Chemical weapons were used against the Kurds in Iraq.
That was in 1988, before the first Gulf War. There were no WMDs in Iraq after we won that war. The UN weapons inspectors consistently reported that Saddam Hussein had no WMDs before the second invasion of Iraq (the one where we destroyed the entire country) but the US press sided with GW Bush’s lying war criminals instead.
Also by the Syrian regime against the rebels.
Nope. All three of the chemical weapons attacks in Syria were first unanimously blamed on Assad by the entire corporate mews media propaganda establishment, and then subsequent analyses pointed to a strategic use of chemical weapons by the US-backed terrorists for the purpose of garnering public support for intensified regime change operations. But the second part was never reported in the mainstream media, of course.
To think that these countries would welcome countries from the West to build them up is another mistake.
Then an international coalition should support peaceful Muslim nations in helping them rebuild the nations that we’ve laid to waste. Peace and prosperity is the right way to defeat terrorism.
You seem to be suggesting that we just keep bombing these nations into oblivion. That insane and totally failed strategy has precipitated a 6500% increase in terrorism and a dramatic surge in terrorist fatalities:
Terrorism
They are five hundred years behind us in terms of civilisation.
That’s an absurd statement. Iraq was a thriving modern civilization before we completely destroyed it and turned it into a seething ISIS-infested hellscape. So was Libya. In fact Libya was a beacon of success and opportunity for the entire continent of Africa, which drew in millions of African citizens looking for a better life. When we destroyed Libya, they had no place left to go but Europe.
It would be seen as a take over and therefore even worse atrocities would arise.
It’s hard to imagine worse atrocities than we’re seeing right now with the Islamic State running huge swaths of territory and open human slave trafficking markets – all courtesy of the disastrous warmongering US foreign policy.
They are learning that the West won't sit on its hands and put up with genocide.
You mean, while we’re committing it.
The “War of Terror,” I mean “The War on Terror,” has racked up a body count of over 5 million people in Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Syria, Somalia, and Yemen. That's nearing Holocaust levels of genocide.
How Many Millions Have Been Killed in America’s Post-9/11 Wars? Part 3: Libya, Syria, Somalia and Yemen
All that can be done is to step in when this line is crossed. It's a lesson they will learn the hard way.
So a handful of mostly Saudi terrorists killed 3,000 Americans, and we’ve killed millions of civilians in retaliation. And you’re cool with that. Chilling.
Take away our recent interventions across the region. The fruit and veg guy from Tunisia would still have flashed himself up in protest and the trap would have sprung anyhow.
Fate.
That’s not even intelligible. If you’re referring to the Arab Spring, that was a covert CIA/Saudi operation:
“WASHINGTON — Even as the United States poured billions of dollars into foreign military programs and anti-terrorism campaigns, a small core of American government-financed organizations were ‘promoting democracy’ [quotation marks mine] in authoritarian Arab states.
The money spent on these programs was minute compared with efforts led by the Pentagon. But as American officials and others look back at the uprisings of the Arab Spring, they are seeing that the United States’ democracy-building campaigns played a bigger role in fomenting protests than was previously known, with key leaders of the movements having been trained by the Americans in campaigning, organizing through new media tools and monitoring elections.”
U.S.-Financed Groups Had Supporting Role in Arab Uprisings
That's what needs to happen yes but we will not see this happen and certainly the migrants who went to Europe and still heading to Europe are not going to turn around back, there's a large percentage of them that did not originate from the war torn areas of the middle east...They came from countries in Africa and eastern countries taking advantage of the situation to gain entry into Europe...
...
I don’t know what you mean by “a large percentage of them,” but 5.6 million refugees have fled Syria alone, thanks to our illegal regime change operation there:
European migrant crisis - Wikipedia
And like I said, Libya used to be the preferred destination for African refugees. We uncorked that bottle when we destroyed Libya.
And I think that most refugees would rather be back home than struggling to survive in distant lands that are overwhelmed with the refugee crisis, and which are intrinsically hostile to their cultures and don’t speak their languages.
The pivotal event at that time was the western military intervention in the Libyan civil war
That was only a “civil war” in the sense of the Syria “civil war” – US/Saudi intelligence arming terrorists to overthrow the existing government while the corporate news media propaganda outlets call it a “civil war” and refer to jihadist terrorists as "rebels."
without western understanding over just who we were backing.
