I am still unable to believe that people can buy into the propaganda which has now led to the US strikes on Syria, with five Arab nations “participating” in the warmongery. The allied Arab autocratic regimes (oh the hypocrisy of Western democracy) are seen as nothing but puppets which stood idly by as Gaza was bombarded for over 50 days, and whose survivors are now picking up the remains of dismembered bodies of men, women children amongst rubble, trying to rebuild their lives.
Included amongst the “Allied” nations are those from which condemnations of the Zionist entity were slow to escape the oily throats of Arab princes and Saudi scholars, but were quick to brand non-violent democratically-elected Muslim Brotherhood as terrorists, whilst funding the slaughter Muslims by Sisi’s men.
With the Western created borders melting before the eyes of hegemonists Barack Obama reiterated what his predecessor so proudly asserted,
“We will hunt down terrorists who threaten our country, wherever they are,”
Bush said the same towards the beginning of his is endless neocon war on terror when he said,
“Wherever they are, we will hunt them down, one by one”
Such statements were only precursors to the breakdown of borders and perpetual warfare which is central to neoconservative foreign policy and which has been normalised in the Obama years.
Tracking the Course of Events
Before any war is waged by the West there is a series of propaganda stories pumped through the media. The killing of Foley was comprehensively used as a pretext domestically (see here and here), as has been the case of Alan Henning, playing exactly into the hands of the neocon policy of perpetual warfare. ISIS tore up the Western-imposed borders as it progressed swiftly through from Syria to Iraq. The actions received daily, nay hourly coverage and these war drum-beating reports were sufficient to raise the terror threat in the UK, despite Theresa May admitting there was no actual intelligence to suggest an imminent attack. In all this, one fact has been conveniently ignored: whether the West like to accept this or not, the puppet Maliki regime in Iraq which was put in place by the West and is still backed by the US, is largely responsible for the growth of ISIS into Iraq as the Sunni population sought respite from minority oppression.
Around the same time we had the Zionist entity being pumped with weapons by the US as it dropped bomb after bomb, firing experimental weaponry on a mainly civilian population, grabbing land in the process to the comparative silence of the Arab and Western nations.
And now we have the bombardment of key positions in Syria. But no bombardment of Israel. With this bombardment will come the inevitable loss of life (including humanitarian air workers), which is merely “collateral” to the US, which is protecting its black liquid interests (also known as Exxon and Chevron), but human beings to those who do not want further bloodshed. The mission creep has also already begun as the US and her “Allies” have additionally targeted Jabhat al-Nusra, an al-Qaeda-affiliated rebel group whose aim is to topple Bashar al-Asad, and in 2012 at least, to target only the “near enemy”. Ironically, a rebel group which was most likely armed by the US in their covert transfer of weaponry from Libya to Syria.
Not content with being left behind in the neocon warmongery, Britain now also wants a piece of the bloody pie, realising that the daily reminders of the “ISIS” threat plastered across papers has now manufactured public consent.
This mission creep is set to expand as the “threats” to the West due to their “interventions” increase. Experience through the Iraq and Afghanistan wars only serve to reinforce this notion. The vicious circle will inevitably lead to discontentment, frustration and anger as the bodies begin to pile up. People will be arrested and detained without charge, stripped of their nationalities and then deported only to be tried and judged innocent of any terror charges. All the while Theresa May will remain an extremist who will not be judged as one.
When the voices against foreign policy grow, the neoconservative will blame ideology (again) as opposed to Western foreign policy for the phantom threat of “radicalisation”.