4 Comments

Is it at all possible that the purpose for keeping the United States involved in the Middle East is somehow related to Israel?

Expand full comment

Based on the indefensible, grossly immoral, unconditional U.S. support of Israel's horrifying mass murder campaign in Gaza, regular Israeli strikes on countries in the region, the idiotic U.S. insistence on brokering a security deal with the Saudi government to create a pathway for Saudi/Israeli normalization, and hysterical domestic efforts to crush dissent with threats, censorship, and police power; it is crystal clear that the U.S. continues to view Israel as a vital strategic asset in the region to dish out discipline as needed to maintain U.S. control. Cook completely fails to face this ugly reality.

Cook's argument also ignores other ugly U.S. realities. He insists that the U.S. did not act in Syria" because "it was paramount in Washington to avoid another intervention." Really? I seem to recall a very nasty, very expensive CIA engineered and funded regime change dirty war in Syria (Operation Timber Sycamore) which Obama approved.

Expand full comment

What retrenchment?

"If a doctor were as incompetent and malicious as U.S. foreign policy has been in the Middle East for the last thirty years, he would be stripped of his license and thrown in jail for causing the deaths of countless patients."

The United States is no doctor, not even a Dr. Kevorkian, and those deaths are and were entirely intentional.

I emphasize your word "malicious".

Expand full comment

Sure would be nice if we brought the boys and girls home from the empires global presence.

People

Planet

Peace

Expand full comment