U.S. General: “We Helped Build ISIS”

www.globalresearch.ca...

Why would we elect someone who was directly responsible for getting guns into the hands of ISIS?
"During an appearance on Fox News, General Thomas McInerney acknowledged that the United States “helped build ISIS” as a result of the group obtaining weapons from the Benghazi consulate in Libya which was attacked by jihadists in September 2012."
"In addition to ISIS obtaining weapons from Benghazi, many members of the group were also trained by the United States at a secret base in Jordan in 2012."
You can scream all you want about Trump retoric being good for ISIS recruiting; one thing you can not say is he was in office and actively helped ISIS get weapons.

a reply to: shooterbrody
Unfortunately you gotta do what you gatta do to keep a job these days.

originally posted by: Spader
a reply to: shooterbrody
Unfortunately you gotta do what you gatta do to keep a job these days.

OK

How are these the same people that get to tell us what to do or say so that "the terrorists win"?

Stop migrants from the middle east and the terrorist win
Step up investigations into muslim jihadists and the terrorists win

These people are seeking office to stay in power; they created this problem. How can anyone support them?

a reply to: shooterbrody

Didn't you get the memo?

Bush started ISIS, Climate change started ISIS, a Trump video started ISIS.

Obama and Hillary were too busy selling flowers to support kitten orphanages to create ISIS.

Just ask any of the Hillary supporters here.

Yeah Obama was literally thinking, "let's start a group called ISIS"

What a crock of #

originally posted by: onequestion
Yeah Obama was literally thinking, "let's start a group called ISIS"

What a crock of #

What is a crock is the lack of outrage at the politicians in office and running for office at the utter failure of policy that created ISIS.
From the link
"CNN subsequently reported that dozens of CIA agents were on the ground in Benghazi during the attack and that the polygraph tests were mandated in order to prevent operatives from talking to Congress or the media about a program that revolved around “secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, and into the hands of Syrian rebels.” Key Syrian rebel leaders later defected to join ISIS."

People wanted to hang W over the mess he created invading iraq after 9/11. Where is the same outrage from the same people over Obama and Hillary creating ISIS?

People wanted to hang W over the mess he created invading iraq after 9/11. Where is the same outrage from the same people over Obama and Hillary creating ISIS?

Which is utter NONSENSE, and HYPOCRITICAL to say the least.

The current US administration in ALL of it's EPIC failures of policy.

OWN the entire middle east situation, and ISIS.

On the other hand I really did not expect them to even try to fight let alone DESTROY them.

After they have to keep them to use them to further INFRINGE our rights.

a reply to: onequestion

www.theguardian.com...

Heres a 2nd source if you think the USA didnt start ISIS, now you've no excuse for your "enlightened" response...

a reply to: neo96

What you all fail to do is rise above party politics, all Administrations in the USA have been supporting a destabilized Middle East; allows more weapons to be sold and the US petrodollar to remain high.

Keeps a Bankrupt USA afloat a little while longer...

originally posted by: neo96

People wanted to hang W over the mess he created invading iraq after 9/11. Where is the same outrage from the same people over Obama and Hillary creating ISIS?

Which is utter NONSENSE, and HYPOCRITICAL to say the least.

The current US administration in ALL of it's EPIC failures of policy.

OWN the entire middle east situation, and ISIS.

On the other hand I really did not expect them to even try to fight let alone DESTROY them.

After they have to keep them to use them to further INFRINGE our rights.

I would look at it like GW was the grandfather of the problem. He then passed it on to a new generation of sleeze.

HW was much more intelligent about the situation than his son. No that I agree with helping out very many of the monsters in power over there. He at least understood the culture and knew when to quit. I actually think he would be the best guy for right now if he wasn't 90 years old. He even was fairly good at talking to both sides of the aisle too.

George let the greed crew go full in and get everything they could oil, contracts, bases etc.

Obama kept the fire going and found some new fuel. Kind of like the whole never let a good tragedy go to waste.

The fact is there isn't a single person running for president that has a clue what to do and has a grasp of the cultural history. Maybe Rand would but he has zero chance.

Get ready for this to be the norm. Without a real vision and strategy that includes the regional culture there is not a chance in hell to stop or slow down what's happening. This isnt a country we are fighting. The scum can run where ever they want when and if they get beat in Syria.

I don't disagree; US foreign policy in the middle east has been a disaster for almost a century.
What I do disagree with is the Hillary apologists who are going to back her election to POTUS.
They were the same people screaming for W to run from office after the iraq invasion.

Obama and Hillary have made this problem significantly worse and Hillary does not deserve a shot to be commander in chief.

a reply to: luthier

would look at it like GW was the grandfather of the problem.

