This isn’t a joke. This isn’t hyperbole. This isn’t intelligent framing and never a fringe conspiracy. This can be a verifiable actuality that many People have no idea, however must know, particularly as they cheer on US overseas coverage actions that morally undermine every little thing America stands for.
World Battle II and 9/11 are sometimes given as decisive and conclusive historic examples that justify US overseas coverage: We needed to struggle the Nazis and we needed to struggle the al-Qaeda terrorists. International coverage debates however, what most People don’t notice is that the present US overseas coverage (particularly over the past twenty years)—removed from preventing modern-day Nazis and terrorists—offers them cash, gear, and help. For the sake of readability, let it’s acknowledged very merely: American, your newly-inflated tax {dollars} go, partially, to help neo-Nazis in Ukraine and Islamic extremist, al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorists within the Center East.
Whereas the US regime, and plenty of People following swimsuit, usually makes an attempt to vogue each battle into the fill-in-the-blank paradigm of World Battle II—each battle is the following WWII, each dictator is “Hitler,” everybody questioning the conflict is “Neville Chamberlain,” an “isolationist,” in favor of “appeasement”—a lot of People unknowingly supported and proceed to help the US sending cash to help true neo-Nazis.
Whereas People additionally recall the trauma of 9/11—an occasion that can eternally outline historical past for the US and is comparable in its significance to Pearl Harbor—and whereas 9/11 has been the definitive second for US overseas coverage for the final a number of many years within the international Battle on Terror, many People unknowingly supported and proceed to help the US sending cash to help al-Qaeda-affiliated terrorist teams in Libya, Syria, and Yemen, and different locations.
These details completely undermine the underlying narratives of the US overseas coverage regime. If an interventionist overseas coverage is morally required due to WWII and 9/11, then why are we being pressured to help the very kinds of “monsters” we’re advised we’re preventing?
The Neo-Nazis in Ukraine: The Azov Battalion
Since virtually all overseas conflicts are solid within the mould of WWII, many People assume that the Russia-Ukraine conflict suits that easy “Mad Lib” template—Putin is Hitler, his forces are Nazis; anybody essential of this conflict, questioning the knowledge of this battle, or making an attempt to offer extra historic context are “isolationists” or “Neville Chamberlain.”
Setting apart the problems of NATO growth and a proxy conflict with a nuclear energy, People needs to be knowledgeable that the $61.4 billion despatched to Ukraine since Russia’s invasion in February 2022 and the $64.1 billion despatched because the preliminary invasion in 2014, has, partially, armed teams just like the Azov Battalion, even internet hosting founders of neo-Nazi Ukrainian events. The US authorities supported a coup in Ukraine in 2014. In doing so, the instability that adopted from the 2014 coup introduced these already-problematic neo-Nazi/fascist forces into the open. The Azov Battalion was already accused of human rights abuses, together with torture.
Although usually dismissed as “Russian propaganda” (e.g., “Putin’s Imaginary Nazis”) the Atlantic Council reported the next: “Ukraine’s Obtained a Actual Downside with Far-Proper Violence (And No, RT Didn’t Write This Headline)” (2018). The C14 neo-Nazi militia perpetrated assaults all through Ukraine, aided by state funds. Within the US in 2014, Senate Republicans launched a invoice to help arming Ukraine, regardless of these identified components.
Andriy Parubiy was the founding father of Social-Nationwide Get together (named after Hitler’s authentic Nationwide Socialist Get together, however later renamed Svoboda) of Ukraine in 1991. He additionally based the Patriot of Ukraine—one other neo-Nazi get together. Parubiy performed a serious position within the 2013 Maidan demonstrations that introduced down the federal government in 2014 (which was supported by Obama and John McCain). As for the Azov Battalion and different related teams, they had been initially a paramilitary group of right-wing Ukrainian nationalists below the Ukrainian Social Nationwide Get together, however later, the Azov Battalion was included into Ukraine’s Inside Ministry.
Within the US Congress, language had been put into HR 2685 by John Conyers and Ted Yoho making an attempt to restrict “arms, coaching, and different help to the neo-Nazi Ukrainian militia, the Azov Battalion,” which handed by a unanimous vote within the Home. Who might presumably object? Nevertheless, “Beneath stress from the Pentagon, Congress has stripped the spending invoice of an modification that prevented funds from falling into the palms of Ukrainian neo-fascist teams.” Sure, you learn that accurately—Congress eliminated a provision that tried to forestall giving arms and help to identified neo-Nazi teams in Ukraine. James Carden reported,
What is evident is that by stripping out the anti-neo-Nazi provision, Congress and the administration have paved the way in which for US funding to finish up within the palms of probably the most noxious components circulating inside Ukraine as we speak.
Nor did this solely occur as soon as. Home-passed spending payments had such language banning authorities spending to those teams, however every time the language was eliminated earlier than last passage. Moreover, the State Division introduced in June 2024 that the US has lifted a weapons ban on a sure Ukrainian navy unit—the Azov Brigade. In an interview entitled, “America’s Collusion With Neo-Nazis” (2018), professor emeritus of Russian research at each NYU and Princeton mentioned, “Among the many omissions, few realities are extra necessary than the position performed by neofascist forces in US-backed, Kiev-governed Ukraine since 2014.”
