Has the Day of the Islamist Arrived?
Sixteen months after the United States abandoned its loyal satrap of 30 years, President Hosni Mubarak, to champion democracy in Egypt, the returns are in.
Mohammed Mursi, candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood, is president of Egypt, while the military has dissolved the elected parliament that was dominated by the Brotherhood and curbed his powers.
The military and the mullahs will fight for the future of a country that is home to one in four Arabs. The soldiers who have dominated Egypt since the ouster of King Farouk in 1952 show no willingness to surrender what they have long controlled of the state and economy.
Yet in the long run, the Brotherhood — whose claim to guide the nation’s destiny is rooted in a faith 1,400 years old — is likely to prevail.
In Syria, the uprising against Bashar Assad appears headed for civil war, with atrocities on both sides. Some 10,000 are estimated to have died, a far bloodier affair than Egypt. And here, too, the day of the Brotherhood, massacred in the thousands by Bashar’s father in Hama, seems not far off.
Witnessing what is happening in these critical Arab countries and across the region, one is tempted to ask: What are the fruits of three decades of compulsive U.S. intervention in the Islamic world?
Ronald Reagan put Marines in Lebanon to support an embattled Beirut regime and saw 241 of them massacred in their barracks.
In 1986, he ordered airstrikes on Libya in retaliation for the bombing of a Berlin nightclub frequented by GIs. Reagan was paid back in his final days in office when Moammar Gadhafi’s killers blew up Pan Am 103, scattering the bodies of U.S. school kids over the Lockerbie landscape.
George H.W. Bush launched Desert Storm to rescue Kuwait from Saddam Hussein and restore the emir. After five weeks of air war and 100 hours of ground combat, Bush triumphed. He then imposed an embargo-blockade on Iraq and transferred thousands of U.S. troops onto Saudi soil that is home to Mecca and Medina.
Two of the causes of his attack on 9/11, said Osama bin Laden, were the U.S. strangulation of Iraq and the defiling of Islam’s sacred soil by infidel U.S. troops.
George W. Bush answered 9/11 by invading Afghanistan, driving out the Taliban and al-Qaeda, and staying on to build a more secular, democratic, and pluralistic nation. He then invaded Iraq to overthrow Saddam and convert that country into a model Arab democracy and strategic base camp for the United States in the Middle East.
What did those wars cost? What did they accomplish?
Some 6,500 U.S. dead, 40,000 wounded, $1 to $2 trillion sunk. Tens of thousands of Afghan and 100,000 Iraqi dead, with widows and orphans numbering over 500,000. Half the Christians of Iraq have fled their homes, and half of these have fled the country in which their ancestors had lived almost since the time of Christ.
Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq can be regarded as a loyal ally or defender of U.S. interests. Pakistan, a country of 170 million with atomic weapons and an ally through 40 years of Cold War, has been converted into an embittered and even hostile nation.
The U.S.-NATO intervention in Libya brought about the dethroning and death of Gadhafi. It also resulted in the expulsion of Tuareg tribesmen who had served Gadhafi as mercenaries. Back in Mali, they have joined rebels to effect the secession of a slice of Mali the size of France, which is now becoming a haven for al-Qaeda.
When one considers the investment America has made in the Middle East — the dead and wounded from our wars, the trillions lost in fighting and foreign aid, the endless time and attention of our leaders, scholars, journalists — what do we have to show for it?
From the Maghreb to the Middle East to Afghanistan, Christians are as isolated and imperiled as they have been in centuries.
The Israelis now have as neighbors Hezbollah to the north; an embittered, segregated Palestinian population of 2 million to the east; Hamas to the south; and to the west an Egypt of 80 million that has just passed into the custody of the Muslim Brotherhood.
And among those seeking to bring down Assad are not only Americans, Turks, Saudis, and Qatari, but al-Qaeda, the principal suspect in the terror bombings of Aleppo and Damascus, and the Muslim Brotherhood, which owes the Assad family a blood debt.
If Assad falls and Sunnis seize power and pursue their slogan — “Christians to Beirut and Alawites to the tomb” — a prediction: A return of the Golan Heights taken by Israel in the 1967 Six-Day War will top the agenda of the new Damascus regime.
And now John McCain is calling for airstrikes on Damascus and Bibi Netanyahu and his neocon allies have Tehran in their gun sights.
What exactly have we gained from 30 years of interventions in the Middle East — that China lost out on by staying out?
