Keith Preston: US principal objective is to oust Assad, not eliminate ISIL

“If the government of President Assad falls in Syria, then ISIS will most likely come to dominate the entire nation,” Keith Preston told Press TV on Sunday.
“If the government of President Assad falls in Syria, then ISIS will most likely come to dominate the entire nation,” Keith Preston told Press TV on Sunday.

An American political analyst in Virginia says defeating Daesh (ISIL) is not a US policy priority and the United States has instead focused on overthrowing the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

“It has to be understood that the principle objective that the United States has in Syria and Iraq is not the defeat of ISIS [or ISIL], that at best is the secondary concern. The principal concern that the United States has is the overthrow of the government of President Assad in Syria,” said Keith Preston, the chief editor and director of AttacktheSystem.com.

“In fact, President Obama recently made a statement to that effect. President Obama was criticizing Russia, saying President Putin’s strategy has been primarily to defeat ISIS and to do so by protecting the government of President Assad which is the primary bulwark against ISIS,” he told Press TV on Sunday.

“If the government of President Assad falls in Syria, then ISIS will most likely come to dominate the entire nation. So the best way to defeat ISIS is to maintain the regime of President Assad, perhaps bolstered by the presence of foreign assistance which is the kind of assistance that the Russians are currently providing,” he added.

On Sunday, former CIA Director Jack Devine said that the United States has been very ineffective when it comes to combating terrorist groups like Daesh (ISIL) in the Middle East.

“You have a group in ISIS today that is frankly uncivilized. These folks could get stronger and stronger. We basically have to destroy ISIS over there,” Devine said, adding that “if there’s blame to be put, it’s on our failure to have done that by this point.”

Categories: Uncategorized

3 replies »

  1. Could someone please explain what America really wants here? I understand the Military Industrial Complex wants a never-ending supply of enemies to keep them in business, I understand that constant fear of terrorism allows more freedom-stealing bills like the Patriot Act to be passed etc. Are those the big 2. I guess Assad, Russia, and Syria won’t let Western bankers into their countries, is that it? Couldn’t they buy Assad off? Given America’s track record on killing leaders and ruining their countries, will Assad not allow himself to be bought off? What are the factors here guys?

  2. Well, I simply found the answer to my question by reading the headline of Keith’s article: US foments terrorist groups in Middle East to eliminate independent governments. Well there I go. American Hegemony. But, how can horrific, extremist groups be better to deal with or fight than secular dictators? They are zealots who have more to fight and die for (their religious ideology) than a dictator? Since, unfortunately, nobody comments on these great articles I guess I’ll probably stumble upon the answer in another ATS article.

  3. Well, my last question was just answered in the above link.
    ISIL is a better alternative to Assad because they don’t pose a threat of any significance to American imperialism. Wow, This website, quite simply and succinctly sums up all of these important, but somewhat obfuscated issues going on in the world. Obfuscated in the sense that to the average American citizen, it is hard to tell what in heck America is actually trying to achieve in the Middle East, or what purpose is PC serving and how did something so crazy evolve in the first place. If you asked the average American these questions I think most would be uncertain, and you would probably hear a large variety of guesses, many of which would be partly true (like my guesses above), but they wouldn’t hit the nail on the head like Preston and his colleagues do. I have faith that most Americans see through the pretexts of promoting democracy or human rights that are given by the establishment for our prolonged wars, but I think most people are somewhat bewildered as to what the real reasons and justifications are.
    Keith, I hope the net neutrality battles keep being won by the good guys, because if the elites ever got to start decreasing or increasing the loading speeds of websites, yours would be one of the first to go because you know too much. Keep up the good work.

Leave a Reply