador John Negroponte, who during his tenure organized death squads in Iraq in a coordinated effort to destabilize the country.
“Since the opening of a new US base in the desert in southwest of Jordan in November 2012… CIA operatives and US special operations troops have covertly trained the militants in groups of 20 to 45 at a time in two-week courses,” al-Alam reported.
In June Aaron Klein reported the U.S. military had trained ISIS terrorists in Jordan.
Previously the German newspaper Der Spiegel reported Americans training “Syrian rebels,” although it was not clear if the Americans worked for private firms or were with the U.S. Army.
ISIS: Creation Of The CIA
http://www.infowars.com/obamas-un-ambassador-admits-fight-against-isis-designed-to-take-out-assad-in-syria/
—-
ISIS an ‘outgrowth of US policy’
—-
—-
Related
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/samantha-power-we-will-not-do-air-strikes-syria-alone
http://news.yahoo.com/3-afghan-soldiers-missing-cape-cod-131301757.html
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/found-missing-afghan-soldiers-caught-trying-enter-canada-n208866
http://www.infowars.com/feds-swarm-plane-interrogate-passengers-over-travel-group-logo-that-resembled-isis/
http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/obama-is-giving-military-aid-to-a-major-terrorist-group-as-a-partner-in-the-fight-against-isis-2
http://shoebat.com/2014/09/22/u-s-allying-terror-states-terrorist-organization-fight-terror-state-terrorist-organization/
—-
Related previous posts on this blog
http://reclaimourrepublic.wordpress.com/key-previous-posts/
http://reclaimourrepublic.wordpress.com/key-isis-hamas-benghazi-muslim-brotherhood-previous-posts/
http://reclaimourrepublic.wordpress.com/2014/09/22/what-would-victory-against-isis-look-like-anyway-how-would-you-know-if-you-won
Tagged: abortion, al-Qaida, “Muslim Mafia, benghazi, Caliphate, Chemical Weapons, Christian, collapse of America, Constitution, dictator, foreclosure, Hamas, immigration, IRS, Islam, Islamist, Israel, jihad, Muslim Brotherhood, Nazi, NSA, Obama, obamacare, radical Islam, rights, Second Amendment, Syria, Tea Party, Tyrannical Government, voter fraud, White House