COPYRIGHT 2012 CREATORS.COM
Read more by Patrick J. Buchanan
- What Should Americans Die For? – May 16th, 2013
- Who Are the War Criminals in Syria? – May 6th, 2013
- Their War, Not Ours – April 29th, 2013
- Is War With North Korea Inevitable? – April 4th, 2013
- Goading Gullible America Into War – March 21st, 2013





Guest
June 25th, 2012 at 10:34 pm
Yes Mr. Buchanan it has, as matter of fact it did when (your) president Bill Clinton was preparing for the Balkan war with Madeline Albright making sure who, how and where to use “This mighty army” of US and NATO to start the bombing campaign in Yugoslavia. Yet as father as son, your story about Kuwait and later Iraq by Bush family being involved and Etc. is another matter in facts that US has been at war for last 20 years, not counting the time and date from Korean war, expending its militarism regimes all over the world, wanting to implement yet another Islamist, like in Saudi Arabia, regime in Syria.
Although (your) present president will deny any involvements but I am sure if you ask the same question from Bill Clinton he will deny it too that US and England were “not" involved in implementing a Sunny muslims government in Kosovo, wanting to divid the nation and making a smaller nations with some more or less religious connections. In the other hand if you are closer to Joe Bidden you can ask him the same question, if he had a plan to divide Iraq, and now Syria or for that matter dividing another nations as we speak.
Guest
June 25th, 2012 at 10:34 pm
Yes Mr. Buchanan it has, as matter of fact it did when (your) president Bill Clinton was preparing for the Balkan war with Madeline Albright making sure who, how and where to use “This mighty army” of US and NATO to start the bombing campaign in Yugoslavia. Yet as father as son, your story about Kuwait and later Iraq by Bush family being involved and Etc. is another matter in facts that US has been at war for last 20 years, not counting the time and date from Korean war, expending its militarism regimes all over the world, wanting to implement yet another Islamist, like in Saudi Arabia, regime in Syria.
Although (your) present president will deny any involvements but I am sure if you ask the same question from Bill Clinton he will deny it too that US and England were “not" involved in implementing a Sunny muslims government in Kosovo, wanting to divid the nation and making a smaller nations with some more or less religious connections. In the other hand if you are closer to Joe Bidden you can ask him the same question, if he had a plan to divide Iraq, and now Syria or for that matter dividing another nations as we speak.
Ben_C
June 26th, 2012 at 2:05 am
I'm guessing the Mali "military coup" was organized and conducted by people who were in senior positions in the Mali military at the time–probably people who had been in the Mali military for years, if not decades. It is interesting the Mali 'coup' seemed to occur abruptly and seamlessly; however, it hasn't occurred in Syria as of yet… It must be because Mali is a "democracy"…who knows…
The Syrian Military is ~60% Sunni from what I understand–the "officer" corp, on the other hand, is a different story; however, the actual composition of the "military" as a whole is ~60% Sunni if I understand correctly. My guess is that those who are on the "front lines' and actually doing most of the fighting and dying in the Syrian 'conflict' aren't the "officer corps"…just a guess though…(perhaps they are some of those 'reported' to have attempted to "defect" from the military, in the middle of armed conflict no less, and were "reported' to be shot in the back by their pro-Assad Syrian military peers…who knows…). So how/why is the Syrian 'situation' automatically assumed to be mainly a "sectarian" dispute in nature–a 'dispute' polarizing the entire nation along these sectarian lines? What it "may" become in the future is anyone's guess, but I'm not quite sure how to classify the "situation" at present… Some people, so I've heard from "opposition" spokesmen, say the "'feel' as though they are at war" recently. Who knows what that even means or what that's about….
Perhaps the 'Occupy Wall Street' movement was primarily composed of, and a spillover 'conflict' resulting from, all the poor 'black' people who lost their homes and were displaced after Hurricain Katrina… This explanation for OWS could/would be a spurious claim the 'lame-stream' half way around the world could make to people in their own Countries–who, in turn, could/would most likely believe it to be true–as it would "seem" to make sense… I wouldn't be 'shocked' if there were OWS protesters who also lost their homes during hurricain Katrina, so perhaps there could be a kernel of "truth" to this 'explanation'…but is it "true"?
It seems, to me at least, that it's typically not wise to get involved in things one does not understand–particularly when there is no clear benefit from doing so.
