45

With the Mujahideen (Taliban and al-Qaeda), it was obvious: attack the Soviets.

But why ISIS? When they overthrew Saddam, why would they fund a group that would attack their own puppet government?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] darkcalling@lemmygrad.ml 21 points 5 months ago

In The Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski, a key figure in shaping US policy thinking last century and this no doubt, it's mentioned that there is region, a triangle of critical control in the middle east that can prevent the uniting of Asia, Africa, and Europe. It is the cross-roads of all these three and although I'm not sure he mentions destabilization, he does mention control and one way to control a region or at least deny its usefulness to others is to destabilize it with terrorism and extremism. To that end the US wants to prevent China and Russia from having good healthy relationships and trade with Africa and Europe because that's land-power that locks the US, far across the oceans, entirely out. That's a potential that would destroy any hopes for US hegemony.

[-] halykthered@lemmygrad.ml 8 points 5 months ago

Made me think of the BRI. At most, it seems like a stall tactic for the US to back extremists. The pendulum is already swinging back against the west. Ground is being lost in the Middle-East and Africa. VEO's csn certainly stir the pot and muddy the waters, but for how long?

this post was submitted on 01 May 2024
45 points (100.0% liked)

Comradeship // Freechat

2042 readers
94 users here now

Talk about whatever, respecting the rules established by Lemmygrad. Failing to comply with the rules will grant you a few warnings, insisting on breaking them will grant you a beautiful shiny banwall.

A community for comrades to chat and talk about whatever doesn't fit other communities

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS