******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*****************************************************************
This article confirms once and for all that anti-intervention has always
been selective. Patrick Cockburn says that he is okay with US air power
being used in Syria as long as it is used against ISIS *and* al-Nusra.
Of course, in the latter case it means bombing one of the more effective
rebel forces because it is "al-Qaeda". If you stop and think about it,
what distinguishes this from drone attacks taking place against
Islamists all around the world? It effectively legitimizes strikes
against the Taliban as well. Finally, it should be noted that Cockburn
sounds pretty much like Christopher Hitchens did back in 2004 or so:
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/in-the-middle-east-our-enemys-enemy-must-be-our-friend-10169984.html
Given that there are 2.8 million Muslims in Britain, 4.1 million in
Germany and 5 million in France, al-Qaeda-type movements are bound to
find some supporters.
What should be done? The only way of dealing with Isis, al-Qaeda and
other jihadi movements is in the countries where they flourish. The
great mistake after 9/11 was for Washington to absolve Saudi Arabia of
responsibility – though 15 of the 19 hijackers, bin Laden himself, and
much of the money spent on the operation came from Saudi Arabia – as
well as Pakistan, which had propelled bin Laden’s hosts, the Taliban,
into power in Afghanistan.
Once again al-Qaeda-type movements are not being targeted effectively
despite their many enemies.
_________________________________________________________
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at:
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
