Home | About | Donate

Why the US and Iran Aren’t cooperating Against ISIS


Why the US and Iran Aren’t cooperating Against ISIS

Gareth Porter

By the logic of geopolitics, the United States and Iran ought to be cooperating to contain and weaken the Islamic State (IS). Both countries have declared that the group is a very serious threat to their own security and to the security of the entire Middle East.


Let's be real here. The ME is in controlled chaos as laid out in Brzezinski's 1997 "The Grand Chessboard". There is no call for faux shock at the current developments.


Mainstream conservatives tell me that the slaughter of the native people here during the building of the usa was necessary for the greater good. All these IS people are trying to do is slaughter a bunch of people to build their own nation. I'm sure if you'd ask IS, they'd tell you that its for the greater good. So, should I as a native person be concerned? They're just trying to build a nation that they believe in.... So please explain to me why the colonial slaughter of native people in the usa was good but IS slaughter of the native people in the ME is bad. Oh please spell out your twisted logic to me. Further, please explain to me why I as a Native person should be concerned? I've already had my language, culture, traditions heritage stripped from me for the greater good. IS would do the same. All I got left is my dna. Why should I care if another foreign invader comes over here to change the way I live again?


"Specifically, Iran has been facing explicit threats of attack from both Israel and the United States since the mid to late-1990s. Now Daesh and al-Qaeda are on the offensive in Iraq and Syria, threatening the twin pillars of Iran’s security strategy."

Strange to begin the story in the 1990s... and leave out the coup in l953, or the way that the U,S. played Iraq against Iran the way bankers fund both sides of war to ensure ample profits to themselves.

Thank you for pointing this out, Mr. Porter. Too many people base their arguments on singular factors or causative agents and leave out the rest of the story. With war the #1 U.S. "product," it takes spreading Terror to move all that inventory to a constant array of interested buyers.

"What is seldom acknowledged, however, is that the interests of the Pentagon, the CIA and the NSA have become tightly intertwined with those of the anti-Iran coalition in the Middle East. A set of mutually reinforcing bureaucratic interests now binds US policy to an alliance structure and military and intelligence programmes in the Middle East that have come to replace objective analysis of regional realities in determining US policy."

And on this.... Indeed!

"Continuing long-term control of those bases is the coin of the realm for US military institutions that trumps possible competing policy concerns. Similarly, arms sales to Saudi Arabia, the other Gulf sheikhdoms and Israel are a primary interest of the Pentagon, its arms contractor partners and its congressional allies. And the determination of that same set of domestic interests to continue the bonanza or research-and-development spending on a missile defense system requires a continued identification of Iran as primary regional adversary and threat."

Mars rules = "the Obama administration is reduced to manoeuvring within the tight constraints imposed by the dominant political interests in cleaving to the status quo."


Realpolitik is alive and well. The West, led by the USA does not want any form of government in the Middle East capable of sustaining itself independently of the global financial system or controlling the trade in its own resources. ISIS or Daesh, whatever, is preferred since it is inherently a destabilizing bunch of fanatic thugs incapable of governance.
Meanwhile the regime gets to try out its boy-toys in preparation for the play-offs with Russia and China.


If we had any geo-strategic imagination in Washington, D. C., we would be pressuring Iran, Israel, and Saudi Arabia, as well as Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, and Turkey, to form an alliance for maintaining peace across the greater Middle East. But our ruling elite is so parochial, sleazy, and larded with selfish, narcissistic, money-grubbing morons, that geo-strategic imagination has no welcome anywhere within the Washington, D. C. (US Treasury Raiding), Wall Street (Finance-Banking Casino) Cabals.

So, the empire slowly rots. Perhaps this is a pattern Gaia sustains to allow the least spiritually competent gene pools self-destruct to make room for the more vigorous and spiritually virile ones.


When the US leadership develops a grudge against a country, it never lets go of it. The two prime examples are Cuba and Iran.

Cuba got shit listed because Fidel Castro was able to lead a revolution that threw out one of the US' most loyal and dependable dictator thugs, Fulgencio Bautista, then Castro declared he wasn't a Communist, evicted the Mafia, then threw in with the USSR and said he was.

Iran got permanently hated on for overthrowing the Shah, who I guess they all loved, then there was all that stuff with the ayatollahs and the hostages,

The MIC and it accomplices (banks, elected and appointed officials, think tanks and the like) seem to feel that these countries betrayed the US when they really shouldn't ought to have, so those nations like those need to thwarted in every way and can and should never be trusted,


Egads! Spiritually "virile"? And Gaia in the same breath.

I notice how all the science/military/engineering types now are working assiduously to assign all behaviors to the genes. As friggin if. World AS machine, but do toss in Gaia to give the appearance that you understand anything that is remotely spiritual in nature.


Using frames like trust and grudge imply personality as basis for behavior. Any thinking person recognizes that Cuba's not playing ball with U.S. CAPITALISTS is what the Great Game is about and a far more honest explanation for why the island was essentially quarantined. And as for Iran, it's a large nation and not as easy to kick into submission as the ones typically favored by the MIC and its accomplices.

This is a ridiculous statement on a par with "a hand came around the suspect's neck... and then he was dead":

"Iran got permanently hated on for overthrowing the Shah ..."

Who overthrow the shah, genius? The same hand that came around the black suspect's neck?


I certainly agree that the undercut here is in large part well understood - we should not trust our so called allies, "Gulf Sunni regimes." We should have been mature enough to have learned from this, but have not. While we have made negotiations possible, we continue to behave as if we have no choices on some issues we clearly do. One is prisoners. Why on earth we are not addressing that is beyond me. I am annoyed with certain people going there to "preach the gospel" because it is clearly not a safe place to try this. That said, I don't think any American prisoner should be ignored, not even for the short term. There may be a plan in the works to deal with this, but it certainly has not been made public so far as I can see. Journalism and free speech, overall concepts of freedom are hindered when we don't stand firm for our journalists to have the freedom to report the stories, no matter where they are located. And simply the question is, are we okay with them taking hostages, still to this day?