More Foreign-Policy Blowback In Spain By Jacob G. Hornberger!!
(2017-08-21 at 14:08:40 )

More Foreign-Policy Blowback in Spain by Jacob G. Hornberger

Last week, 13 more people died in Spain as a consequence of United States foreign policy in the Middle East and Afghanistan. No, not by guns or suicide bombs, which is often the case in "blowback," but instead murder by vehicle. A van driven by a terrorist succeeded in killing 13 pedestrians and injuring about 100 others.

Here is an excerpt of from an article on the matter in the New York Times:

For more than a decade, Spain seemed immune to the steady eruptions of Islamic violence that rocked other European countries where radicalized young men, often from poor immigrant backgrounds, carried out devastating bomb, gun or vehicular attacks.. Now, the authorities are rushing to answer how a group that includes teenagers was able to carry out a well-planned and coordinated attack in a country that has parried danger for so long, despite being such a tempting and symbolic target for Islamists.

What is a reader to conclude on reading that type of thing?

It seems to me that the logical import of such a statement is that Spain is facing a threat from Islamic terrorism - that Islam is a dangerous religion, at least in how it is interpreted by religious extremists - that Muslim extremists are coming to get us to establish a worldwide caliphate - that it is necessary to educate Islamic youth about Western civilization - and that it is necessary for United States troops to be over there killing them before they come to kill us over here.

Of course, we heard this same tripe during the Cold War.

The communists were engaged in an international conspiracy that was based in Moscow and whose aim was to take over the United States and the rest of the world. There were millions of them everywhere, including countless Reds serving as secret Fifth Columnists here in the United States. If United States forces were not sent to fight and die in Korea, Laos, Vietnam, and elsewhere to kill commies, the dominoes would start falling and America would end up entirely Red.

As I was reading that New York Times article, I wondered: Are they even going to mention the possibility of "blowback," which was the term that Chalmers Johnson used to title his great pre-9-11-01 book: " Blowback: The Costs and Consequences of America Empire"? Suddenly, in the middle of the article, there it was:

QUOTE

But Spain does not loom as a primary focus for Islamist militants. Although a staunch NATO ally, the country has been a marginal player in the United States war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even as they aggressively intercepted terrorist cells, Spains leaders have prided themselves on their efforts to integrate Muslims into mainstream Spanish society.

END QUOTE

After mentioning and downplaying Spains role in the United States death machine in Iraq and Afghanistan, the article returned to business as usual:

QUOTE

Yet Spain cannot escape its symbolic attraction for Islamists that is rooted deep in its history. Between the eighth and 15th centuries a large part of the Iberian Peninsula was ruled by Muslim caliphs, and extremist websites often speak fancifully about a return to the era of Al-Andalus, as medieval Spain was known.

END QUOTE

The operative terms in the earlier quote are "NATO ally" and "marginal player."

NATO, which is controlled and run by the United States government, has played a leading role in the death and destruction that the United States government has wreaked in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Moreover, any "marginal player" in an enterprise is a player nonetheless. NATO members and "marginal players" in the United States governments killing of Muslims and others have to be prepared to suffer the blowback that comes with the death and destruction that the United States war machine is wreaking on others.

Thus, all the stuff about Muslim history, or the nature of the Muslim religion, or about the supposed penchant of Muslims for violence, or about the so-called quest of Muslims to establish a worldwide caliphate is totally irrelevant fluff.

The Islamic terrorism against the United States, NATO, France, England and other NATO members and "marginal players" in the United States death machine is nothing more than "blowback," i.e., the inevitable consequence of United States foreign policy in the Middle East and Afghanistan, which has involved killing Muslims and others for more than 25 continuous years.

How do we know this? Well, one reason is that during the entire Cold War, when the official bugaboo was communists, nobody ever even mentioned the so-called threat from Islam. In fact, when the U.S. government partnered with Islamic extremists in Afghanistan when it was the Soviet Union doing the occupying of Afghanistan, American interventionists were ecstatic and cheered the United States support of Islamic extremists, some of whom would go on to form al Qaeda.

The question naturally arises: Why can interventionists not bring themselves to acknowledge that anti-United States Islamic terrorism is the consequence of United States interventionism in the Middle East and Afghanistan?

Why can they not just say, "Spain has just experienced 13 more deaths and 100 injuries as a result of Spains participation in the United States governments ongoing interventionist killing spree in the Middle East and Afghanistan"?

Why do they feel the need to embellish that simple truth will all that irrelevant fluff regarding the Muslim religion and Islamic history?

My hunch is that it is because the United States national-security establishment, including NATO, is viewed as holy and sacrosanct by interventionists.

To state clearly and unequivocally that the Pentagon and the Central Intelligence Agency are the root cause of terrorist blowback is akin to heresy in the minds of interventionists.

Moreover, the last thing interventionists want is for people to begin questioning interventionism and the costs and consequences of interventionism. Better to keep people thinking that anti-United States terrorism came first and that United States interventionism is necessary to end terrorism.

Not surprisingly, the interventionists and the mainstream press hardly ever take note of Switzerland. No vehicular terrorist attacks there. That is because Switzerland is not a part of NATO and is not a "marginal player" in the United States death machines 25-year-long killing spree in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Since the United States death machine continues to operate in the Middle East and Afghanistan, the citizenry of all nations who participate in that death spree, either as a NATO partner or as a "marginal player," should just accept the inevitable - more blowback - and leave the irrelevant fluff out of it.

There is but one way to end the anti-United States terrorist blowback - by bringing all United States troops home.

Printed here with permission from Mr. Jacob G. Hornberger of The Future of Freedom Foundation!! Their Great Website!!