tweakabelle
Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: mnottertail
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
I'm not sure that the lack of an AUMF is going to change anything.
These wars are being fought through proxies. As I understand it, an AUMF is irrelevant to proxies.
Even if the US could be somehow prevented from arming its proxies directly, all it has to do to circumvent any constraint is arm them through third parties. Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey (the last two being important US allies in the region) are more than happy to act as conduits to the Syrian rebels - they've shown such an aptitude for it that they will arm anyone who opposes Assad including IS. And finance them too if $ are short. Hey the Saudis will even be glad to supply them with happy pills too, if that's what it takes.
So the flow of arms to various anti-Assad outfits of varying political hues (from fundamentalist Islamists through to nominal democrat) continues unabated. It's likely to continue for as long as it takes ..... But that doesn't mean that the US (or the UK which is behaving in exactly the same fashion as the US) isn't involved.
Those who thought that the enemy was Islamic fundamentalists need to think again. If the evidence from Syria is anything to go by, getting rid of Assad is a much higher priority in Washington and London.
Saudi Arabia, because of the wealth of the royal family, and the size, is the perpetrator of 9/11. Turkey is a problem because of its Kurdish territory.
(and I talked about this before 2008 I said all this at the outset, before we went into Iraq.) And of course, those are our best allies. We got trouble.
"We got trouble". Yes. Indeed. Trouble with a capital 'T'.
Saudi Arabia is also responsible for the tsunami of fundamentalist preachers flooding the Arab/Muslim world. It is exporting its own strict fundamentalist interpretation of Islam - the Wahabi sect - throughout the Muslim world through financing madrassas and mosques. This ideology is very close to the interpretations of Islam that IS and other extremist Islamist terrorist entities adopt.
So Saudi Arabia is playing a very duplicitous game. OTOH it is posing as a long term US ally and security alliance partner. OTOH it is financing the spread of fundamentalism throughout the Arab/Muslim world. On a private level, Saudi citizens are thought to be among the primary financiers of groups such as AQ and IS.
Saudi Arabia in case anyone needs reminding is run like a medieval theocracy with a shocking human rights record. Political opponents of the ruling family are killed, even if they are children . The Saudis are also the West's armaments industry's best customers with deals worth in excess of $50 billion currently in the pipeline.
With friends like this who needs enemies? Defeating the ideas that drive IS and similar groups will necessitate the cessation of Saudi activities financing and spreading fundamentalism but has any one ever heard a Western politician of consequence demanding this?
"We've got trouble" big time!
< Message edited by tweakabelle -- 11/24/2015 2:42:37 AM >
_____________________________
|
RE: ISIS can't attack the US - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread