You Say ISIL, I Say ISIS, Let’s Call the Whole Thing Off

298
SOURCENationofChange
Mandatory Credit: Photo by REX USA (2642870a) Hayat Boumeddiene, far right Hayat Boumeddiene 'appears in Islamic State film' - 06 Feb 2015 The latest video released by French-speaking Islamic state (ISIS), fighters may be Hayat Boumeddiene, who is believed to have knowledge about the deadly January 9, 2015 attack on a Paris kosher grocery,The video, titled "Blow Up France 2," was released Tuesday and shows an ISIS fighter praising previous attackers in France and calling for new attacks. The video shows a woman standing next to the speaker, wearing camouflage clothing and holding a weapon. French authorities are investigating the possibility this woman could be Hayat Boumeddiene. Her husband, Amedy Coulibaly, killed four hostages January 9 at a kosher grocery in Paris, authorities said. He was killed by police in a rescue and the remaining hostages fled to safety.

John McCain frequently justifies his most war whacky ideas with, “I’d rather fight them over there than fight them here.” As if those are the two choices. As if presenting a non sequitur null set false dichotomy is a response would ever work.

Right, well, the joke is on us. It works all the time—not to actually fix the problem, but rather to extend it for the benefit of those who profit from it. It is a horrific piece of false logic that has many nodding their heads and ceding authority and dominant opinion to an elite group who profit in money or power or status when they lead us into more bloody hell. After Obama gives in, they all pile on and screech “Too little! Too late!” Obama is not barreling quite fast enough in the wrong direction for them.

And McCain is simply typical, not a bit out of lockstep with this woefully incomplete consideration of options.

There are excellent reasons that most Iraqis believe that the US government provides support for ISIS. The evidence may be circumstantial but the old adage, There is no such thing as a coincidence, is one that militates toward generation of such conspiratorial notions.

Based on lies, we invade a relatively stable country—Iraq—driving it into receivership. We fire their military from their jobs with nothing to which they can transition—of course, they are going to self-organize and seek financial and trade backing to set up shop as a violent insurgency. We ludicrously claim to be productively training in the Iraqi police and soldiers, none of which takes. Indeed, they present a tempting target for anyone with an idea of political power.

A New Kind of Media

Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. We cover the important issues the mainstream media doesn't want you to see.

If you value the work that we’re doing, please donate to our Summer Campaign today.

Summer 2019

$5,302 of $15,000 raised
$
Select Payment Method
Personal Info

Credit Card Info
This is a secure SSL encrypted payment.

Donation Total: $5.00 One Time

You can also donate via ActBlue by clicking here.

Who benefits? Who loses?

US elites benefit. Owners of military contractors benefit the most ($711,000,000 the last day of 2015 alone, nearly $40 million per hour around the clock), and they share their largesse with those who serve them best—friendly bellicose politicians, persuasive media, high-level military officers.

Iraqis, now Syrians, and by extension even the Europeans who are now awash in refugees from the wars we help foment, and the US taxpayer, and, documented by a Brown University study, the US job seeker—these are the losers. Every $billion spent on the military is a significant job loss, since taxpayer money spent on education, health care, clean energy development, or infrastructure upkeep creates many more well-paying jobs for Americans.  

May 2016 be the year we turn this around.

COMMENTS

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.