News   /   IN-DEPTH   /   Iraq   /   Syria   /   Foreign Policy   /   Afghanistan   /   Editor's Choice

The fairy godmother of Daesh, US establishment

US Fairy Godmother of Daesh. (Composite image: PressTV)

Since the inception of the Daesh or ISIS terrorist group many have pondered what led to the creation of such barbaric terrorists. There have been many experts who pointed the finger at the United States. They believe the policies of the US in Iraq, and later in Syria, were instrumental in founding Daesh.

Such arguments, of course, did not find their way into the mainstream media, where US Marines are often glorified as forces fighting evil.

But when such remarks are made by those who run for US president, then it would be difficult to overlook them.

George Bush, George W. Bush had the same problem.

George W. Bush says the worst mistake he made as president was listening to CIA director George Tenet tell him it was a slam dunk that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and so the Neo cons and CIA got to go into Iraq and throw out and do regime change and,... and we got nothing.

Now we've spent 8 trillion dollars and what do we get for that 8 trillion? Nothing, worse than nothing!

Iraq is now much worse off than it was when we went in there. We killed more Iraqis than Saddam Hussein ever did. We may have killed a million Iraqis; nobody knows the number.

It is an incoherent country today with Shia death squads fighting with Sunni death squads on the street, the government is corrupt, and the police are corrupt.

We created ISIS. We drove 2 million refugees up into Europe. A deeply destabilized democracy for a generation in Europe, that caused Brexit.

This is the cost of the Iraq War. 8 trillion dollars there, 16 trillion for the lock down, 24 trillion, nothing to show except a devastated middle class in the United States of America.

And we need to put an end to that.

Robert Francis Kennedy Jr., American Environmental Lawyer

For some people the remarks by Robert F. Kennedy, who is running in the Democratic primary for the 2024 presidential election, may sound a bit conspiratorial.

It is safe to say that had it not been for the catastrophic US decision to invade and occupy Iraq in 2003 in defiance of international law, the world's most barbaric terrorist group, namely Daesh, would not exist today.

Kennedy is not the first presidential nominee who has made such remarks. Six years ago, Donald Trump, who was running for president at the time, made the same arguments calling the then President, Barack Obama, the founder of ISIS.

We've spent trillions of dollars in the Middle East, trillions. We shouldn't have ever, ever, ever, gotten into Iraq. I said it from the beginning. I said you're going to destabilize the Middle East; then we did.

And then an even easier decision. We should have never gotten out the way we got out. And then Obama came in and normally you want to clean up. He made a bigger mess out of it. He made such a mess.

And then you had Hillary with Libya; so sad. In fact, in many respects, you know, they honor President Obama. ISIS is honoring President Obama. He is the founder of ISIS. He's the founder of ISIS. He's the founder. He founded ISIS, and I would say the co founder would be crooked Hillary Clinton. Co-founder, crooked Hillary Clinton.

Donald J Trump, Former US President

The million dollar question is how such a terrorist group could be instrumental in driving US policies in West Asia.

In relation to Daesh, the US and British intelligence services both made a monster so they create the antithesis of freedom within Syria.

So once the populations who came into the control of Daesh during the Syrian conflict saw the hellhole being formed around them, the Americans hoped then that they would come running in to the arms of the people who offer them peace and liberty.

And once the people are tortured or brutalized enough, then they yearn for freedom, of course. At least that's what the American intelligence operations of this type want to be the result. But they played a similar game in places like Libya, and look at the results. They played similar games in Iraq and Afghanistan too, of course, and the US, they like to create their own enemies, and they have to be the opposite values to which they project out.

And they do it to force a population of their target culture to run into their abusive arms. So if you can get your enemy to run into your arms from their abusers, then you have won their hearts and minds.

You may have done it dishonestly but the hearts and minds are now yours, regardless of the unethical way you got to that point.

Johnny Vedmore, Investigative Journalist

When Trump called Obama the founder of ISIS, he said that he and other Republicans made such remarks to get back at the Democrats for the turmoil in West Asia, but 2024 Democratic Party presidential candidate Robert Kennedy's remarks show this is not just about partisan games.

I believe the best way to interpret that is that ISIS is basically the bastard child of the two main political forces in the United States. There is the Democratic Party and the Republican Party, both of whom are equally responsible for the rise of the group, as on the side on the side of the Iraq.

We have of course, the invasion of Iraq that was promoted, and that was conducted by the Republican camp by the republican administration of George W. Bush.

And on the civilian side, we of course, have the intervention on the part of the Obama administration, the Democratic administration, in support of the various armed groups opposed to the Syrian government.

So together this created this deadly cocktail of terror, murder, and, mayhem, across the Middle East, and the kind of terror which United States took great advantage of in order to, you know, in order to basically try to solidify its presence in the region.

But from what we are seeing now in Syria, Iraq, other countries, is that this sort of presence has gradually melted away and other regional actors such as Iran, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Russia, have actually taken the place of the influence that United States once had.

Denis Rogatyuk, Journalist & Filmmaker

The invasion and occupation of Iraq was part of the so called 'War on Terror' by the United States. The game first started in Afghanistan and then continued in Iraq. Many would say Iraq was not the last nation in the US crosshairs but was supposed to be a stepping stone for other invasions.

