What's new

Republican congressman praises ISIS attack in Iran, says US should consider supporting ISIS

Republican congressman praises ISIS attack in Iran, says US should consider supporting ISIS
Um, no.

On Thursday, Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) praised the recent Islamic State attack in Tehran as a “good thing” and suggested that maybe the United States should work with the militant organization.

Rohrabacher’s entire line of reasoning for why the United States should work with a militant group accused of human rights violations and war crimes like ethnic cleansing is astonishing. Here it is verbatim:

“We have recently seen an attack on Iran, and the Iranian government, the mullahs, believe that Sunni forces have attacked them. This may signal a ratcheting up of certain commitments by the United States of America. As far as I’m concerned, I just want to make this point and see what you think, isn’t it a good thing for us to have the United States finally backing up Sunnis who will attack Hezbollah and the Shiite threat to us? Isn’t that a good thing? And if so, maybe this is a Trump — maybe it’s a Trump strategy of actually supporting one group against another, considering that you have two terrorist organizations.”
Iran witnessed its first attack claimed by the Islamic State on Wednesday. Attackers stormed the parliament building in Tehran as well as the shrine of the country’s first Supreme Leader, Ruhollah Khomeini, a notable symbol for the Iranian government. At least 17 people were killed in the twin attacks, and dozens were injured. The attack was a notable achievement for the Islamic State, which according to the Iranian government, has been trying to plan an attack in the country for some time.

There are multiple issues with Rohrabacher’s logic. The most obvious, of course, is that it is not in the interest of the United States to see the Islamic State expanding across the Middle East. The United States is actively involved in reigning back the extremist group in Iraq and Syria. On Saturday, the U.S. Embassy in Manila announced that U.S. Special Operations Forces are working with the Philippine military in a battle against Islamic-State affiliated fighters on that front as well. Thus, the attack in Tehran this week— the first time the Islamic State has successfully planned something in Iran — can certainly not be a “good thing.”

It’s not clear why Rohrabacher views the Iranian government and the Islamic State as one and the same, but it’s even more baffling that he thinks the recent attack was thanks to the Trump administration. The Trump administration’s foreign policy has been completely incoherent, especially when it comes to the Middle East. But for the most part, Trump has been very vocal in his criticism of the Islamic State. If Rohrabacher has some intelligence that the administration is abetting the Islamic State, while the U.S. military is fighting it on multiple other fronts, he should probably share that intelligence immediately.

Experts at the House hearing where Rohrabacher made the comments immediately refuted his comments.

“Those attacks were claimed by the Islamic State,” said Matthew Levitt, director of The Washington Institute’s Stein Program on Counterterrorism and Intelligence at the conservative Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “It’s never in our interest to support a terrorist group like the Islamic State. We should condemn the attacks in Tehran, as we would condemn any act of terrorism, even as we hold Iran accountable for its sponsorship of terrorism.”

Rohrabacher wouldn’t listen to the experts on the panel, however.

“So that’s like Joe Stalin was a horrible guy, we must never associate with horrible guys like that, even against Hitler,” he said, talking over Levitt. “And so maybe it’s a good idea to have radical Muslim terrorists fighting each other. I’ll leave it at that.”

Rohrabacher’s comments come a few days after a short White House statement that implied that Iran deserved the attack in Tehran. “We grieve and pray for the innocent victims of the terrorist attacks in Iran, and for the Iranian people, who are going through such challenging times,” the statement read. “We underscore that states that sponsor terrorism risk falling victim to the evil they promote.”

It’s no surprise that Rohrabacher is so anti-Iran he is willing to praise the Islamic State for conducting an attack in the country. The congressman is a vocal supporter of regime change as well as a huge advocate of the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK), a cult-like group known for human rights abuses which wants to overthrow the Iranian government and which was classified as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government until 2012.

Rohrabacher, who has been has been previously called “Putin’s favorite congressman,” has also brushed off human rights abuses by the Russian government, calling them “baloney.”