Your not going back far enough.

Ibn Saud had conquered most of the Arabian peninsula and consolidated it into one kingdom with the help of the fanatically religious Wahhabi Bedouins, who believed, among other things, that dying in battle was a ticket to paradise, that all images, from pictures to statues, had to be destroyed, that drinking and smoking and singing and dancing were sins punishable by whipping, and so forth.

Promise's,Promises.

originally posted by: onequestion
Yeah Obama was literally thinking, "let's start a group called ISIS"

What a crock of #

Obama has influence on what is going on in America that's news.

Sibel Edmonds one of the top iwhistleblowersn American history proved it was the CIA who set up al Qaeda and ISIS the CIA work for the ruling classes. and also the british and American militaries were photographed by investigative journalists dropping off weapons to ISIS soldiers who were allegedly Israeli and Turkish troops.

4 years of bombing Syria means this was nothing other than genocide by both American and British governments and militaries this is why Russia cleaned ISIS up in 3 weeks

originally posted by: shooterbrody
I don't disagree; US foreign policy in the middle east has been a disaster for almost a century.
What I do disagree with is the Hillary apologists who are going to back her election to POTUS.
They were the same people screaming for W to run from office after the iraq invasion.

Obama and Hillary have made this problem significantly worse and Hillary does not deserve a shot to be commander in chief.

How could they make it much worse than destabilizing the entire region and invading a country under false pretense? How would you quantify which is worse?

They certainly haven't helped and maybe found a way to spread the instability but the Iraq war combined with Afgan is the root cause. Without that there is no ISIS. Let's also not forget the Republican guard Bush let walk helped form the military strategists for ISIS as well.

Besides all these morons work for the same people most likely.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: luthier

would look at it like GW was the grandfather of the problem.

Your not going back far enough.

Ibn Saud had conquered most of the Arabian peninsula and consolidated it into one kingdom with the help of the fanatically religious Wahhabi Bedouins, who believed, among other things, that dying in battle was a ticket to paradise, that all images, from pictures to statues, had to be destroyed, that drinking and smoking and singing and dancing were sins punishable by whipping, and so forth.

Promise's,Promises.

Nah the issues around world war one could have been diplomatically resolved. Instead we let the Rockefellors and what is now BP try and manipulate our politics for their gains. Heck that's why we overturned Iran's gov. They were nationalizing the oil fields.

GW completely destabilized the area by invading a soveriefn country. Obama took the football and ran.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: shooterbrody
I don't disagree; US foreign policy in the middle east has been a disaster for almost a century.
What I do disagree with is the Hillary apologists who are going to back her election to POTUS.
They were the same people screaming for W to run from office after the iraq invasion.

Obama and Hillary have made this problem significantly worse and Hillary does not deserve a shot to be commander in chief.

How could they make it much worse than destabilizing the entire region and invading a country under false pretense? How would you quantify which is worse?

They certainly haven't helped and maybe found a way to spread the instability but the Iraq war combined with Afgan is the root cause. Without that there is no ISIS. Let's also not forget the Republican guard Bush let walk helped form the military strategists for ISIS as well.

Besides all these morons work for the same people most likely.

They have made it worse because Obama had 8 years to get us out of the middle east like he campaigned on, and instead he with the help of his secretary of state Hillary armed ISIS. Now ISIS is attacking people in the US. I think that is much worse. At least with W the war was over there and not here. How anyone would want to cast a vote for someone who helped to make the Ca terrorist shootings happen I will never understand.

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: shooterbrody
I don't disagree; US foreign policy in the middle east has been a disaster for almost a century.
What I do disagree with is the Hillary apologists who are going to back her election to POTUS.
They were the same people screaming for W to run from office after the iraq invasion.

Obama and Hillary have made this problem significantly worse and Hillary does not deserve a shot to be commander in chief.

How could they make it much worse than destabilizing the entire region and invading a country under false pretense? How would you quantify which is worse?

They certainly haven't helped and maybe found a way to spread the instability but the Iraq war combined with Afgan is the root cause. Without that there is no ISIS. Let's also not forget the Republican guard Bush let walk helped form the military strategists for ISIS as well.

Besides all these morons work for the same people most likely.

They have made it worse because Obama had 8 years to get us out of the middle east like he campaigned on, and instead he with the help of his secretary of state Hillary armed ISIS. Now ISIS is attacking people in the US. I think that is much worse. At least with W the war was over there and not here. How anyone would want to cast a vote for someone who helped to make the Ca terrorist shootings happen I will never understand.

While I am not denying the situation of this administration I just don't see it that way at all.