I would say that the war on terror which was very unfortunately named; it was really meant to be a war on sovereignty. It was a war on independence. It was a war to defend the US economic and political interests across the Middle East.

This is a conflict, a series of conflicts, which, we have to remember, of course, starts with the intervention, the invasion of Afghanistan.

 And I would say that looking back now more than 22 years earlier, what we're seeing is that the United States has failed in both its own stated objectives, and in the real objectives they have.

Denis Rogatyuk, Journalist & Filmmaker

Two decades of militarized approach in West Asia has caused incalculable harm. It has killed and injured hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians.

In Iraq alone, the birthplace of Daesh, the US invasion is projected to have caused the death of over 1 million people.

And there seems to be no end to such militarization, shifting from one failed strategy to yet another.

But it also seems like a continuation of the current cycle, maybe the current 100 year cycle, which is a continuation of Kissinger's ideology of perpetual war, which was created in the late 50s. Not only used by Kissinger but by people within the CFR, the Council on Foreign Relations and you had other people like the Dulles brothers who were instrumental.

I see it as a dusty relic of like a 60 year old mechanism for hidden colonialization, a type of strategy which is specifically designed to never see a conflict ever be resolved, there will never be a winner, and there'll never be a loser. And it's a strategy which ends up causing constant instability wherever it's utilized.

So the War on Terror itself is like a brutal enactment of fundamentalist US mainstream policies, which were designed pacifically to terrorize, not only the obvious armed enemies of the West, but all civilians in a country man, woman or child.

So although the battleground and the individual conflicts have differed in scope and scale, various enemies of America have been put into one target by this blanket term, the 'War on Terror'.

 And who was the war on terror actually targeting? Was it Iraq? Was it Syria? Was it Libya? It seems to be like the War on Terror was really the war on the Middle East; and that's definitely the way I see this.

Johnny Vedmore, Investigative Journalist

There are a few people who deny the failure of the war on terror, which has caused severe environmental destruction and cost American taxpayers over $8 trillion.

But there are some people who deny the United States created Daesh; they just don't see the correlation.

I really do believe that the people who reject the idea of (the) US creating ISIS, also reject reading, they reject conversation, they reject investigation, they reject the research, they reject good sense.

You could show someone who has been slowly and constantly brainwashed throughout their entire existence, you could show him all the evidence under the sun but they will nowadays turn around and say things like 'conspiracy theory' they've been given the terms and the mental tools to reject any idea.

So the idea that Daesh is something that was created by Western intelligence services seems like just another conspiracy theory, like they all are.

So the people who refuse to acknowledge clear and obvious Western intelligence meddling and the creation of such assets, like parts of ISIS, I mean, a lot of people who were part of Daesh they [sic] didn't know they were part of something that was probably part funded, or part organized by different nefarious intelligence services; doesn't even have to just be the CIA; there's a lot of them.

Johnny Vedmore, Investigative Journalist

In the first years of the occupation of Iraq the US military detained tens of thousands of Iraqis, many of them non combatants, holding them at Camp Bucca in southern Iraq, where imprisoned militants were able not only to radicalize new recruits in plain sight, but also plan future operations and attacks.

One former Bucca detainee, incidentally, was none other than Abu Bakr al Baghdadi. Yes, the self proclaimed Caliph and leader of Daesh.

The destruction of Iraq, the death of hundreds of thousands of civilians and complete destabilization of that region, that was the main precursor for the creation of ISIS, particularly for the creation of ISIS in the area of Iraq.

In the case of Syria, I believe that the United States' actions were far more direct, and contribute in a far more direct manner towards the creation and the strengthening of this group.

In the case of Syria, the United States intervention and, in particular, the kind of support which it gave to various warring factions in the Syrian conflict, particularly to various Islamist groups, among them, al Qaeda, that basically created a very reliable stream of ammunition, arms, and, money, which ISIS took great advantage of and was able to effectively establish itself for several years.

Denis Rogatyuk, Journalist & Filmmaker

Alan Greenspan, who served as chairman of the US Federal Reserve for almost two decades, has written in his memoir: "I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows. The Iraq war is largely about oil".

In Syria, too, the US has maintained its illegal presence while controlling the country's oil fields, all under the pretext of fighting remnants of the Daesh terrorist group in the area.

I would say that this is perhaps, in certain ways, this is an attempt of the United States to try to salvage the failure that was the Islamic State.

That is because ISIS effectively, you know, failed in its objective of overthrowing the government of Syria, it failed in the objective of overthrowing governments of Iraq, and in particular, in the case of Syria, we have to remember that this government of Bashar Al Assad was seen as being the arch nemesis of the of the United States.

I believe that after understanding their failure, the next best alternative for the US foreign policy division was to try to scramble and take hold of any natural resources they could put their hands on.

 And this of course, includes the various oil fields, which are now currently in territories administered by the US military forces.

Denis Rogatyuk, Journalist & Filmmaker

The United States’ ill-named war on terror in Afghanistan has been one that has earned it the most vicious labels; disaster, debacle, shame, the horrible mission, and so on.

