Whose Side Is The US Supposed To Be Working With In The Middle East – Part 1

Just Whose Side Is The US Supposed To Be Helping In The Middle East In Our Quest For Revenge

Can anyone really tell me? I mean we believe as westerners that we are fighting against the Muslim Brotherhood, ISIS, the Boko Haram, and a whole medusa head of others radiating out of the same ideological brain. But who have we trained and equipped? We believe the utter barbarism and horrendous acts being carried out in the region between warring factions needs to be addressed and those responsible made to answer for their actions. We see ghastly acts they have perpetrated upon their own people as well as by those in the radical Islamic group called ISIS. Who is the aggressor and who is the ones under attack? We also entered the area in direct retaliation for the horrendous actions against our country especially those during 9/11 so how much vengeance is enough?

Who are we fighting beside as NATO allies — radicals or regional conflicting tribal groups from times past? The answer is all of these I think and yet something more.

Yet, all the while, we have been allowing these same groups access and rights in our own westernized countries? We are allowing these groups to modify our way of life in order for them to impose their laws and rights when we here in the U.S. already have a far better document called the Constitution that has many better qualities than they could ever provide for our citizens?

I’m confused and probably so are a lot of US citizens who have no real understanding of the area except that which has been deliberately put forward by the liberal media…..who exactly are the players in Iraq or Afghanistan that the US is supposed to be fighting Against or For? The dynamics of this region is a longstanding area of internal conflict dating back thousands of years. Do they even know or trust who they have targeted? Is this more like a Hatfield and McCoy scenario? 

Yet it seems like constantly shifting sands, we have been drawn into a massive conflict where the players are at times the oppressors and at others the aggrieved. 

The Muslim Brotherhood got started in 1928 and is defined by Encyclopedia Britannica as a religio-political organization who has from inception advocated for a return to the Quran, Sharia law and the Hadith as guidelines for a worldwide Islamic society.  Groups adhere, pay a ransom to survive as basically “slaves”, or are eliminated. So naturally, all off-shoot groups while differing in some ways DO adhere to that tenet. They may fight against each other until one becomes top dog but in the end that is the only tenet that will not change.

I definitely am not in any way or form an expert on any of these things but take most from historical or expert information just to provide some sense of what is happening.

In Part 1 and 2, is a bare thumbnail sketch of regional players and the actual conflict we have become embroiled in thanks to those who have been planning and plotting since WWI. 

Part 3, Is about drawing some kind of conclusions. My main query if any wish to enlighten me is our goal to destroy only ISIS there? Or is there more? Is our collaborative effort with the parties in the region simply a case of “the enemy of my enemy is my friend” or are forces that have deliberately used US taxpayer funds to arm ALL sides so everyone can fight like mad dogs set loose in an arena with the only clear winner being the audience in the shadows? The last eight years have seen us mired deeper in the goings on over there. Yet it has also seen our own productivity, employment, military, and infrastructure decline thanks to the determined efforts of Obama, MB, Socialists, the Democrats, and the UniParty collusion.

Trying to Make Sense Of The Dynamics:

Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)– CFR is made up of US Born or Naturalized citizens and those who have applied for permanent residence make up this council. Names such as Peter Ackerman, John Abizaid, Madeleine K. Albright, Jami Miscik, Tom Brokaw, J. Tomilson Hill, and Stephen Friedman appear as board members. Other notables include Roger Ailes, Joe Biden, Warren Beatty, Sandy Berger, and Michael Bloomberg (US Intelligence Agency people appear to be one of the backbones of this group.) The founding members included many of those who had been at the signing of the Treaty of Versailles after World War I. Some consider this group to be connected strongly to New World Order. Finances for the CFR came from the same players that set up the Federal Reserve System in America: J.P. Morgan; John D. Rockefeller; Bernard Baruch; Paul Warburg; Otto Kahn; and Jacob Schiff. This is basically the monetary strength that has been behind the Democrat Party. They have an interactive infoguide that may give some (albeit propagandized) version of who Kurds are in the area.

Considering the list of notables of the CFR, when they back something, I personally wonder who and what is behind their position — NWO or the sovereign USA. So their throwing support to one group or another doesn’t leave me with a good feeling–just like if I hear that McCain, Obama, the Clintons, John Kerry or other players from the last eight years have been pushing to help or support a certain “JV” Middle Eastern group or a half dozen others.

Kurds – Are they terrorists, allies in the war against the Islamic State, or a nation in need of a state? Well according to liberal MSM The Atlantic( Monthly) this group is all of these. They speak Kurdish, an Indo-European language, and are predominantly Sunni Muslims. Kurds have a distinct culture, traditional dress, and holidays are taken from both Arab and Persian cultures. The estimated thirty million Kurds (those that have survived regional conflicts and genocides) reside primarily in mountainous regions of present-day Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Turkey and remain one of the world’s largest peoples without a sovereign state.

