Modern Terrorism: An American 'Success' Story (L'Expressions, Algeria)
"Before September 11, 2001, terrorism, at least at the
level of nuisance it has now reached, was unknown. September 11 was the pretext
that U.S. neo-conservatives used to take action and prepare the world for 'fighting
terrorism.' This was merely a strategy for reconfiguring global geo-politics.
... Since 2003, it has been well understood that U.S. arguments legitimizing
the war on terrorism were a deception. These were falsehoods that enabled the
Americans to tell the world about a jihadist 'plague,' and say that they were the
only ones in possession of a cure."
Chechen Omar al-Shishani: Described as the 'public face' of the the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, he embodies one of the reasons Russia is just as interested in putting ISIS out of business as the United States and Iran are.
2000, terrorism - at least as we know it today - didn't exist in the Middle
East, particularly not in Iraq and Syria. However, the American invasion of ancient
Mesopotamia absolutely changed the existing order. In addition to its
introduction into the region, it has transformed into a radicalizing cross-border
scourge. That was only possible, and is this really a paradox? - through
the logistical and strategic support of the United States, to what would become al-Qaeda, to Islamist movements operating in
Afghanistan from 1980-1990, and for movements trained by the CIA and financed
by Saudi Arabia. If we don't go back to the origins of what is now a global
scourge, and if we fail to properly define this phenomenon, we can neither understand
its international expansion let alone eradicate it.
advent of international terrorism is in fact closely tied to, on one hand, the
American strategy of world domination, and on the other, Washington's desire to
divvy up the Middle East along ethnic, tribal, and denominational lines (George
W. Bush's project for a Greater Middle East).
Syria, Iraq, and Libya today provide a damning picture of what will become of
and Maghreb regions if given
over to jihadism. And it is Qatar and Saudi Arabia that
fund jihadism, which is largely responsible for the planned
destruction of the Arab nation.
September 11, 2001, terrorism, at least at the level of nuisance it has now reached,
was unknown. September 11 was the pretext that U.S. neo-conservatives used to take
action and prepare the world for "fighting terrorism." This was merely
a strategy for reconfiguring global geopolitics. In his January
28, 2003 State of the Union speech, George W. Bush laid his cards on the
table and assured us that, "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret
communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam
Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al-Qaeda."
February 5, 2003, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell "produced"
before the U.N. Security Council "evidence" of links which, according
to him, existed between Iraq and the nebulous Islamists. Thus, under the guise of
fighting terrorism, the White House, the State Department, and the Pentagon, embarked
on a campaign of utter insanity. Earlier, on June 1 2002, President Bush had unveiled
what he called "the Bush
Doctrine," which advocated strikes against what he called "rogue
W. Bush was fantasizing. In 2002 there was no "terror" from
terrorists that in 2014, the Syrian and Iraqi people now live with. It was the
American invasion of Iraq that gave rise to the jihadist groups, most notably the
Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS).
In Syria, it remains the United States, aided by France and Great Britain, which
have resolutely incited the overthrow of the lawful Syrian regime, with, again,
the emergence of jihadist groups, including the Al-Nusra
Front (the local representative of al-Qaeda), which are responsible for the
deaths of tens of thousands of Syrians and the exodus of millions of others.
the United States has wanted regime change by force - Iraq, Libya, Syria - far
from installing democracy and a respect for the people, it has resulted in the
destabilization of these states with the result that power has been seized by
armed jihadist groups which impose a reign of terror over populations under their
the Americans send troops into Iraq? Unlikely! On the other hand, they will do
what they are already doing in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen: conduct war by
drones. This is less costly to the United States in both human and financial
terms, whereas the collateral damage is and will be disastrous for the
countries targeted. There have been more Afghan, Pakistani, and Yemeni
civilians killed by American drone strikes than by the terrorists. The
sacrifices, if not the errors, the Americans will say, are unavoidable, even if
it will still be Iraqis and Syrians who foot the bill.
Posted By Worldmeets.US
Since 2003, it has been well understood that
U.S. arguments legitimizing the war on terrorism were a deception. These were
falsehoods that enabled the Americans to tell the world about a jihadist "plague,"
and say that they were the only ones in possession of a cure. Unheard of 13
years ago, terrorism, as well as having developed, has consolidated, thanks to Western
logistics and financing from the Gulf kingdoms. U.S. counter-terrorism has thus
managed to drive and even encourage jihadism toward
objectives that only Washington must understand. Seen from this angle, "terrorism"
seems rather an American "success"!