Posted originally on the conservative tree house on February 3, 2022 | Sundance | 133 Comments

According to the White House, 50 special forces operators attacked the leadership compound of Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi, the ISIS replacement head for Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi who was killed in 2019.  According to the White House occupant, after a lengthy engagement with U.S. forces, al-Qurayshi killed himself the same way al-Baghdadi did, by exploding a bomb.  There were no U.S. casualties.

(Via ABC) First responders reported that 13 people had been killed, including six children and four women. White House press secretary Jen Psaki said U.S. officials believe al-Qurayshi’s explosive killed himself, his wife, and three children. She added that U.S. officials were conducting an assessment to determine whether American action resulted in any civilian deaths. (more)

The White House background briefing on the strike IS HERE.  The remarks by Joe Biden ARE HERE.

Sending 50 special operators for one building engagement is a little heavy; however, obviously the White House was petrified that something would go wrong, and the last thing Ron Klain wants would be another boondoggle to add to the pile of disasters this administration has created.

That said, rather than debate the mission, I would draw attention to the location and bigger picture.  Northern Syria is part of the Muslim Brotherhood territory under the influence of Turkish President Recep Erdogan.  ISIS, al-Qaeda, al-Nusra, and all extremist Islamic factions therein are all just various shades of authentic Islam as promoted by The Muslim Brotherhood.

Turkey is a member of NATO.  Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi and all of the various offshoots of ISIS could not operate in Northern Syria without the assistance of Turkey.  But we are not allowed to talk about that.  Notice how none of the media ask the White House or Pentagon if we discussed the attack with Turkey in advance?

Background – Circa 2018

The announcement of The United States drawing down troop deployment from Northern Syria, with the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia sending in replacements to bolster the region, highlights a much larger backstory.

President Obama’s February ’09 Cairo speech began a sequence of events that led to what was called the “Arab Spring” – factually an extremist uprising.  Bolstered by the resulting chaos, the Muslim Brotherhood rose to power in Egypt behind Mohammed Morsi.

However, a majority of the Egyptian people rejected President Morsi’s Sharia governance, and asked a well respected General Fattah al-Sisi to step in.

Accepting the request of a desperate people, Sisi removed Morsi, disbanded the Muslim Brotherhood and went on to win a landslide election in 2014.

The leadership of the Brotherhood fled to Qatar.

President Obama and his policy team were not happy with this outcome.  Obama supported Morsi, not al-Sisi.  Another person who was not happy was Turkish President Recep Erdogan, who also supported Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood.

Undeterred, and understanding the need for urgency, Egyptian President al-Sisi then began a long process of confronting extremism.  Sisi destroyed the Hamas terror tunnels on the border between Egypt and Israel; and, despite the anxiety expressed by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, Sisi brokered an interim peace agreement between the Palestinian Authority and Israelis.

Destroying the Hamas tunnels removed the physical terror influence of Iran.  President al-Sisi then returned his focus back to Qatar and their support for the exiled leadership of the Brotherhood.

President al-Sisi formed a coalition against Qatar. This coalition included the UAE and Saudi Arabia who withdrew their ambassadors and isolated Qatar in the region.  This was the beginning of what we now call, more broadly, the Arab coalition.  The coalition initiated sanctions against Qatar until they stopped financing and harboring terror.  Remember, this is late in 2014 and a lot is happening really fast.

Against growing pressure from Arab states, including the Gulf Cooperation Council, Qatar agreed to expel seven leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Again, reflecting his alignment with the Brotherhood, and with much more grand ambitions of a new Ottoman empire as his unspoken motive, Recep Erdogan provided the terror leaders a home in Turkey.

It is important to note timing (’13, ’14, ’15,) and the political alignments:

• President Obama, Turkey (Erdogan), Qatar, the Palestinian Authority, and Iran, were aligned with favorable outlook toward the Muslim Brotherhood.
• Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, UAE and the Gulf Arab states were not favorable toward the Muslim Brotherhood.

