Who’s to Blame for Rise of ISIS?

By October 6, 2016Current Affairs

Who’s to Blame for Rise of ISIS?

By AMERICAN Liberty Report


There have been a number of military whistleblowers, researchers, and other insiders who have told us the Obama Administration, including the direct efforts of then Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, are directly responsible for the existence of the terrorist organization known as ISIS.

Not the least well known of these is Ken O’Keefe, a former marine and constitutional activist who says Obama and Hillary funded ISIS, giving them weapons and other equipment.

Others take a less hard-nosed approach, such as Donald Trump, saying that the Obama administration created the breathing room needed for the development of an organization like ISIS by pulling out of Middle-Eastern battlefronts without leaving any substantial security forces.

Now, Senator John McCain has lent his voice to the growing crowd of people saying ISIS is a creation of the Obama administration.

He says Obama himself bears the responsibility for the rise if ISIS.

Responding to the news that the president has given his authorization to send 600 more American troops to Iraq, McCain said, “This is the very same nation that we had to remove our troops from, by the way, in the very words of Barack Obama himself: ‘the most democratic, and most free, and prosperous Iraq in history.’”

A simple Google image search of Iraq thirty years ago and today will easily debunk the president’s claim that this middle eastern country is, in fact, freer than ever.

McCain, who was unsuccessful in his 2008 presidential campaign against Obama, said that earlier decisions made by the president have provided fertile ground for the development of the current conflict involving the terrorist group, and for ISIS itself.

“Everybody was appalled when I said that the president is responsible- that he bears the responsibility,” McCain said. “He is the one that declined the suggestion of General David Petraeus and the former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta to train and arm the Free Syrian Army and to establish no-fly zones over Syria.”

The senator from Arizona then added that had those recommendations been taken, the situation in that part of the world would be very different to the situation we see today both in Syria and in Europe.

“Look, right now, they are paying this butcher’s bill, they pulled everyone out,” McCain said. “They pulled all of our forces out of there to satisfy a political agenda with no other purpose but to arbitrarily secure votes and support. Now al-Qaida traveled into Syria, transformed into ISIS- and that is what we are facing today.”

We know now that the CIA originally aligned itself with extremist political Islam during the Cold War. At that time, America’s people and political class saw the middle-eastern world in simpler terms. There was the Soviet Union on one side and Third World nationalism on the other.

We have the heart-warming story of Charlie Wilson, the Texas representative and Democrat who saw the constant Russian gunship attacks on middle-eastern villages as a tyranny. His work provided those villagers with rocket-propelled grenades that enabled them to repel the Russian helicopters.

The United States had begun the early stages of arming these radicals which would eventually lead to the rise of the very terrorist forces that we hear so much about today. Many people have suggested that Wilson himself was used as a patsy by the CIA to create a tear jerking story that would get the American public to soften its view of our giving weapons to radical Islamists.

To go further, many would say that the film, “Charlie Wilson’s War”, was part of a complex arm of the plan to boost the public relations profile of our handing power and weapons to these groups which would eventually use them against the west.

What budding terrorist groups gained from the experience was a keen insight into how to use guerrilla tactics to take down larger and more powerful targets. It is a thing that can easily be seen as having a direct analog to the attacks of 9/11.

Surrounding all this, at best suspicious behavior by the Obama administration and its predecessors- is the appearance that was it not for heavy U.S. involvement in their land and affairs- they would not have the weapons, the capabilities, and the courage to use them against the west.

Today, terrorist states are more powerful and prevalent than they have ever been. Considering that Obama has been in office for two full terms- it is not beyond the pale to ask what he should have done differently.