Trump’s Secret ISIS Strategy Unmasked: Indiscriminate Killing of Civillians
Remember during the campaign it was a secret plan that he couldn’t divulge so as not to tip off the enemy? Just like he had a secret plan to destroy Obamacare and a secret plan to tame Washington-we saw how well that worked out.
With ISIS as well, he had a secret plan.
“Trump vows to ‘utterly destroy ISIS’ — but he won’t say how.”
“To fight the Islamic State terrorist group, Donald Trump would “bomb the s— out of” their oil fields or “bomb the hell out of ISIS.” Or maybe neither of those things.”
“The GOP presidential nominee has called for “very few troops on the ground,” but also 20,000 to 30,000 troops. Or he might just let Russia handle the fighting.”
“He proposed banning all foreign Muslims from entering the United States until we “figure out what is going on” with terrorism. Or maybe just people from certain countries.”
Generally all Trump’s plans are secret in the sense that he has no plan. His secret is to just talk about a theme very broadly and say the details are secret. As he doesn’t know anything about them and doesn’t want to sweat it. Ie, it’s just a campaign tactic and he thinks everything is just a political campaign-what’s governing got to do with it?
“On his ISIS plan, however, his secret plan is coming into better focus. Here’s what it seems to be: the indiscriminate killing of civilians in the Middle East. Yes, finally I have to quote Glenn Greenwald somewhat approvingly:”
“FROM THE START of his presidency, Donald Trump’s “war on terror” has entailed the seemingly indiscriminate slaughter of innocent people in the name of killing terrorists. In other words, Trump has escalated the 16-year-old core premise of America’s foreign policy — that it has the right to bomb any country in the world where people it regards as terrorists are found — and in doing so, has fulfilled the warped campaign pledges he repeatedly expressed.”
“The most recent atrocity was the killing of as many as 200 Iraqi civilians from U.S. airstrikes this week in Mosul. That was preceded a few days earlier by the killing of dozens of Syrian civilians in Raqqa province when the U.S. targeted a school where people had taken refuge, which itself was preceded a week earlier by the U.S. destruction of a mosque near Aleppo that also killed dozens. And one of Trump’s first military actions was what can only be described as a massacre carried out by Navy SEALs, in which 30 Yemenis were killed; among the children killed was an 8-year-old American girl (whose 16-year-old American brother was killed by a drone under Obama).”
In sum: Although precise numbers are difficult to obtain, there seems little question that the number of civilians being killed by the U.S. in Iraq and Syria — already quite high under Obama — has increased precipitously during the first two months of the Trump administration. Data compiled by the site Airwars tells the story: The number of civilians killed in Syria and Iraq began increasing in October under Obama but has now skyrocketed in March under Trump.
Of course, you know Greenwald. His big worry is that he criticizes Republicans while leaving Democrats off the hook. He insists that it was ‘already quite high’ under Obama. True, Trump’s talk of Obama’s fecklessness was always an illusion.
But what’s different as he allows is Trump’s utter unconcern with killing civilians. That seems to be the secret plan. What’s even more worrisome is, say what you will about Obama’s ISIS strategy, it wasn’t rooted in literal hatred of Muslim people. It was based on the idea of what actions he thought he needed to perform to keep the country safe and fight Jihadic terrorism.
Trump-and his brain, Stephen Bannon-literally are prejudiced against Muslims. How much of this is driven by their hatred for Muslims and their utter callousness towards young Muslim and/or Arab children being slaughtered?
Greenwald here sets up a canard:
“This escalation of bombing and civilian deaths, combined with the deployment by Trump of 500 ground troops into Syria beyond the troops Obama already deployed there, has received remarkably little media attention. This is in part due to the standard indifference in U.S. discourse to U.S. killing of civilians compared to the language used when its enemies kill people (compare the very muted and euphemistic tones used to report on Trump’s escalations in Iraq and Syria to the frequent invocation of genocide and war crimes to denounce Russian killing of Syrian civilians). And part of this lack of media attention is due to the Democrats’ ongoing hunt for Russian infiltration of Washington, which leaves little room for other matters.”
This is silly. We can walk and chew gum at the same time. If you look at it, Democrats have been fighting on all fronts. What is Greenwald saying-a subverted election is not of grave concern?
What is more fundamental than if we lose confidence in our democratic process? If people lose faith that the election is on the level?
Yet we were still able to defeat Trump’s Muslim ban-both of them-and stopped the repeal of Obamacare.
It’s true, there’s been less talk about Trump’s foreign policy so far. Part of this may be that he muzzles all the agencies so that we don’t know what’s going on.
But now that we have news of what Trump just did, it’s a travesty. He has treated our allies in Iraq despicably. First he targeted them in his first Muslim ban. He even locked an Iraqi interpreter who had served the US army in a broom closet for 13 hours.
While Greenwald mocks the idea that Russia subverted our election, a serious worry is that our foreign policy has also been subverted as a result.
Recently we saw how much Putin has set himself up as the pied piper of reactionary populism-a movement that Greenwald often has served as a useful idiot in.
Putin has actually united the reactionaries of the world in a ‘defense of traditional values’ and combining against ‘Islamic terrorism.’
“Putin had never spoken glowingly of the West, but grim pronouncements about its fate grew central to his rhetoric. He hurled splenetic attacks against the culturally decadent, spiritually desiccated “Euro-Atlantic.” He warned against the fetishization of tolerance and diversity. He described the West as “infertile and genderless,” while Russian propaganda derided Europe as “Gayropa.” At the heart of Putin’s case was an accusation of moral relativism. “We can see how many of the Euro-Atlantic countries are actually rejecting their roots, including the Christian values that constitute the basis of Western civilization,” he said at a conference in 2013. “They are denying moral principles and all traditional identities: national, cultural, religious, and even sexual … They are implementing policies that equate large families with same-sex partnerships, belief in God with the belief in Satan.” By succumbing to secularism, he noted on another occasion, the West was trending toward “chaotic darkness” and a “return to a primitive state.”
“Few analysts grasped the potency such rhetoric would have beyond Russia. But right-wing leaders around the world—from Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines to Nigel Farage in Britain to Donald Trump in the U.S.—now speak of Putin in heroic terms. Their fawning is often discounted, ascribed to under-the-table payments or other stealthy Russian efforts. These explanations don’t wholly account for Putin’s outsize stature, however. He has achieved this prominence because he anticipated the global populist revolt and helped give it ideological shape. With his apocalyptic critique of the West—which also plays on anxieties about Christendom’s supposedly limp response to Islamist terrorism—Putin has become a mascot of traditionalist resistance.”
In Syria, Hillary Clinton would not see Putin as an ally. Trump not only wants to ban Syrian refugees in this country, he’s been indiscriminately killing civilians in Syria in an alliance with Putin. And Putin’s goal in Syria is about protecting Assad first and foremost.
In any case, it looks like Greenwald’s buddy Assange missed the boat when he claimed that ‘A vote for Hillary Clinton is a vote for endless, stupid, war.’
P.S. As we saw in my poll out last week, the long awaited poll results are in, and right now I’m just 11 points down vs. Peter King (GOP-NY-District 2). And the voters don’t even know who I am yet.
There is nothing more important in getting answers to Trump-Russia collusion than a Democratic House in 2019. Please donate to help me in my part of the effort to fight for a Dem House.
Thank you. We must have a Dem House. And so, we will.