US 'Counter-Terrorism' in Syria: Perpetually Finding Terror Where US Dollars Are
The Pentagon announces 'large-scale' attacks against ISIL in Syria, conveniently responding to an ambush that killed three US personnel in Palmyra. One might almost forget that the US presence in Syria is, by international law, an illegal occupation, propping up Kurdish forces and, as many critics argue, inadvertently (or not so inadvertently) nurturing sectarian groups, including ISIL itself, as
a convenient pretext for continued intervention. This cycle of US military action generating the very 'threats' it then 'combats' is not a bug; it's a feature of over two decades of 'war on terror' doctrine. So, the US attacks ISIL, an entity arguably strengthened by the chaos of US regime change efforts throughout the region, including the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the proxy wars in Syria. It
appears to be an endless feedback loop: US military forces are attacked in a country they are illegally occupying, they respond with 'large-scale' attacks, and the cycle continues, all while the mainstream media, like Al Jazeera here, dutifully reports the Pentagon narrative without questioning the legality or efficacy of the initial presence. How many more decades of 'counter-terrorism' will it
take for us to question the initial policy that repeatedly creates these very enemies?