Whereas in America, phrases like “Hitler,” “Nazi,” “fascist,” and “neo-Nazi” had been pushed into meaninglessness via overuse and absurd software. It’s supremely ironic that those that use WWII, Hitler, Nazis, and fascism as justifications for each overseas intervention—those that usually advocated to “punch a Nazi,” known as themselves “antifascists,” known as Trump “Hitler,” claimed Trump held a Nazi rally, and so on.—additionally dutifully, unquestioningly displayed their Ukraine flag on social media, and unknowingly threw their help behind actual neo-Nazis in Ukraine in a proxy conflict towards Russia. Whereas pondering they had been supporting preventing the “Nazis” of our time, the American folks had been traitorously tricked into funding neo-Nazis in a harmful battle towards a nuclear energy. American, for the final decade, your tax {dollars} have been going, partially, to Nazi teams.
The Terrorists within the Center East
In addition to Pearl Harbor and WWII, no single occasion has been used as justification for ongoing overseas intervention like 9/11. After al-Qaeda struck the US on 9/11, the grieving nation unified behind one easy sentiment: “By no means Overlook.”
In style sentiment claimed the Battle on Terror was mandatory and efficient to forestall extra 9/11’s and was the explanation for interventionist overseas coverage. We’re “preventing them over there, so we don’t should struggle them over right here.” Whether or not that assertion is completely appropriate, whether it is really believed, then certainly years of arming al-Qaeda-like terrorists (“arming them over there”) just isn’t solely counterproductive, however a betrayal.
George W. Bush and the neoconservative conflict hawks in his administration seized on the general public’s ache and confusion within the wake of 9/11 to launch a number of unrelated wars within the Center East. When Washington despatched the troops into Iraq in 2003 and overthrew Saddam Hussein, it destroyed the steadiness of energy and handed Iran a big quantity of affect over the area.
The regime in Iran is an outdated enemy of Washington and the first adversary of Israel, the American authorities’s closest ally. A extra highly effective Iran was deemed unacceptable by the very individuals who had simply introduced it about. The American navy was slowed down in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Iran possessed a way more superior navy than both of these international locations, so a full-scale invasion of Iran was off the desk.
As a substitute, as Seymour Hersh specified by an in depth New Yorker article on the time, the Bush administration determined to make use of the US authorities’s covert components to bankroll armed revolutions towards a few of Iran’s most necessary regional allies, even when much like al-Qaeda in ideology and practices and generally aligned with them (e.g., Libya, Yemen, Syria, and so on.). The favored euphemism for that interval was “average rebels.”
In gentle of the January 1, 2025 terror assault in New Orleans, this turns into much more related. The everyday discourse will possible counsel that, due to this assault and others, what is required is extra overseas intervention by the US within the Arabian Peninsula and/or extra restriction of People for our personal “safety.” As a substitute, what is critical is to understand that our authorities has been—and continues—funding and arming our enemies in overseas international locations. This contains bombings, wars, and sanctions and we expertise these surprising penalties later. At naked minimal, we ask that our authorities cease funding and arming our enemies.
For instance, whereas data continues to be popping out in regards to the New Orleans assault by Texas-born Shamsud-Din Jabbar on New 12 months’s Day, it has been reported that there was an ISIS flag in his car. Whereas it’s tough to make certain of the precise motive but, the coverage of the US authorities has been an elevated bombing marketing campaign towards ISIS and simultaneous help for the overthrow of the Assad regime in Syria by Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), which is an offshoot of al-Qaeda and has a really related ideology to ISIS.
After the US-supported overthrow of the regime in Syria—to the detriment of many in Syria and the area, particularly Christians—a technique of “terrorist rebranding” started to happen. Julani fought for al-Qaeda in Iraq and based HTS in 2017, which had been designated (accurately) as a terrorist group by the US authorities. Kyle Anzalone writes,
HTS was given the phobia designation shortly after Julani based the group in 2017. The group grew out of the al-Nusra Entrance, al-Qaeda’s Syria affiliate. On the time, Washington and London acknowledged Julani’s reorganization of his militant group as an effort to obscure its al-Qaeda origins.
Following the US-assisted overthrow of the Assad regime (which has taken place over years), there was dialogue about whether or not to contemplate HTS a “terrorist” group. Whereas we needs to be shocked, we shouldn’t be shocked, the US regime has covertly been working with such characters since at the very least the Carter administration, when the CIA, Osama bin Laden, and the mujahideen teamed up towards the Soviets in Afghanistan. Much like the problems of sending American weapons and cash to the Azov Battalion, Tulsi Gabbard put ahead a “Cease Arming Terrorists Act” (March 6, 2017).
How can it’s the case that—due to WWII and due to 9/11—our present overseas coverage in some way justifies sending American help and luxury to “monsters,” neo-Nazis and terrorists? These are the very components we’re advised we should oppose by way of interventionist overseas coverage. These actions should not solely harmful and counterproductive, however breathtaking acts of betrayal.