Peshmerga – Is itself considered a force that is largely divided and controlled separately by the Democratic Party of Kurdistan and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan. The Iraqi Army is “supposedly forbidden by law” from entering Iraqi Kurdistan. The Peshmerga, along with other Kurdish security subsidiaries, are responsible for the security of the Kurdish Region. The Soviet Union, supported the DPK in the Kurdish national struggle against the monarchies of Iran and Iraq.

In 2003, during the Iraq War, Peshmerga were said to have played a key role in the mission to capture Saddam Hussein. In 2004, they captured a key al Qaeda figure who eventually led to the death of Osama Bin Laden. Following a large-scale Islamic State offensive against Iraqi Kurdistan in August 2014, Peshmerga and Kurdish forces from neighboring countries have been waging war against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant in both Iraq and Syria. They have been highly successful despite a serious lack of funding and support. These forces are allegedly against Turkey/Sunni/Erdogan/ISIS. Yet they have been targeted by the Iraq forces because of their determination to be an independent Kurdistan nation or group separate but equal in Iraq.

Kurdistan – consists of three regions–Turkey (Northern Kurdistan), northern Iraq (Southern Kurdistan), northwestern Iran (Eastern Kurdistan), and northern Syria (Rojava or Western Kurdistan). Iran Kurdistan is not autonomous. Kurds fighting in the Syrian Civil War were able to take control of large sections of northern Syria as government forces, loyal to Bashar al-Assad, withdrew to fight elsewhere. Having established their own government, they called for autonomy in a federal Syria after the war. Kurds actually voted to secede from Iraq but Iraq refuses to accept their right to do so. Some of the Kurd area protected by the Peshmerga is the oilfields so coveted by others. That oilfield is thought to have nine billion barrels of oil reserves — 6 percent of the world’s total and 40 percent of Iraq’s.

Iraq – The sectarian nature of the war between Shiite (Shia) and Sunni Arabs in Iraq reflects a centuries-old battle between Persia and the Arab world. They adhere to different versions of Islam. Violent Sunni Arab rejection of Iraq’s Persian roots plays out daily on the streets of the capital. In internet postings, Sunni Arab insurgents, many of them officers during the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s, describe their attacks on Shiites as settling accounts.

“There has always been conflict between the Arabs and Iranians, and they always tried to involve Iraq,” Sheik Humam Hamoodi, an Iraqi Shiite politician and cleric.

British forces who forged modern-day Iraq after the defeat of the Ottoman Empire placed a Sunni Arab tribal leader at the country’s helm to encourage an Arab base rather than Shiite Iranian/Persian. This basically established the groundwork for strong resistance and infighting within the areas between long time enemies.

Iraqi–Kurdish Autonomy Agreement of 1970 – Agreed to in March 1970, in the aftermath of the First Kurdish–Iraqi War, for the creation of an Autonomous Region, consisting of the three Kurdish governorates and other adjacent districts that had been determined by census to have a Kurdish majority. For its time it was the most serious attempt to resolve the long-running Kurdish–Iraqi conflict. The Kurds considered themselves different and separate from Arabs. They wanted to establish their rights of language, education, and governance by and for their own peoples within an area that was distinctly theirs in joint legislative leadership with the Iraq government.

Despite this agreement, the Iraqi government embarked on an “Arabization program” in the oil rich regions of Kirkuk and Khanaqin in the same period. Eventually, the peace plan for the Kurdish autonomy failed, re-erupting into the Second Kurdish–Iraqi War in 1974, which escalated the Kurdish–Iraqi conflict. (The economics of the time saw the US siding with the Iraq Arab group as the oilfields were so critical to western oil consumption.)

Four separate overall groups in the region of the Middle EastKurds (nomadic supposedly without permanent settlements); Arabs;  Persians (now known as Iranians) who are said to have descended from the Aryan race and dominate in the region; and Turks who are predominantly found within Turkey. The thing to know is that none of these four groups are within a singular nation, each can be found co-mingled within the entire Middle East area since this region has been mostly nomadic for thousands of years.


So I imagine most readers are getting restless and their eyes are crossing. You are probably wondering why in the heck why I am on this rant since we have so much going on in the US to deal with on our own?  

Good question….however, the answer is not so easy to sum up in the particulars as we see them in conflicts currently going on nor is it comfortable for any of us. It may however be that there is one single movement behind all of this, barring wildly flung accusations or conspiracy theories, that all of the conflicts as a whole can be attributed one central idea after weeding out a lot of the chaos.


Part 2 – Who Is The US Supposed To Be Helping In The Middle East?
Part 3 – Why Was The US Pulled Into A Middle Eastern Regional Conflict?

About Uriel

Retired educator and constitutionalist
Tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Whose Side Is The US Supposed To Be Working With In The Middle East – Part 1

  1. Hardnox says:

    Excellent piece Uriel. Follow the money.