An essay on "proxy" forces.

It is inconceivable that the British government believes harboring thousands of terrorists within its borders will not result in terrorism.

It harbors these terrorists in order to cultivate and deploy them in future proxy wars and in the meantime prevents them from being liquidated abroad when targets of Western aggression get the upper hand.^[1]

The use of proxies or indigenous troops is as old as the Khyber Pass but the hypocrisy about their use of late can be cut with a knife. If Mr. Cartalucci is correct then we see that Britain is using the vilest of the vile for its foreign policy games. As does the U.S. in Syria and did in Libya. The attack on the consulate in Benghazi resulting in the death of Ambassador Stevens and other brave (!!) Americans illustrated that proxies are a dangerous tool as likely to buck in your hands as an improperly used power tool. Hillary and Obongo had no appreciation of this at all and scattered like cockroaches in the kitchen when the chickens came home to Capistrano.

The U.S. used ethnic (Montagnards, Nung) and religious minorities (Hoa Hao, Cao Dai) in Vietnam masterfully. I never for a moment feared any kind of a betrayal from the good-humored and effective Hoa Hoa troops with whom I served. Their religion is quasi-Buddhist by which term I mean no disrespect and their hostility to the Viet Minh and the local Cong needed no affidavits of sincerity.

It isn't the cooperation with and support of various groups here and there in the world that are the problem per se. Rather, the national goals served by establishing such relations, the moral obligations created in the process, and the choice of "partners," as the U.S. loves to say, are what are important.

"American interests" is term that's downright rubbery these days and I can't see how sending arms to ISIS troops in Syria advances even the most limited sense of that term. (And it IS obvious those arms came from Jordan where we and the Saudis have a presence.) As is true of our primary role in Operation Inherent Resolve with its 500+K civilian casualties and immense destruction in Syria. Massive death and destruction and for what?

In Syria the goal of getting rid of Assad the Mad Dog Ophthalmologist is rotten from the git and allying ourselves with ISIS and al-Qaida there is a move that stains ANY goal we might have for involvement in that country. We've been disgraced by our "partners" in Syria and Cartalucci points out how the British have been bitten by their coddled proxies right in their own backyard. Things not looking good for their and our arrogant dabblings in the lives of various "enemies" here and there.

But, of course, there are those Iranians and their proxy forces in Iraq and Syria. We can't have that. That's just wrong.

Notes
^[1] "Reading Stabbings: Deliberate Product of UK Foreign Policy." By Tony Cartalucci, Land Destroyer Report, 7/12/20.