China definitely seems to have taken a "hands-off" approach to 'issues' all around the world that don't concern 'China". Has China benefited as a direct result? Who knows… It's impossible to say for sure, but I can't see how 'China' would be in a better place as a nation today if they flushed resources down the toilet and, in the end, accomplished nothing positive for 'China's' interests…
Bruce Richardson
June 26th, 2012 at 5:41 am
Brilliant analysis and articulation. Why is Pat Buchannan not running our foreign policy???
Dahoit
June 26th, 2012 at 5:51 am
Sorry,the evidence against Khaddafi about Lockerbie is still not there,and that strike against Libya by Reagan was prompted by Israeli false flags,and if one is worried about Christian populations,why do we back those monster Israelis who are the cause of all this turmoil,death and destruction,which of course their enablers,alCIAda,are fully culpable of also.
Pat needs to be a born again politician,release the scales from ones eyes,and see the truth,that it is US who are the bad guys,and have been post ww2.Add up the dead,man.
omop
June 26th, 2012 at 5:57 am
Interestingly quizzical title. Islam dates back several centuries and includes over a billion people scattered in parts of Europe, the Middle East and Asia. The long British policy of favoring certain Islamic countries, especially those "created" by them such as [Kuwait, Bahrein,Yemen] has to a large extent been copied by the US which has long favored Saudi Arabia and others.
Whats seems odd is the almost hysterical reaction to the election of a Muslim in a country of some 80 million Muslims as President when several Western democracies insisted on creating a special state for a people of just one religion [ Israel ].
Michael Hamrin
June 26th, 2012 at 7:44 am
In answer to your last question, Patrick, some factions in the U.S. have gained enormously from decades of intervention: that would be the politicians who use fear as the motive force in the electoral process and the providers of manpower and war materiale to keep these invasions provisioned. There is good money for some in keeping the war machine continually busy. Also, according to a neutral observer in the Lockerbie trial, the rule of law was not scrupulously followed. It is what Ramsey Clark had to say about Sadam Hussein's lynching. Ghaddafi was not in a position to fight the decision and it was impolitic to do so, but there is some doubt about whether he personally ordered the destruction of the aircraft. The problem with having been lied to for so long by so many is that it is now very difficult to trust any legal finding in past cases.
MvGuy
June 26th, 2012 at 8:08 am
Nice how Pat delivers his packages of knowledge and analysis to us without wandering very far off the farm. He accepts the official story for the events that were the catalyst for the very interventions pwhich he seeks to examine… without trying to draw back the curtain to see who/what was werking the levers that made such policy inevitable……
If policy is implemented which harms American interests time and time again………..as a result of events of murky provenance…… Analysis of these events at "face value" will not necessarily give us the information we will need to avoid morewaste of American lives and treasure………
[Do] "Guys like [Pat] "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." … "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."]
In the end, if political analysis consists of reviewing the show that the special interests and political insiders put on "framed" in their legends, luke a game of three card Monte, we the people will ALWAYS lost in the dark. What we need, is to learn what has happened behind the curtain…
In this Brave New World of our Government going to the dark side, of the big lie..of murder, bribery, torture… rape and absolute cover-up power,and official secrecy "laws"…… why accept anything they purport as fact to be such when there are so many better more logical less faith based answers…
Un accepting the official narrative as our frame….. we risk building the foundations of our policy and understanding on big lies and false assumptuions ………..
MvGuy
June 26th, 2012 at 8:08 am
Nice how Pat delivers his packages of knowledge and analysis to us without wandering very far off the farm. He accepts the official story for the events that were the catalyst for the very interventions which he seeks to examine… without trying to draw back the curtain to see who/what was werking the levers that made such policy inevitable……
If policy is implemented which harms American interests time and time again………..as a result of events of murky provenance…… Analysis of these events at "face value" will not necessarily give us the information we will need to avoid more waste of American lives and treasure………
[Do] "Guys like [Pat] "in what we call the reality-based community," which he defined as people who "believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality." … "That's not the way the world really works anymore," he continued. "We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do."]
In the end, if political analysis consists of reviewing the show that the special interests and political insiders put on "framed" in their legends, luke a game of three card Monte, we the people will ALWAYS be lost in the dark. What we need, is to learn what has happened behind the curtain…
In this Brave New World of our Government going to the dark side, of the big lie..of murder, bribery, torture… rape and absolute cover-up power,and official secrecy "laws"…… why accept anything they purport as fact to be such when there are so many better more logical less faith based answers…
Accepting the official narrative as our frame….. we risk building the foundations of our policy and understanding on big lies and false assumptions ………..
