Posted on 12/24/2019 6:02:54 PM PST by bitt
So when we know that Jamal cash hoagie was big time MB and also a “writer” for the WAPOST and former intel for the Saudis as well as CIA took over his uncle Adnans smuggling business should we be surprised that he wound up being fish food?
I think the CIA was heavily involved in taking down Libya and also Soros who was paranoid that Qdaffi was about to support the dinar with Gold which would have ruined Soros’ day.
IF it was cia and I’m pretty sure they had a big hand, they always have multiple goals. Its their MO.You name the op they all have 5,6,7 goals or they don’t bother from russian collusion to Arab spring.
Post 19
Post 20
Good food for thought.
Thanks
One problem with your scenario’s focus on Obama.
The regime change agenda against Assad began during the term of GWBush.
1. It was covert and involved secretly supporting the organizational (not material) build up of the “Syrian opposition”.
2. It involved and had the support of other western nations besides the U.S. and it involved Turkey, Saudi Arabia and other Sunni Middle East countries.
3. Like the stupid U.S. venture supporting Afghans to over throw the Soviets there, the west left most of the “grunt work” on the ground in Syria to it’s Middle East friends, with the U.S. having little to do with vetting the Syrians or learning the Syrians own intentions.
4. The resulting “organized resistence” to Assad was predominately fundamentalist Sunni organizers and the largest of them the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood. Anyone looking at the history of civil unrest under the regimes of the Assad family would have admitted that the Brotherhood had been a force in all of them.
5. Obama was not even running for office when all the above started. He inherited the project as it already existed via State and CIA watch.
6. The “Arab Spring” merely became a convenient point for the west to signal to the “Syrian Opposition” that it was time to become public with their organized resistance.
But the U.S. never seemed to have any plan or sense of what would happen once the “Syrian opposition” began their part in the regime change agenda, other than to garner international political support for them.
That is what Obama encountered. The CIA and State had been ivolved in lifting up the “Syrian opposition” but besides lifting it up they had no plans of what to do after that, of how to then get rid of Assad. They also seemed to have never calculated what Assad’s response would be. It’s as if they thought Assad would just lie down for the opposition and not call in his friends in Tehran and Moscow.
But, badly for Obama, he also had his “deal” he was trying to make with the Mullahs of Tehran, and the mess in Syria was complicating that. He needed EU & Russian & Chinese support for the deal, and bombing Assad was going to scuttle that deal; which he wanted for his own legacy.
So he punted on Syria. Letting the CIA bungle its way trying to build the armed opposition to Assad, and them doing as badly vetting who that support went to as they did in Afghanistan. As before in Afghanistan, their partners in Syria - mainly Saudi Arabia and Turkey - was generating a very fundamentalist armed coalition against Assad.
I think Obama simply did not care. He wanted his “history making” deal with the Mullahs of Tehran. Of course Valerie Jarret was part of that.
As for Libya and Egypt, again I think that was State & CIA with Obama just letting them go, so I put them both more in Clinton’s lap, with her much longer deep state connections. I think Obama was pushed to act in Libya by Clintion and McCain, but the evidence is clear that again, as in Syria, State and CIA had no real plans about where things would go and how to get there. Maybe they had plans and maybe Obama was not going to let them do their “nation building”. It all three cases, the U.S. helped intiate “change” and then stepped away and left a mess.
But when did it all begin? Before Obama.
excellent account of these events
Seconded
“Obama and Clinton concocted the “Arab Spring” in order to overthrow Assad in Syria, Mubarek in Egypt and Quaddafi in Libya. Their goal was to replace each with a Muslim Brotherhood aligned person. I believe Valerie Jarrett was DEEPLY involved in pushing this.”
How many here, I wonder, figured this out by watching events, without any classified or insider information.
“How is it that some of the Founding Fathers with far cruder tools and a more limited knowedge base were able to see the Muslims so much more clearly than their modern day counterparts?”
Perhaps because they weren’t being flim-flammed by leftist evildoers all day every day?
“He had a look of terror on his face. I marked him as suspect immediately.”
About when was that?
Assad got the support of the Mullahs in Tehran because he - being an Alawite minor Muslim sect and a secularist - was never an insider with any of the major Sunni majority countries, where religiously he as an apostate. Over time the Syrian Muslim Brotherhood spearheaded civil uprising against Assad’s father and then Assad after that, which were put down mercilessly. That history alone should have told the U.S. deep state how Assad would react to the new “Syrian Opposition”. Also they could not have been so ignorant to believe Assad was unaware of the covert regime change agenda building to work against him. I guess they expected “bomb the hell out of Assad” McCain to prevail, but as I said THAT was not going to fit with trying to get the deal done with the Mullahs of Tehran that Obama was pursuing.
Issa is running for a House seat again
“American intel has seemed remarkably immune to an understanding of how religious politics work in the ME.”
Agencies, if not the government as a whole, develop narratives explaining what people think, how cultures function, etc.
I used to be a legitimate authority on Japan. It was frustrating to see how consistently the State Department got everything wrong. The DOJ got involved with something we were doing, and they got everything wrong, as well.
And when I say they got things wrong, I don’t mean they felt uncertain and were guessing. They were as certain as they could be. They were aggressively wrong.
It doesn’t surprise me at all that the State Department has no understanding of how religious politics work in the ME. Just as with Japan, I’m certain that State has a narrative regarding that, and that no part of that narrative bears any resemblance to reality. None the less, one must maintain a quasi-religious dedication to that narrative if one hopes to remain employed at State.
“Maybe so, but I think that’s the worst way to figure things out.”
I knew as soon as I clicked “post” that this was poorly written and could be misunderstood.
I was really just interested in how easily it could be understood by Freepers that Obama and Clinton were pursuing such a plan, that their real object was to turn the entire ME over to the Muslim Brotherhood types.
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.