Eric Zuesse for
the Saker Blog
Even some
mainstream U.S. ‘news’-media (but none that are Republican) acknowledge the
fact that Qasem Soleimani was among the most effective of all nations’ generals
who fought against ISIS. Other mainstream U.S. ‘news’-media seem very reluctant
to do so, because the entirety of America’s mainstream ‘journalism’ has spewed
hatred against Iran’s Government after Iranians in 1979 succeeded at
overthrowing the dictator Shah whom America’s CIA had installed in 1953 to end
Iran’s democracy and to control the country, and he privatized the National
Iranian Oil company and cut America’s aristocrats in on the profits from sales
of Iranian oil. (Under George W. Bush, the U.S. Government did basically the
same thing to Iraq’s oil industry.) So, America’s mainstream ‘news’-media, which are
owned by the same aristocracy that imposed Iran’s dictatorship in 1953, have
portrayed Iran’s #2 leader, General Qasem Soleimani, as a ‘terrorist’, instead
of as the leading fighter against ISIS, which he actually was.
On 3 January
2020, Ilan Goldenberg, of the Democratic Party neoconservative Center for a New
American Security, headlined in the Council on Foreign Relations’s Foreign
Affairs, “Will Iran’s
Response to the Soleimani Strike Lead to War?” and only two references to ISIS were there, both
buried in his article: “He led Iran’s campaign to arm and train Shiite militias
in Iraq — militias responsible for the deaths of an estimated 600 American
troops from 2003 to 2011— and became the chief purveyor of Iranian political
influence in Iraq thereafter, most notably through his efforts to fight the
Islamic State (ISIS).” And: “ISIS retains an underground presence and could
take advantage of the chaos of an American withdrawal or a U.S.-Iranian
conflict to improve its position in Iraq.” So, it’s hard for a reader there to
figure out that Trump actually assassinated ISIS’s main enemy.
On January 4th,
Marketwatch headlined “Who was
Qassem Soleimani, and why is his death a major development in U.S.-Middle East
relations?” and
there was only a single reference to ISIS, the source being Iran, which that
article was criticizing: “In a tweet, Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad
Zarif described the strike that killed the general as an act of international
terrorism: ‘The US act of international terrorism, targeting &
assassinating General Soleimani — THE most effective force fighting Daesh
(ISIS), Al Nusrah, Al Qaeda et al — is extremely dangerous & a foolish
escalation,’ he wrote on Twitter. ‘The US bears responsibility for all
consequences of its rogue adventurism,’ he said.”
Some of
America’s mainstream ‘news’-media portrayed the killing of Soleimani as being
damaging to America’s ability to continue occupying Iraq and therefore harmful
to the fight against ISIS because the U.S. — not Iran and Russia — lead
the fight against ISIS in both Iraq and Syria. In other words: they presume
that lie. Politico headlined on January 3rd, “How the
Soleimani strike could kneecap the fight against ISIS” and opened:
The U.S. strike
that killed Iran’s top military leader could put America’s fight against the
Islamic State in jeopardy, opening the door to the reemergence of the terrorist
group.
The Thursday
night attack on Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani could also prompt the
government in Iraq to kick U.S. troops out of the country, ending America’s
mission to train the Iraqi military to fight terrorist groups.
U.S. troops have
deployed to Iraq since 2014 to fight ISIS and train Iraqi forces with
permission from the Iraqi government. As part of this agreement, Iraq asked the
U.S. specifically not to target Iran within the country, a request America has
now violated “in flagrant fashion” with the strike on Soleimani near the
Baghdad airport, said Scott Anderson, a former legal adviser to the U.S.
Embassy in Baghdad.
“This is going
to put a lot of pressure on those aspects of our relationship they have control
over,” Anderson, a fellow at the Brookings Institution, said Friday. … “If we
can’t be in Iraq, we can’t be in Syria,” Barbara Slavin, the director of the
Future Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, said Friday.
They don’t
mention that both Brookings and the Atlantic Council are neoconservative,
pro-imperialist, and controlled by (overwhelmingly funded by) large U.S.-based
international corporations and U.S.-allied governments, which benefit from
U.S.-and-allied arms-sales and oil-extraction. So, that’s just a standard
propaganda-piece from Politico, pumping the U.S. empire.
It is important
to remember the role both he and Iran played in the fight against ISIS.
While US
aircraft, special forces and local allies fought ISIS in Syria, as well as in Iraq,
Iranian-backed militia also pushed the terror group back in Iraq. Soleimani was
reported to have often led that fight from the front line …
The 62-year-old
led Iran’s elite Quds Force, which had a hand in both fighting the Islamic
State militant group and U.S. forces.
There was no
contradiction between those two positions shared both by Soleimani and Iran,
because ISIS was created as a fundamentalist-Sunni U.S. proxy fighting force
against Iraq’s Shiites. There was also this:
Long known as
the ‘shadow commander’ in Western media, his profile was raised in 2015 as
Iranian outlets began releasing photos of him in the battlefield guiding the
war against ISIS. …
Iran had
launched airstrikes against ISIS fighters outside Baghdad in late
2014 just
as the United States and its coalition partners were taking on the extremist
group.
ISIS, made up of
Sunni extremists, was ideologically at odds with Soleimani and the Iranian
Shiite regime he defended.
Soleimani and
his commanders were on the front lines in Iraq and his name
became synonymous with victories attributed to Iraqi ground forces [fighting against ISIS]. He had presented
himself as the face of the offensive in Tikrit, a city which fell under ISIS control
in 2014 [HE WAS FIGHTING AGAINST ISIS THERE].
Iran sought to
highlight his efforts against ISIS while protesting his death Friday.
Fox News
contributor Geraldo Rivera says the Baghdad airstrike that killed Iranian Gen.
Qassem Soleimani was a strategic error against a U.S. “friend” who “saved
people.”
A “Fox &
Friends” panel was injected with heated rhetoric on Friday when Mr. Rivera
defended the Quds force leader’s résumé in a discussion with Ainsley Earhardt,
Brian Kilmeade and Steve Doocy.
“Six months ago,
Ainsley, this guy was our friend,” Mr. Rivera said.
Rivera was
opposed not only by the other Fox “Friends” there, but by the reader-comments,
such as the most-liked ones:
Sort byBest
• RedBowtie
What planet does
Rivera live on? Soleimani has engineered the killing of many Americans.
7 Likes
• RedGuitar
stalin was our
friend and helped us defeat hitler. no really a friend. ha
6 Likes
They want to
remain suckers of America’s billionaires, who want to have Iran back.
Of course,
Russia’s news-media were honest about
this matter;
they have no reason to lie about it; and, besides, they don’t lie nearly as frequently as America’s
billionaire-controlled ‘news’-media do — they know they are distrusted from the
get-go throughout the U.S. empire, because Russia’s lying Soviet predecessors
(before 1991) are constantly pumped to America’s ‘news’-media behind the scenes
by America’s CIA (representing America’s billionaires) as being like today’s
Russian news-media, which they very much are not. Russia really did
end the Cold War; the U.S. regime never did.
Soleimani was
the face of armed resistance against ISIS in Iraq and Syria and contributed in
a big way in defeating ISIS, said an expert familiar with West Asian dynamics
who requested not to be identified.
Last year
Soleimani had also slammed Pakistan for its failure to control terror groups on
its soil that targeted Iranian Revolutionary Guards group.
Iran and India
were among regional powers that backed anti-Taliban forces along with Russia
before Taliban was ousted in Afghanistan. …
Last February, a
car laden with explosives hit a bus of Revolutionary Guard soldiers on
Zahedan-Khash road in Iran’s border province of Sistan-Balouchestan, killing 27
and injuring 13. Pakistan-based Jaish ul-Adl Takfiri terrorist group, which has
ties to al-Qaeda, claimed responsibility for the attack.
Days after the
attack, Soleimani said Iran does not want mere condolences, but concrete action
from Pakistan. “Can’t you, as a nuclear-armed state, deal with a
hundreds-strong terrorist group in the region?” he had said.
That’s a major
daily newspaper in Hindu India, which isn’t a place about which readers in
America and allied countries haven’t been taught by their news-media to expect
to see such a commentary being published. According to Wikipedia, “As of 2012, it is the world’s second-most widely
read English-language business newspaper, after The Wall Street
Journal,[4] with a readership of over 800,000.”
Also on January
4th former UK Ambassador Craig Murray headlined from Britain “Lies, the
Bethlehem Doctrine, and the Illegal Murder of Soleimani” and he exposed lies against Soleimani by
Democratic U.S. Presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren, U.S. Vice President
Mike Pence, and a key neoconservative legal advisor to UK’s Government. He was
exposing there a bipartisan and international sliming operation, the type of thing
that traditionally persuades masses of suckers to vote for politicians who
continue the grand imperial enterprise, for the benefit of U.S.-and-allied
billionaires. However, that scam might not be so successful this time
around.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.