A previous version of this piece said that Rohrabacher made these comments on Friday. He actually made these comments during a House hearing on Thursday titled “Attacking Hezbollah’s Financial Network: Policy Options.”

Adrienne Mahsa Varkiani
Associate Editor @ThinkProgress. World News and all things freelance. Send me your pitches: [email protected]
https://thinkprogress.org/republica...g-says-maybe-we-should-back-isis-a7e9382dbe1b
ISIS was created to get "rogue" muslim states in line. The creator, in my opinion, are not countries, rather organizations like Unicol etc. ISIS fights against muslims and sometimes, just to showoff, blasts fireworks in the founding areas as we e.g UK, Germany etc. So, I personally don't have any doubt that who is creator of this monstrous organization.
 
another Zionist shill who has infiltrated the US government.

nothing to see here. Perhaps one day the American people (and Europeans) will wake up to the parasite that's taken over their government.
it was this sort of parasite Zionists taking over national institutions while having 0 loyalty to the host states(and acting like parasites) that gave rise to the extreme anti-Semitism we saw in 30s/40s.

1000% correct about loyalty to the host state, maybe that's their fatal flaw. I also don't support Anti-Semitism, because Judaism is a religion, like all the other ones, it has good and bad mixed in. My issue is about the power grab. It's not healthy for any country to have it's entire zeitgeist commandeered by any one group. Especially a minority group that just happens to be Jewish.
 
Shockingly, Trump aligns the U.S. with ISIS over terror attack in Iran
Terror attacks in Tehran signal the launch of a foolhardy U.S.-Saudi war alliance

(Credit: AP
This article originally appeared on AlterNet.
President Trump now has his own war. The two terror attacks in Iran that left 12 people dead are its opening shots.

ISIS took credit for the attacks, which served its goal of stoking sectarian war. Not coincidentally, the attacks also advanced Trump’s goals of escalating U.S. hostility toward Iran.

Trump inherited wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, and a cold peace with Iran based on the international agreement to limit Iran’s nuclear program. Trump is abiding by the agreement while searching for ways to turn the cold peace into a hot war. His method: commit the United States to take sides in the long-standing political struggle between the Sunni and Shia traditions of Islam.

The Sunni cause is bankrolled by Saudi Arabia, the region’s richest nation, which just bought $110 billion worth of U.S. weapons and relegates women to second-class citizenship. The Shiites are led by anti-American Iran, which has the region’s largest population, 17 women in parliament, and a democratically elected moderate president, Hassan Rouhani.

Trump’s visit to Saudi Arabia last month was not a joke about a glowing orb. It was a war council, in which Trump allied the United States with the Sunnis and declared war on the Shiites. And what vital U.S. interest is served by taking sides in a religious civil war waged thousands of miles from American territory? The answer remains obscure and undiscussed in Washington.

In his May 22 scripted remarks in Saudi Arabia, Trump cited terrorism: “For decades, Iran has fueled the fires of sectarian conflict and terror. It is a government that speaks openly of mass murder, vowing the destruction of Israel, death to America, and ruin from many leaders and nations in this very room.”

But all of the terrorists who attacked in Manchester, Paris, New York and Washington were Sunni fundamentalists. None of them were connected with Iran. Iran’s attacks on Americans and Westerners occurred mostly in the 1980s and ’90s. Since 2000, more than 95 percent of terrorist casualties worldwide have been inflicted by Saudi-influenced militants. Trump’s policy is based on a false premise.


ISIS gets a pass

An ignorant and embattled commander-in-chief has aligned the United States with Saudi’s theocratic monarchy and its international brigade of Sunni foot soldiers, known as ISIS. The militants of ISIS are Wahhabists, devotees of a Saudi fundamentalist tradition, which abhors Shiism, democracy and women’s rights as contrary to the wishes of Allah. ISIS loathes the heretics of Iran even more than it despises the infidels of the West.

As ISIS lost ground in Iraq and Syria earlier this year, it promised (via a video) to strike in Iran for the first time. Now ISIS has made good on its threats — and the militants, whom Trump likes to describe as “radical Islamic terrorists,” get a pass from the White House.

