NO AUTHENTIC ISLAMIC ORGANIZATION WOULD USE THE NAME OF A PAGAN MOON GODDESS: RT: As ISIS cuts a swathe through the Middle East, retroactively transforming Osama Bin Laden into the highbrow arm of modern Islamic terrorism, we’ve quite naturally begun the game of deciding who to blame for its existence. In fact, Tony Blair showed admirable consistency in sticking to the doctrine of preemptive self-defense by firing off a statement that the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant had nothing to do with his policies in Iraq - the moment they made their big break into mainstream television. This back and forth over responsibility is really at the heart of the matter, but in a far deeper way than we usually get around to discussing. After all, a good deal of Western foreign policy post-Cold War has revolved around NATO states voluntarily assuming responsibility for issues that were, strictly-speaking, not their responsibility. Someone needs to ‘police the world’, ‘bring the bad guys to book’, exercise their R2P (responsibility to protect - yes, we have descended into text-speak) and ‘nation-build’. It looks good on paper. But if you really look at how this policy has played out on the ground, you will notice that far from nation-building, this voluntary assumption of responsibility has instead sown a level of chaos and dissension that cannot plausibly be blamed purely on mistakes or unforeseeable circumstances. Instead, it seems to be the old divide and conquer strategy at work and we probably have keen minds like Richard Perle and Bill Kristol of the neo-conservative think tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC) to thank for this modern take on an old classic. We will return to the thoughtful documents penned and disseminated by PNAC shortly. But first, let’s try to figure out what is really going on beyond the rhetoric when it comes to our responsibilities around the world...
Posted on: Thu, 26 Jun 2014 09:12:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015