Some loose foreign policy threads

The mainstream media does a terrible job at gathering the back story required to make sense out of many stories that burst upon the national conscientiousness. Partisan political interests cast deep, dark shadows on the truth and as time passes, public interest wanes and the media moves on, unaware of their failure to ever report the full truth.

Let’s start with the oh so glorious Arab Spring, the media couldn’t talk enough about a few years ago. What happened to the Arab Spring? Where has “democracy” or “freedom” flourished in the Mid-East?

Libya stands as a western intervention where reporting failed to flesh out even the basics. Who exactly were the Libyan rebels facing “genocide” as Hillary Clinton states? Which European leaders were pushing to oust Gadaffi and who vetted the intelligence, which the Obama administration used in making the decision to intervene?  To this day, details remain sketchy at best. Then Benghazi in the messy aftermath and still more questions persist. Hillary Clinton stated weapons were being gathered up by the US in a security effort, but what happened to those weapons?  Where were they being sent? What exactly was the CIA mission in Benghazi? After that hearing where the Democrats declared everything had already been covered in previous investigations, well, I wonder why was ambassador Stevens meeting with a rebel leader from an Al Qaeda affiliate? Congressman Pompeo showed that photo and Secretary Clinton stated she had no idea, but doesn’t that information seem important in light of the attack on the US facility later that day by Al Qaeda-like rebels?

Syria also remains awash in myths and outright lies, so let’s start with the assertion that we should have intervened sooner in Syria? What justification was there for the US to intervene in a civil uprising in Syria at the outset? Of course, as time wore on the Obama administration played the genocide/gross human rights violations card and pushed intervening on the Samantha Power “responsibility to protect” mantra, but truly who were these “moderate Syrian rebels”? The entire reasoning process used with the regime change proponents seems very flawed, so can anyone explain this in simple terms?

The recent dramatic increase of refugees seems like an orchestrated event to destabilize Europe. Who is behind it and who is funding the effort? All of the photos and videos show people with Western-style clothes, coats, hats, shoes, etc.  Who is providing the humanitarian assistance? Who is helping these refugees along the path to Europe? Obviously many aren’t Syrian refugees, but there’s a storyline that Assad is depopulating areas of Syria? Is this true? Today, the British Daily Mail has stories of Syrian rebels fighting Assad using Alawite women and children as human shields – packing them into metal cages and transporting them on the backs of pick-up trucks and tractor trailers, to dissuade Russian and Syrian army bombings.  Are these the rebels McCain and the “Syrian moderate” proponents are supporting?

Does anyone else have questions about these US foreign policy issues?



Filed under Foreign Policy, General Interest, Military, Politics, The Media

3 responses to “Some loose foreign policy threads

  1. Kinnison

    Funding the “refugee” invasion of Western Europe? George Soros. And someone is providing fake Syrian ID papers for a bunch of non-Syrians to join the crowd—and that’s not something you do al fresco on the back of a pickup truck.

  2. Robert

    The same thing he gets out of funding Obama and the Obama backed agitprop groups roiling our society today. Hate and revenge.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s