After ISIS took credit for killing children at a pop music concert, Trump tweeted his rage. After ISIS attacked Iranian tourists and parliamentarians, Trump tweeted about his trip to Cincinnati. The White House later issued a statement that did not mention ISIS or “radical Islamic terrorism,” but did say “states that sponsor terrorism risk falling victim to the evil they promote,” which is pretty much what Osama bin Laden said after the 9/11 attacks.

The president may be morally bankrupt, but his political message is consistent: don’t criticize Saudi allies who are taking the fight to Iran, at least not by name.

War is spreading

Trump’s escalation promises more war in a region already punished by armed conflict. Saudi Arabia’s bombing campaign against Iran’s allies in Yemen, waged with U.S.-supplied weapons, has created a humanitarian disaster. The same holds true for Bashar al-Assad’s cruel war on his own people and Saudi-funded ISIS rebels.

Oblivious to the region’s complex realities, Trump fans the flames of war via Twitter.

Yesterday, Trump took credit for the decision of Saudi Arabia and other Persian Gulf nations to sever diplomatic ties and air travel with Qatar, a tiny wealthy emirate of only 200,000 people. Qatar is the only country in the Gulf that maintains relations with Iran. The goal is to force Qatar to abandon Iran, the better to unify the Sunni countries for the coming conflict.

About Qatar’s isolation, Trump declared grandly:

…extremism, and all reference was pointing to Qatar. Perhaps this will be the beginning of the end to the horror of terrorism!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 6, 2017

Not quite. Hours later, ISIS struck in Tehran.

Flashpoints to Watch

The Sunni-Shiite conflict is already spreading to flashpoints where the United States could be drawn into the religious civil war. Two stand out. Al-Udeid airbase in Qatar: The largest U.S. military base in the region is now hosted by a sovereign government with whom the United States, following the Saudi lead, is now virtually at war. The State Department, under the hapless leadership of Rex Tillerson, appeared to be surprised by this development. The U.S. military says its flights in and out of the Combined Air Operations Command will be “unaffected” by the sense of crisis pervading the region. The reality is the United States feels the need to issue reassuring statements because the stability has given way to uncertainty under Trump’s provocative policy. Was Trump unaware his actions would raise the threat level facing U.S. forces? Or did he intend to put U.S. forces on war footing? No one knows because we have little information about how Trump made his decision. Both possibilities are disturbing. El Tanf in Syria: This city, located on the Syrian-Iraq border, is home to an American base. On Tuesday, U.S. military reported that it attacked allies of the Syrian regime, including Iranian militias, for the second time in three weeks after they ignored warnings to move away from the U.S. base. American commanders on the ground want to prevent the Iranian militias from using the road to El Tanf as a supply line from their Shiite allies in Iraq. That would strengthen their position as they press the fight on ISIS in northern Syria. In other words, the United States is now stepping up attacks on the front-line Iranian forces that are fighting ISIS. To wage war on Iran, Trump’s actions relieve pressure on ISIS. This is new. Before Trump came to office, the U.S.-led coalition focused on ISIS (also known in the region as ISIL or Daesh) and did not initiate fighting with Iranian militias also fighting ISIS. That is now changing, thanks to the influence of National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster and Defense Secretary James Mattis, both of whom are hawkish on Iran. Barbara Slavin, Middle East correspondent for Al-Monitor newspaper, stated what is obvious to the region.


hard to believe attacks in Iran after Trump visit to Saudi a coincidence. serious escalation — Barbara Slavin (@barbaraslavin1) June 7, 2017

Far from coincidence, the Tehran attacks were the result of the U.S.-Saudi understanding forged last month. While Congress bickers, Trump inflames a religious war and terrorism breaches another frontier.

Jefferson Morley is a staff writer for Salon in Washington and author of the forthcoming book, Snow-Storm in August: Washington City, Francis Scott Key, and the Forgotten Race Riot of 1835 (Nan Talese/Doubleday).
 

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom