US playing ISIL card to wreak havoc on Syria, Iraq: Pundit

Press TV has conducted an interview with Ken Stone, with the Hamilton Coalition to Stop the War, for his insights into the strategy of the United States in fighting the ISIL Takfiri group in Syria and Iraq.

The following is a rough transcription of the interview.

Press TV: Now, the US is touting its record of fighting the ISIL, however, Raqqa, Ayn Issa all these places are now falling into ISIL hands, where is the US and its ‘successful’ strategy to fight the ISIL?

Stone: Well, in my opinion the overblown crisis-language that were being fed here in the West about certain limited gains made by ISIL recently are designed to promote further US aggression. And in the end, the people of Syria and the people of Iraq are going to prevail. They’re going to preserve the national integrity of their countries and they’re going to drive out the foreign aggressors. Now, as for Obama’s four points today the so-called pillars of US foreign policy, I prefer to call them four phony premises in a phony US war. And I’ll do with them point by point.

First point, ISIL is a US asset. In the 2012 defense intelligence agency report, it’s clear that the US not only knew about, but welcomed the formation of the Islamic State (ISIL), they wanted it because it’s a pretext for the US to reenter with its military forces to the country of Iraq and to go for regime change in Syria. The US airstrikes that Obama was crowing about are few and far between actually. And the Syrian air force fights many more missions a day than the US does. The US does not intend “to degrade and destroy ISIS”, they nearly intend to contain ISIS (ISIL) for their foreign policy goals, which are to destroy and subdivide the countries of Iraq and Syria into warring balkanized stateless, that is the real purpose of Obama’s first point.

The second point, to increase effort for forces fighting on the ground against the ISIL; well, if that was really the case, then Mr. Obama should make an agreement with President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. He should recognize the Syrian government and work with it to destroy the terrorists if he were serious. If he were serious, he would work with Iran, he would work with Russia to oppose the Takfiri terrorists wherever they pop up in the world, but that’s not Obama’s real purpose.

The third point was to work to prevent aid and funding and recruits going to ISIL. Again, if Obama were really serious about this, he could just pick up the phone and call his buddies, his clients, Mr. Erdogan in Turkey, King Abdullah in Jordan and King Salman in Saudi Arabia and say hey guys it’s over, close the borders, cut off the funding, close down the training camps to the terrorists and the war would be over in a few weeks, but this is not Obama’s real purpose.

The forth point is the most hypocritical of all, which is humanitarian crisis and tragedy. This crisis that we see now in Iraq and Syria is humanitarian tragedy, was caused by US attacks, the illegal attacks on Iraq originally in 1991 and in 2003. American voters thinking that they were voting for Obama for a change for an end to Bush era policies. They didn’t get that from the Nobel peace prize winner. In fact, he expanded all the Bush-era war on terror to whole new countries.

ABN/GHN

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.co.uk