The Reagan administration inadvertently created Al Qaeda by arming the Afghan mujahedeen in the 1980s, then George W. Bush’s Iraq War gave rise to ISIS. So, one might draw a lesson about overusing military force abroad, says Ivan Eland.
By Ivan Eland
The mass shooting in Orlando, Florida at a gay nightclub, by a man pledging a seemingly last-minute allegiance to the ISIS terror group, leads to questions about whether the U.S. government has been adequately protecting its citizens.
Going back in time, the U.S. government inadvertently created Al Qaeda by encouraging, funding, and arming radical Islamist fighters against the Soviet Union in faraway Afghanistan during the 1980s. After the 9/11 attacks by that group, the U.S. government, by conducting an unrelated invasion of Iraq, then unintentionally created an even more brutal group called Al Qaeda in Iraq, which pledged allegiance to the main Al Qaeda group in Pakistan, and eventually morphed into the even more vicious ISIS. ISIS then took over large parts of Iraq and Syria, but began to attack Western targets only after a U.S.-led coalition began bombing the group in those countries.
President George W. Bush announcing the start of his invasion of Iraq on March 19, 2003.
Directly planned attacks by ISIS have occurred in Europe, but ISIS has had problems recruiting people in the United States to go to Syria for military training and return to the United States to attack, because its Muslim community has not been radicalized. Thus, the group has had to rely often on spontaneous and crude — but nevertheless sometimes deadly — attacks by relative amateurs “inspired” by the group, such as the incidents in San Bernardino and Orlando.
In the Orlando attack, the perpetrator, Omar Mateen, even may have been dressing up anti-gay bigotry by pledging allegiance to ISIS shortly after he began his dastardly act. Although the FBI had investigated his past statements and connection with one of the few Americans who joined an Al Qaeda affiliate and went to Syria in 2013 and 2014, respectively, they closed the investigation; Mateen’s father and ex-wife have both dismissed religion and instead pointed to anti-gay statements he had made. His father has even pointed out that the shooting may have been triggered by Mateen’s outrage at his three-year-old son recently observing two men kissing and touching.
Entrapping ‘Terrorists’
According to a recent investigation by The New York Times, in two-thirds of prosecutions of ISIS-related terrorism cases, the FBI is using once rare undercover sting operations, such as going on the Internet and encouraging bloviating and bragging individuals to do illegal things so that they can be arrested. Unbelievably, the reason for such a high percentage is that such intrusive undercover operations can be done without approval of judge, which is needed for searches and wiretaps. Thus, the Congress and the public are largely in the dark about such stings.
According to Michael German, a former undercover agent with the FBI, who was quoted in the Times, “They’re manufacturing terrorism cases. These people are five steps away from being a danger to the United States.”
Omar Mateen, identified as the shooter in the Orlando, Florida, massacre.
Such furtive entrapment is good for the FBI, so that the agency can show that funding the agency results in arrests in terrorism cases, but is bad for the republic. Because talk is cheap and doesn’t necessarily coincide with action, the FBI (and other law enforcement agencies) likely may be egging people on to do things they wouldn’t do without such encouragement.
Even more important, the FBI may be wasting time arresting relatively harmless braggarts who have discovered ISIS on the Internet or on TV while ignoring others — ISIS-related or not — who may be more dangerous. Most important, such undercover operations alienate an otherwise cooperative American Muslim community, which could quit providing the FBI intelligence on any really dangerous people.
In the panic that ensued after the 9/11 attacks, the FBI was transformed to focus on terrorism cases rather than its traditional concentration on more “ordinary” federal crimes. And since the advent of ISIS, the agency seems to have focused like a laser on the group.
As the San Bernardino and Orlando incidents seem to show, even an “inspired” lone wolf can kill significant numbers of people, if not masses of people as on 9/11. Yet the school shootings at Virginia Tech and Sandy Hook have killed about as many, and anyone can now kill people for reasons of hate and simply dress up their motivations by pledging allegiance to ISIS, which the Orlando murderer may well have done.
Despite the hysteria that occurs when ISIS is somehow associated with incidents like San Bernardino and Orlando, Americans should keep in mind that their government inadvertently created the group in the first place and is now hyping the danger to get more resources for its agencies, such as the FBI and Department of Defense, to combat the problem.
The Orlando tragedy is horrendous, but Americans should put the threat from ISIS in perspective and not allow the security agencies to run rogue and either stir up more terrorism from overseas or undermine the republic by using entrapment techniques that are counterproductive to protecting the public.
Ivan Eland is senior fellow and director of the Center on Peace & Liberty at the Independent Institute, Oakland, CA, and the author of Recarving Rushmore: Ranking the Presidents on Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty.
Wrong| The Reagan administration inadvertently created Al Qaeda by arming the Afghan mujahedeen in the 1980s/
There was NOTHING “inadvertent” about this. It was calculated, deliberate, CIA funded and a fully cognisant strategy.
Read The Grand ChessBoard – ziggies manifesto.
Nothing “inadvertent”.
He BOASTS about his strategy.
monica… Wow, it is hard to even formulate a response. I don’t know if you realize it or not but the US, I believe, has been at war for 91% of its’ history, many of those wars predate the creation of Israel. So I think the US does just fine in creating its’ own wars without anything related to jews. I believe some of what is happening in the Middle East is about Israel but the US, currently as the world’s hegimon, is also trying to further its’ geopolitical and economic interests before other countries fully rise to challenge the US, and western, dominated world. I just don’t believe that all roads lead to Israel but it is certainly plays a part in what is happening in the Middle East.
Be anti-Semitic somewhere else, pig. Your name isn’t even capitalized. Since the United States is a white-dominated and white-majority country, I presume the bankers are too. Also, the writer of this article blamed the U.S government, not any minority groups. You are despicable, taking blame away from rich whites and blaming it entirely on the Jews. I can’t tolerate people who refuse to let their country or government responsibility for their actions.
Actually the Carter administration started arming the mujahedeen, but of course the Reagan admin beefed up the whole racket as soon as Jimmy left office. But Carter started arming them in the late 1970s.
Yep, I was ready to point this out when you beat me to it. Zbiggy Brzezinski and Jimmy Carter cooked this up, along with Pipes and Bush as the “Team B” project. They sold the idea that the Soviets were running out of oil and gas, and would use Afghanistan as a springboard to take over the Persian Gulf. But first, they had to sell the Soviets on the idea that radical islamists were plotting against them so they would invade Afghanistan, thereby creating a plausible Soviet invasion scenario. That’s where some obscure figure named Hekmatyar came in, and he somehow got things rolling along with Osama bin Laden aka Tim Osman. The “duopoly” owns all the manufactured terror, and it’s impossible to just blame it on Reagan. But if Mr. Eland really wants to blame something on Reagan, a better tack would be the background on Reagan’s flirtation with Ukrainian Nazis. That has turned out to be a “bipartisan” adventure as well. Ref.: Elizabeth Gould and Paul Fitzgerald — available on Amazon, makes for some exciting reading.
Drew Hunkins… According to a documentary that I watched by award winning journalist John Pilger, the US spent $500 Million in 1979, six months “before” the Afghan/Soviet War, under Carter to fund, arm and train the Mujahideen which went on to become Al Qaeda and the Taliban (now we have ISIS/Daesh which is an off-shoot of Al Qaeda from within Iraq after Hussein was ousted meanwhile our “allies”, Turkey/Saudi Arabia/Qatar, are now funding and arming them). It is just a dirty, twisted game to them…
Unfortunately, this is a plausible explanation, and at the very least must be considered a big factor.
The “inadvertently” bit may be correct, but IMO the neocons were (and are) evil enough to be doing such things as creating ISIS deliberately.
Exactly. Create a Problem. Observe Reaction. Offer a “Solution.”
I have a masonic bible. It’s called morals and dogma. On the cover of the book has the pyramid with the eye capstone and a eagle above it, or should I say phoenix bird. There is an inscription that says in Latin “Ordo de chao”. Which means order out of chaos. Your right about the age old tactic, create the chaos, so you can establish the order of your fancy. Unfortunately the order these bastards are planning is lucifarian, which spells death to all, and it would happen if the Almighty God didn’t cut time short and send His son to stop the utter destruction of the sons of Adam.