The Iraq war killed thousands of Americans and it permanately alterred 50k plus soldiers bodies and minds.

Since I am a compassionate person I will also include it is responsible for at least 100k Iraqi innocent lives.

Anybody can go beserk break the social contract and murder people.

It's a well established fact that America, perhaps not meaning to at the time, created ISIS.

The real problem has been the complete ineptitude they have shown at dealing with the mess that they have created.

It looks like they are FINALLY starting to sit down and talk with Russia though. So maybe to superpowers will prove better than one and send them all back to the hell they came from.

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: shooterbrody
I don't disagree; US foreign policy in the middle east has been a disaster for almost a century.
What I do disagree with is the Hillary apologists who are going to back her election to POTUS.
They were the same people screaming for W to run from office after the iraq invasion.

Obama and Hillary have made this problem significantly worse and Hillary does not deserve a shot to be commander in chief.

How could they make it much worse than destabilizing the entire region and invading a country under false pretense? How would you quantify which is worse?

They certainly haven't helped and maybe found a way to spread the instability but the Iraq war combined with Afgan is the root cause. Without that there is no ISIS. Let's also not forget the Republican guard Bush let walk helped form the military strategists for ISIS as well.

Besides all these morons work for the same people most likely.

They have made it worse because Obama had 8 years to get us out of the middle east like he campaigned on, and instead he with the help of his secretary of state Hillary armed ISIS. Now ISIS is attacking people in the US. I think that is much worse. At least with W the war was over there and not here. How anyone would want to cast a vote for someone who helped to make the Ca terrorist shootings happen I will never understand.

While I am not denying the situation of this administration I just don't see it that way at all.

The Iraq war killed thousands of Americans and it permanately alterred 50k plus soldiers bodies and minds.

Since I am a compassionate person I will also include it is responsible for at least 100k Iraqi innocent lives.

Anybody can go beserk break the social contract and murder people.

How can you call out bush and not obama?
They both had the same amount of time, both have failed policies. At least when bush left the war was over there and not here.
When bush left NOBODY was going to vote for anyone in his administration. That is the difference between then and now; Hillary actively made this worse and dems are going to vote for her.
Can you imagine anyone voting for cheney in 08?

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: shooterbrody

originally posted by: luthier

originally posted by: shooterbrody
I don't disagree; US foreign policy in the middle east has been a disaster for almost a century.
What I do disagree with is the Hillary apologists who are going to back her election to POTUS.
They were the same people screaming for W to run from office after the iraq invasion.

Obama and Hillary have made this problem significantly worse and Hillary does not deserve a shot to be commander in chief.

How could they make it much worse than destabilizing the entire region and invading a country under false pretense? How would you quantify which is worse?

They certainly haven't helped and maybe found a way to spread the instability but the Iraq war combined with Afgan is the root cause. Without that there is no ISIS. Let's also not forget the Republican guard Bush let walk helped form the military strategists for ISIS as well.

Besides all these morons work for the same people most likely.

They have made it worse because Obama had 8 years to get us out of the middle east like he campaigned on, and instead he with the help of his secretary of state Hillary armed ISIS. Now ISIS is attacking people in the US. I think that is much worse. At least with W the war was over there and not here. How anyone would want to cast a vote for someone who helped to make the Ca terrorist shootings happen I will never understand.

While I am not denying the situation of this administration I just don't see it that way at all.

The Iraq war killed thousands of Americans and it permanately alterred 50k plus soldiers bodies and minds.

Since I am a compassionate person I will also include it is responsible for at least 100k Iraqi innocent lives.

Anybody can go beserk break the social contract and murder people.

How can you call out bush and not obama?
They both had the same amount of time, both have failed policies. At least when bush left the war was over there and not here.
When bush left NOBODY was going to vote for anyone in his administration. That is the difference between then and now; Hillary actively made this worse and dems are going to vote for her.
Can you imagine anyone voting for cheney in 08?

How am I not calling out Obama? The guy has been a joke. He didn't improve the situation at all.

I would never vote for Hillary in a million years.

That doesn't however erase what Bush actually did. I mean not even as a conspiracy. Not only did 911 happen on his watch he is responsible for thousands of Americans deaths. 10's of thousands are permanently maimed and 10's of thousands have killed themselves because of the trauma.

Personally I won't ever forget that. I have family and friends directly affected. Just because Obama continued the train doesn't make him any better or worse than what Bush did.

If we are talking American lives. Bush has Obama far beat. Unless you don't consider soldiers lives as valuable. Iraq was pointless and they posed no threat.

Obama has just continued the policies the US has been moving towards. He is just also a terrible and divisive leader.