Trump's Terror Challenge

Those were the days—back in 2015! Remember? Trump was running for president and he had the brainstorm of embracing Mike Flynn who, as head of the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), had got into some hot water career wise by revealing that the US was the big sponsor behind the terror conglomerate known as ISIS. Yes, there were other sponsors—Israel, the UK, Turkey, etc.—but in the nature of things the US was the big dog. The Deep State was not at all amused by Flynn’s antics, so he was put out to pasture until Trump brought him into his fold.

That all developed in the context of the Arab Spring regime change movement that the Anglo-Zionists put in motion with Hillary at DoS. Back then the US was a bit shy about openly letting the world know that the US was, like, the world’s biggest sponsor of terror. The official line was that we were against terrorism and regimes that the Anglo-Zionists didn’t like were the “terror masters”. Actually it was the other way round, and we were using terrorists on an international scale to take down regimes that we didn’t like—like Libya, like Syria, etc.

During his presidency Trump actually attempted to put a halt to that by ordering a withdrawal of US troops from Syria, where they were training and supporting various terrorists who we were deploying against the Assad regime. That’s when Trump—more or less like Obama before him—learned that current legal scholars view Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution “The President shall be commander in chief” as the punch line to some obscure joke that the Founders had inserted in a fit of hilarity. No withdrawal happened, so Trump pivoted to his own gag line about how he was so clever that he was ripping off Syria’s oil and no one could stop him. Presumably that was MAGA.

In about three weeks Trump will once again enter the Oval Office as the CinC, so he gets another whack at getting the US out of the terror business after four more years of world wide Anglo-Zionist terror under Zhou and those who were pulling his strings. It seems the US no longer much cares who knows we’re the real terror masters, but there’s always the possibility that Trump still cares. That will depend on what MAGA means this time around.

A lot of this has come totally out in the open with the overthrow of Assad in Syria. The US has been gunning for the Assad regime from way back in John Bolton’s “Beyond the Axis of Evil” days in 2002, when Bolton first perpetrated the gag about the US frowning on “state sponsors of terrorism”—that was everyone but us. So 22 years later, having finally won the long war against Syria, the Anglo-Zionists felt entitled to do a victory lap and openly embrace the “Syrian rebels”—who turned out to mostly be Central Asian members of the international jihadist brigade, led by a serial beheader with a $10M price on his own head. The US has been supporting these and other related terrorist groups, including Uzbeks who have perpetrated terror attacks in Russia, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (targeting Yemen), and more.

Things have become more complicated in just a month or two—Turkey, it seems, pretended to be part of the terrorist anti-terror coalition the US thought it was leading, but then pulled a double cross (ha, ha!). It turns out that the HST jihadis were actually answering to Ankara and not to us. So Trump will inherit a real mess. Right now, Turkey appears to be calling the shots in Damascus and is installing non-Syrian jihadists to run the “Syrian” government, as well as targeting the US/Israel Kurdish proxies. Dave DeCamp brings us up to date:

Foreign Jihadists Appointed To Senior Positions In New Syrian Military

Authored by Dave DeCamp via AntiWar.com,

Foreign jihadists have been appointed in senior positions in the new Syrian military, which is now led by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), an offshoot of al-Qaeda that led the offensive that ousted former President Bashar al-Assad.

Syrian sources told Reuters that the foreign fighters appointed to the military include Uyghurs, a Jordanian, a Turk, and an Albanian.

The inclusion of Uyghurs is interesting. One suspects that the Anglo-Zionists have been plotting to get some sort of jihad activity going in the Uyghurs native Xinjiang in China. Certainly these HST Uyghurs haven’t hidden that aspiration.

However, it appears that the Zhou regime has not given up on the possibility of pulling the HST out of the Turkish orbit, so they’re dangling the possibility of US support before the eyes of the leadership in Damascus:

HTS is still designated by the US as a foreign terrorist organization, but the Biden administration has celebrated its takeover of Syria. The US has also made clear it’s willing to work with the new government and its de facto leader, Abu Mohammad al-Julani, who has been going by his real name Ahmed al-Sharaa.

Earlier this month, Barbara Leaf, the US Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs, met with Julani and announced the US was removing a $10 million bounty on his head.

The same US national security state that took away our rights and sent its soldiers to die for a “war on terror” is hailing the takeover of Syria by transnational jihadist rabble as a great triumph. And when the blowback comes again, they’ll find even more rights to take away. https://t.co/DrDh62gUXy

— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) December 30, 2024

Julani, a former al-Qaeda leader, appointed other HTS members in senior positions of the "transitional government" and has said elections in Syria probably won’t happen for at least four years.

This is what Trump will inherit. To my mind this whole situation presents a two part test case for Trump. Will he pull the plug on US support of terrorism around the world, or does MAGA somehow allow for the use of terror to obtain its objectives? The other part of the test is whether Trump will actually be able to control his appointees. For example, Little Marco Rubio, who is “engaging” with the Blinken DoS during the transition period. Or Michael Waltz as NSA. How independent of the Deep State will John Ratcliffe be? And so forth. Reversing these deeply entrenched policies will not be easy, especially with so many of these appointees to national security positions having well known Neocon proclities from their past lives and careers. Trump is four years older with a lot on his plate. Will he be up to dealing with this supremely important challenge? Did he yield to the Deep State already with some of these appointments? America’s international reputation is riding on this, and that may affect Trump’s ability to actually get deals done—who will trust him if he shows himself unable to control the Deep State?