America Allying with Al Qaeda? – Freedom Philosophy
There exists a subclass of human being, who do nothing to change their environmental malpractices but go about demanding others change their ways. They demand others support the impoverished but they themselves offer nothing by way of alms-giving.
Likewise, there exists a subclass of human being that demand others relinquish their militaristic killing of civilians while they themselves offer nothing by way of humanitarian reprieve.
They are the first to chastise Hussein and Assad for their barbarous use of chemical weapons and the first to feel a brief surge of “Americana” when they hear the phrase “I love the smell of napalm in the morning.”
Americans are the first to demand Russian non-interference in their governance, and they themselves are the first to interfere in the governance of others. They militaristically suppress a revolution in Yemen but in true George Washington form they support it in Libya (the in true Washingtonian form, it’s rife with slavery). Americans will demand the rest of the world relinquish their terrorism while they themselves do nothing to abandon their own terrorizing of the world.
Herein lies the folly of NATO’s foreign policy, the more children they kill the more the world hates them, the more the world hates them the more the ideologues will attempt to kill them, and the more NATO responds in turn with brutal acts of terrorism that kill more children. The brutality shows no signs of stopping.
Al Qaeda in 2008, at the beginning of the drone strike war, boasted 700 members. Since that time over 30,000 soldiers have joined to fight with ISIS alone. The current foreign policy has done nothing to slow the growth of terrorism.
NATO has responded with viciousness – hoping with the collapse of ISIS that the problem has gone away.
Kim Jong Un has rallied his people into accepting third world economic conditions and brutal totalitarian rule, all because his propaganda is bolstered by his country’s veterans with first-hand testimony of Americans using chemical weapons to gas entire towns during the Korean War.
Regardless of whether or not the war was justified (and I’m inclined to think it was), the tactics were deplorable.
Generations later, the North Koreans despise Americans, have nuclear weapons, and, it’s questionable as to whether or not the Americans can shoot them down. Making America safe didn’t work.
Even today, while NATO’s cruelty finds new heights in using starvation as a war weapon against civilians in Yemen, they have been so foolish so as to have entered into an alliance with ISIS and Al Qaeda to combat Houthi rebels.
Historically, Houthis aren’t nearly the threat to NATO that either ISIS or especially Al Qaeda is.
When NATO is on the same side as ISIS and Al Qaeda, I would suggest it’s time to re-frame foreign policy.
The extrapolation from this data, which indicates a demonstrably failed foreign policy, invites two possible conclusions. That NATO is working with a failed foreign policy model and is not wise enough to ask whether or not their core assumptions within the model are correct – much in the same way Keynesians are working with an observably false economic model but it has become so entrenched that few economists challenge it.
The second possible conclusion is that foreign policy doesn’t have the aim of making the world, or even NATO-allied countries, a more peaceful place.
The images of U.S. troops protecting opium production, the $110 billion Saudi Arms deal Trump brokered, the $15 billion Saudi Arms deal Trudeau has approved, all of this indicates that these wars are geared toward making a select few people rich. It’s quite a thing to tell a parent or a spouse that their loved one is dead to make someone else rich.
Regardless, the war isn’t ending anytime soon and our foreign policy has made the world a more dangerous place.
I’ll end with the chilling reminder from the movie Nineteen Eighty-Four:
The war is not meant to be won. It is meant to be continuous.