Posted on 04/05/2017 9:16:05 PM PDT by PingPongChampion
The US establishment's geopolitical strategy to reform and neutralize the Middle East has been ongoing since the first Bush Administration. If you thought they would let Donald Trump throw a wrench into their gears, you were wrong. It serves America's national security and global interests to disarm the unfriendly Islamic powers in the Middle East, and the arguments in favour of keeping the status quo intact are convincing. There's also a lot more to it than that, which is why the foreign policies of both Democrats and Republicans have been essentially identical over the past forty years.
Under the Obama Administration, the tactics were different but the goals were the same. We saw the collapse of Libya, a strong stance on Syria and the rise of ISIS—which has been a threat on the global stage but has also been a huge destabilizing force in Syria against the Assad regime. Assad's regime has faced an internal rebellion as well as an invasion by ISIS. This serves the overall US geopolitical strategy in the region with the appearance of less US meddling.
General Wesley Clark outlined the geopolitical strategy in 2013 with Democracy Now. He talked about his conversations with Bush officials after 9/11, including Donald Rumsfeld and a particular General:
(Excerpt) Read more at poletical.com ...
But the difference is neither Obama nor Bush wanted to make America great again.
It serves America’s national security and global interests to disarm the unfriendly Islamic powers...
Where is that happening?
Yep. If Trump really falls for the Russia/Assad crap, it’s over.
F’em. We are on our own.
Heaven only knows what the actual truth is behind the tangled web of the Middle East. I think the President is facing a steep learning curve on geopolitics. As much as we like to think he is playing 4D chess while the rest of the world is playing checkers, Trump finds himself having to seek advice from those with experience, which means NEOCONS.
Although they mention the rise of ISIS as a destabilizing threat, they say it’s good because it is helping to overthrow Assad.
They fail to mention that ISIS is responsible for millions of ‘migrants’ to Europe. (Or so they tell us.)
How good is a foreign policy if it may help to overthrow a democratically elected leader in a small middle eastern country, but destabilizes all of Europe, forever?
Sounds like a lose-lose situation.
Well, that's a sanitized way to put it. Much of the region is on fire and in anarchy, and the effects are spilling into areas far removed from the Middle East. What a smashing success that strategy has been.
I remember sitting in a doctor's office in 1999 reading an article about the neocon plan to wage war in the Middle East in order to pacify it and create a Pax Americana that would make it safe for commerce. I have always looked at our ME policy since then with that article in mind. i never cared for the plan then, and I don't care for the mess it has made. That is the status quo they want to preserve?
Everyone is falling for the same “solution” again, including Trump. The Middle East “solution” will never be resolved as long as there is a false religion called Islam. These false “religionists” do not want peace; they want the eradication of Israel.
Trump should just say this: “We will resume negotiations for settling the middle east problem when Islam and the “Palestinians” reform their hatred of Israel and accept its authority and right of existence, until then nothing will change and this is a waste of time.” Trump will get more respect than you can imagine, as well as more vitriol from the same jackasses.
Wow, sixteen years in the strategy. I suppose there's been a ton of progress and the Middle East is way better off now than before we started, right? Hmmmm....
> It serves America’s national security and global interests to disarm the unfriendly Islamic powers in the Middle East, and the arguments in favour of keeping the status quo intact are convincing.
Hogwash. It has been demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that the policies necessary to accomplish the goal, of what the author deceptively and euphemistically refers to as “disarmament” but is really better understood as “installing puppet states”, are deeply flawed from many important perspectives - strategically, economically, morally, and have given rise to a permanent “shadow government” that makes a mockery of our own Constitution.
As Admiral Ackbar might put it... “it’s a trap!”
I think you’re 100% right.
Yes he will, but it will be at the head of the line leading these zipper heads.
In terms of true western values, the religiously fundamentalist regimes in Saudi Arabia and some of the Gulf States are no more our “friends” than are the Mullahs in Tehran. The globalist pretense that they are our friends is a forty year mistake in western thinking.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.