In an interview with Agence France Presse (AFP), Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said that the suspected chemical weapons attack on April 4 was a complete fabrication. “Definitely, 100 percent for us, it’s fabrication,” he said.
Assad maintains that he gave up his chemical weapons in 2013. He also said that the U.S.’s strike on the Shayrat Airbase didn’t really have any effect on his military.
In addition, Assad said that ISIS is backed by the U.S. and some of its allies. “Our impression is that the West, mainly the United States, is hand-in-glove with the terrorists,” he said. “They fabricated the whole story in order to have a pretext for the attack.”
Is Assad right in this case? I don’t know, and we probably won’t ever really know. But the U.S. certainly has a history of supporting terrorist groups.
Years before Osama bin Laden was our archenemy, he was our ally to whom the U.S. provided funding, training, manpower and weapons in order for his team of Mujahedeen to help accomplish our geopolitical goals. In fact, the CIA labeled this group of recruits placed under bin Laden’s leadership “Al-Qaeda,” or “The Database.”
Al-Qaeda and ISIS wouldn’t be here today if it weren’t for the U.S.’s covert funding of it. Our foreign policy demands a credible enemy to justify our presence in the Middle East. Al-Qaeda has worked wonderfully, and ISIS is even better.
“I mean, let’s remember here: The people we are fighting today we funded 20 years ago, and we did it because we were locked in this struggle with the Soviet Union…
“They invaded Afghanistan, and we did not want to see them control central Asia, and we went to work, and it was President Reagan, in partnership with the Congress, led by Democrats, who said, ‘You know what? Sounds like a pretty good idea! Let’s deal with the ISI and the Pakistani military, and let’s go recruit these Mujahedin! That’s great! Let’s get some to come from Saudi Arabia and other places, importing their Wahhabi brand of Islam, so that we can go beat the Soviet Union!’
“And guess what? They retreated, they lost billions of dollars, and it led to the collapse of the Soviet Union. So there’s a very strong argument, which is: It wasn’t a bad investment to end the Soviet Union, but let’s be careful what we sow, because we will harvest.”
Then, in 2012, Hillary’s State Department backed terrorist organizations to try to topple Assad’s government in Syria. According to a leaked memo between the State Department and the Pentagon, obtained by Judicial Watch: “The Salafist [sic], the Muslim Brotherhood and AQI [al-Qaeda in Iraq] are the major forces driving the insurgency in Syria. The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support [this] opposition, while Russia, China and Iran ‘support the [Assad] regime.’”
AQI eventually morphed into what we know today as ISIS.
Interestingly, those militant groups that have reigned in the Middle East for decades function not so much as terrorist organizations, but more as U.S.-backed controlled opposition forces. As long as they get adequate funding and military supplies, they will continue to recruit new members, go on terrorist rampages throughout that region, destabilizing nations and necessitating (so they say) Western involvement either through covert funding or military presence.
The geopolitical engineers strike the perfect balance between engaging ISIS and Al-Qaeda terrorists in combat on the one hand, and giving them financial support on the other. We don’t want to wipe them out completely, because then we wouldn’t have an excuse to be there. And we can’t let them take over the region completely, because the U.S. wants to be the ones in control. There has to be that balance to keep this war a vicious cycle; ongoing and never-ending.
The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com