MvGuy
June 26th, 2012 at 8:14 am
"Two of the causes of his attack on 9/11, said Osama bin Laden, were the U.S. strangulation of Iraq and the defiling of Islam’s sacred soil by infidel U.S. troops."
"In 1986, he ordered airstrikes on Libya in retaliation for the bombing of a Berlin nightclub frequented by GIs. Reagan was paid back in his final days in office when Moammar Gadhafi’s killers blew up Pan Am 103, scattering the bodies of U.S. school kids over the Lockerbie landscape."
We must stop reviewing their shows and start to cross examine them……..
james
June 26th, 2012 at 12:38 pm
All this time I thought Patrick is an enlightened politician, but after this piece, I really do not know. He seems just like his evangelical christians running his country and party. Let me attempt to clear some of the bullshit he tried to pass:
- He used the term Mullah to describe the egyptian current winners, this is a term used in Iran. I think he was trying to use it as a derogatory term. If Shafiq wins will puke cannon be OK with it?
- He conveniently forgot to mention the Iraq Iran war where his country played a major role in making and helping Saddam. How revealing.
- He also downplayed the victims in Americas war against the Islamic world, a lot more than 100,000 Iraqis have died by the Americans.
- 500,000 Iraqis, mostly children died due to the Iraq sanctions before the invasion of Iraq, the "it was worth it" MADeline Albright note were also conveniently ignored.
- Many more items I do not have the time to mention.
So does Patrick Puke Cannon want the Muslim world to be grateful got his blood thirsty terrorist country?
Go sell your bull somewhere else Patrick, it does not fly here.
james
June 26th, 2012 at 12:45 pm
One more thing Patrick, what part of "Leave us the f*ck alone" you don't understand?
wars r u.s.
June 26th, 2012 at 12:59 pm
"100,000 Iraqi dead" I think you forgot a zero.
ANU News.net Has the Day of the Islamist Arrived?
June 26th, 2012 at 1:01 pm
[...] When one considers the investment America has made in the Middle East — the dead and wounded from our wars, the trillions lost in fighting and foreign aid, the endless time and attention of our leaders, scholars, journalists — what do we have to show for it? http://original.antiwar.com/buchanan/2012/06/25/has-the-day-of-the-islamist-arrived/ [...]
Anti_Govt_Rebel
June 26th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Israel is the primary reason for US involvement in the middle east, and the root source of all the headaches Pat lists. If Israel was not an issue, we probably would not need AntiWar.com
Pat's article seemed kind of long and disjointed, yet he mentioned Israel only by referring to its neighbors (confusing his compass points I believe). Whether his soft touch was for fear of being labeled anti-semite or because he really doesn't believe Israel and its "Amen corner" in the US (Pat's phrase), is the cause of the problems, I don't know.
Pat is a master at seeming to make excellent observations, but always leaving you wondering what he really believes. Is he the sort of person that has you rooting him on as a good writer, but then who does the opposite of what you would expect if he actually came into power?
Anti_Govt_Rebel
June 26th, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Israel is the primary reason for US involvement in the middle east, and the root source of all the headaches Pat lists. If Israel was not an issue, we probably would not need AntiWar.com
Pat's article seemed kind of long and disjointed, yet he mentioned Israel only by referring to its neighbors (confusing his compass points I believe). Whether his soft touch was for fear of being labeled anti-semite or because he really doesn't believe Israel and its "Amen corner" in the US (Pat's phrase), is the cause of the problems, I don't know.
Pat is a master at seeming to make excellent observations, but always leaving you wondering what he really believes. Is he the sort of person that has you rooting him on as a good writer, but then who does the opposite of what you would expect if he actually came into power?
I like him, but I don't trust him.
MvGuy
June 26th, 2012 at 7:48 pm
Yaa guys………. PLEASE do NOT attack Pat……..WTF..!!! Please do not forget how he defended John Demjanjuk in his darkest hour. I truly believe that Pat is a genuine patriot and he viscerally loves America and the American people… Of Course….. for any patriot and person who loves America…. It is a really bitter pill to swallow…. to even consider, much conclude that the big event that changed EVERYTHING…… neutered the constitution…. and the bill of rights… was actually implemented by OUR elected officials….. God bless him, but not his blindness to our American corruption and evil reflexes…