We knew exactly who we were backing. The CIA renditioned Abdelhakim Belhadj, a known Taliban terrorist, a decade before we backed his militia in the overthrow of Qaddafi, so it was no surprise when he joined the Islamic State after the CIA/Saudi coup:
CIA worked with Libya in terror suspect renditions, documents show
CIA Asset Joins Islamic State in Libya – Abdelhakim Belhadj Worked with U.S. and NATO to Overthrow Gaddafi
https://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-asset-joins-islamic-state-in-libya-abdelhakim-belhadj-worked-with-u-s-and-nato-to-overthrow-gaddafi - /5434923
The biggest cheerleaders for this action were the British Prime Minister David Cameron and French President Nicolas Sarkozy. Obama was said to be lukewarm on the idea, although the warmonger Hillary Clinton was an enthusiast (remember her disgusting and bloodthirsty reaction when the dictator Gadaffi was lawlessly murdered by a mob in the streets when he was finally ousted?).
Yeah Hillary Clinton is one of the most bloodthirsty neocons warmongers in US history, who touts the endorsements of war criminals like Henry Kissinger and John Negroponte. How anyone can believe that she’s left-wing in any sense totally baffles me. Reports indicate that she was the loudest voice in the room pushing Obama to bomb Libya.
The collapse of the Libyan government opened up a channel for migration across the Mediterranean into southern Europe
Yep.
and also likely caused Syrian unrest to turn into an outright civil war
Actually we stole Qaddafi’s munitions and routed them through a rat line via Turkey to Syria, where those weapons were given to jihadist terrorists (al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, Islamic State) to overthrow Assad.
with the rebels hoping for a similar western military intervention in that country (which thankfully has not yet happened, despite the ardent wishes of many in western governments and in the news media, although this threat has certainly not gone away, and may come to a head this autumn).
They’re not “rebels,” they’re US-backed terrorist mercenaries. Most of them aren’t even Syrian. And they’ve used chemical weapons three times, presumably with the assistance of the CIA and Turkey, in false flag operation to get the US more directly involved in the war. When Obama realized that the first chemical attack in Syria was a false flag operation to force him to send troops into Syria, he back-pedaled and put it up for a Congressional vote. That’s why we didn’t fully commit like we did in Iraq and Libya.
I believe that the needless escalation of tensions with Russia, owing largely to post-Soviet NATO expansion, has largely been at the behest of US arms manufacturers.
Boom. Yep – that’s what political campaign donations buy: war profits. But the bankers may be even more central to all of this – every nation that has threatened the Petrodollar has either been destroyed, or is currently the focus of media hate campaigns with the intent to garner public support for military action against them.
I do not think that a US government orchestration of the 9/11 terror attacks has anything to do with this.
Maybe not, but I don’t rule out the possibility: our war machine and the heads of our intelligence agencies are complete psychopaths. People who are capable of intentionally lying in order to start wars are capable of anything.
Theories about controlled demolition and thermite use in 9/11 are just fatuous nonsense. I have seen no adequate explanation as to why a controlled demolition of the Twin Towers was desirable for any would-be conspirators, and they concoct the ridiculous idea of the most elaborate controlled demolition in history, some appealing to the completely unproven and seemingly bad idea of using thermite to achieve this end. Conspiracy theorists claim variously that explosive reports could be heard, and also that thermite was used to avoid the noise associated with high explosives.
The samples tested did have nanothermite, a military-grade variety of thermite, so that’s suspicious as hell. And NIST has refused to test their samples which have proper chain of custody, which is also suspicious as hell. We don’t have airtight proof, but what we do have is far from “fatuous nonsense.” We have credible suspicion.
Thermite could potentially be used to bring down a building. However, if you use thermite, you will lose any ability to control the collapse, which requires split-second timing that can only be achieved with high-explosives. Thermitic reactions could have taken place in the burning Twin Towers in the official explanation. Thermite reactions take place when elemental aluminium reacts with, for example, iron oxide. Quantities of aircraft aluminium would have melted in the Twin Towers fires and this molten aluminium would likely have come into contact with oxidized steel members of the buildings' structures.
It appears to be a viable theory; nanothermite would have the explosive properties required for symmetric demolition:
World Trade Center controlled demolition conspiracy theories - Wikipedia
Furthermore, the 9/11 attacks were aimed squarely at the elite of American society: the Twin Towers, office blocks largely housing financial services firms and similar companies, and the Pentagon, a building housing US military top brass. If the orchestrators wanted a more guttural reaction of support against the apparent perpetrators of these acts from the American people, why did they not target the common man? It would have been no more difficult to have flown the hijacked aircraft into a packed sports stadium, for example.
I don’t think you can argue the key point: it worked. Americans saw it as an attack on America, not an attack on the American elite class.
Most people never questioned any of the insane wars that we started as a result of those attacks, or the expansion of those wars all across the Mideast over the last 15 years. If that was the point (and I’m not saying that it was, because it can’t be proven), then it worked perfectly.