The United States attacked the Taliban some 20 years ago, adamant that they were responsible for the 911 attacks.

Then two years ago, suddenly, the US government insisted on negotiating with the same said group and gave the country back to the Taliban without a fight.

Well, it is almost cut and paste, opeationally speaking, to what they've been doing, they [sic] already planned to go into Afghanistan before they did it and they just required a pretext. So we know from lots of documents that there's all sorts of things happened around 911.

So the group of terrorists that were involved in 911 attacks would only the ones in the paper planes, well, some of those who were proven to have been recruited by the CIA; the main terrorists involved in the takedown of the World Trade Center were the CIA themselves.

Whichever one of the many theories that you choose to believe about what happened in [sic] September 11th, the CIA played a massive role in creating the road which led to the attacks and they used the trauma to create support for the introduction of the Patriot Act, as well as many other forms of legislation.

And the decades of conspiring that the CIA have done internationally since its inception, have been a large part of the reason why almost every major war, disaster, or, negatively impacrting historical event, has occurred in the first place. So (the) Central Intelligence Agency, the blood on the hands of the guilty American murderous War Machine, which, don't get me wrong, is not the people on the ground.

Now, this is one thing that really fundamentally needs to be understood. There's a difference in America, there's (the) American military industrial complex machine that creates things like Afghanistan, looks for reasons to go into these places, which are just the way they are like, it is just a way to put troops into line for a potential conflict with Russia. I mean, that's really, Afghanistan has always been about that.

And so, it's still the same old thing but they got to find new pretexts all the time, so they don't keep saying the same thing. 'Well, we need to do it because we need to get Russia in the end'. They can't keep saying this. So Afghanistan is obviously one of those tools, but the difference is the American people; the American people don't feel like this. They don't feel like, they don't want to go and attack Afghanistan.

If you go and ask someone in America, some random country that America is going to back in the next 10 years do you want to attack them? They'll say no. And there's a very big difference between that.

Their culture is something else but their leaders have created this monster machine. It really is a monster, and it creates conflicts like in Afghanistan, and like I said it's copy and paste.

Johnny Vedmore, Investigative Journalist

The Trump administration had negotiated a withdrawal agreement with the Taliban.

US officials negotiated the release of 5000 Taliban prisoners that were being held by the Ashraf Ghani government, without consultation with the Afghan government.

The Internationally backed Afghan government collapsed, and then President Ashraf Ghani fled the country in August 2021 as the Taliban took over the capital, Kabul, amid the disastrous withdrawal of US forces.

Effectively, the United States gave up one of the most strategically important countries in the Middle East, to an armed group, to turn around and put a political group which, effectively, can now boast that, you know, it defeated the number one military power in the world and which now finds itself as being not just as an organization with deep roots in the country, but as an organization which can project this message to its people, to the people around the world: 'We defeated the United States."

And I believe this one phrase is more destructive, more destructive to the United States, than any other phenomenon since the end of the Vietnam War.

Denis Rogatyuk, Journalist & Filmmaker

Given the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan, one would think that the Americans had learned their lesson by now, however, rather than bringing an end to US forever wars, the Biden administration has continued to conduct lethal operations, employing the euphemistic term 'over the horizon strikes'.

The United States is currently an active partner in the war in Ukraine and is heading toward a confrontation with China.

The only one true ally which the United States will hope to remain with in the Middle East, would be Israel, and Israel itself is undergoing a very deep political crisis with the current regime of Benjamin Netanyahu.

But when we look beyond that, when we look at the conflicts, conflicts which are currently taking place across Middle East, the conflict in Syria, the remnants of ISIS in Iraq, the conflict in Yemen, of course.

You know, in each one of these cases we've seen in the United States, a level of intervention being diluted and being effectively pushed back by the regional actors, and I believe it is very important to look right now, to look at the conflict in Yemen.

And in the context of these new negotiations, which are taking place between Saudi Arabia and Iran, because we have to remember that Saudi Arabia, being one of the major allies of the United States, up until now, has been one of the main participants in the war in Yemen.

And, and it is one of the greatest hopes of these of these negotiations between Iran and Saudi Arabia, that this conflict can be put to an end through diplomacy, diplomacy, which is also being assisted by China, which was instrumental in creating the grounds for these negotiations between Iran and Saudi Arabia.

China has also previously commented on and made several offers of assisting to rebuild Syria and Iraq following the devastation brought by the US interventions in these countries.

So I believe that while the United States attention seems to be shifting much more towards confronting China and also confronting Russia.

What we've actually seen is that China has basically demonstrated to the world what a real humanitarian intervention looks like.

In the case of the Middle East, it means creating the conditions and the foundations for peace between old rivals, and also creating the foundations for the rebuilding of the region to its former glory.

Denis Rogatyuk, Journalist & Filmmaker

Twenty years of the so called War on Terror that has resulted in a myriad of destruction and successive wrong policies in Iraq and Syria, show that America, whether directly or indirectly, is the real fairy godmother of The Daesh or ISIS terrorist group.

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

Press TV News Roku