In the background of this ideological conflict, Syria was in a state of civil war as a result of U.S. Obama policy carried out by Secretary Clinton/Leon Panetta and Secretary Kerry/John Brennan. Obama was aligned with Turkey, again Erdogan, who wants greater influence and has a vision of his new Ottoman empire.

As gatekeeper between Europe and the Middle East, Erdogan knows the value of his geography and the influence it provides him.

Erdogan also wants to absorb Northern Syria and is willing to enlist his Muslim Brotherhood allies toward his goals.  However, Egypt, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the UAE (team anti-Brotherhood) are against the expansion of Turkish influence.

Despite President Obama’s ongoing opposition, Egyptian President al-Sisi faced down Turkey over a U.N. Security Council seat and quietly defeated them.  [In a secret ballot, Erdogan lost.]  At the same time this was happening, expansive energy reserves via natural gas, were discovered to be much larger than initially thought off the coast of Israel.

♦Fast forward to the 2016 presidential election and outcome of a Donald Trump victory.  With President Trump, the power dynamic shifts.

Hillary Clinton, recognizing the value of the financial benefit from Qatar, would have supported the Muslim Brotherhood; Donald Trump did not.

The Anti-Brotherhood, anti-extremism team now have an ally.  The key voices are Egyptian President Fattah al-Sisi, Saudi Arabia King Salman, and Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman.

President Trump supported the disposition and view of the Arab coalition (Egypt, Jordan, UAE, Saudi Arabia, GCC and ultimately Israel); President Trump was not supportive of the Pro-Brotherhood more extremist team (Turkey, Qatar, Palestinian Authority), and that becomes brutally obvious during the historic U.S-Gulf Arab Summit, when President Trump tells the audience to “drive out” the extremist voices.

Back to Syria.  The Brotherhood is the political branch of multiple extremist groups. The bottom line is the Brotherhood supports radical Sunni extremism regardless of faction or fighting force.  President Recep Erdogan of Turkey also favors the Brotherhood; and unfortunately, he leverages his position inside NATO with that favorability in mind.

Recep Erdogan wanted Northern Syria, and he wanted to eliminate any resistance toward his gaining Northern Syria – specifically, the Kurdish resistance.

Concerns over this key point was what drove a wedge between government policy advisers. Differences of opinion over this key point are what was driving opposition to Trump’s withdrawal position from Syria.

The Arab coalition, and Israel, oppose Erdogan.  President Trump was undergoing a transition period for quite some time.  Trump’s plan was essentially to draw down U.S. troops in Syria, and replace them with regional Arab coalition allies to bolster the Kurds.  Many U.S. voices were concerned that Turkey (Erdogan) would attack this coalition and the Kurds, without the presence of U.S. troops.

Ultimately, this is where President Trump’s unique strategy became important.

President Trump was aware of the duplicitous and untrustworthy nature of President Erdogan; simultaneously Erdogan is in the NATO alliance.  President Trump would obviously not allow fear of a NATO ally to drive U.S. policy, and he was right.

If you think about it, either: (A) Turkey needs to comply with group regional security and stability measures; or (B) Turkey needs to be kicked out of NATO, confronted and crushed.

Which option do you think President Trump was working on?

December 23, 2018:

December 24, 2018:

Knowing the economic approach that President Trump brought to solving these challenges, it was obvious Trump was positioning for option “A”, but in the background hoping for the opportunity to use option “B”, which would really get to the root of the problem.

This geopolitical dynamic also provided a clearer understanding of what motives Erdogan held when he was so aggressively antagonizing over the Kashoggi matter and trying to create a fracture in the relationship between President Trump and Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman (MbS).

[…]  We know that Jamal Khashoggi was never a journalist—at least, not in the usual sense of the word; he was a highly-partisan operative who worked with a handler to publish propaganda at the behest of the Emirate of Qatar. He was, in other words, an agent of influence. (read more)

Yes, that’s correct.  Even the New York Times admitted Jamal Khashoggi was actually receiving his articles from the Qatar government explicitly to push an agenda favorable to their pro-Muslim Brotherhood views.

Now think about this.  In the U.S. we know The Washington Post is essentially the print propaganda for the U.S. intelligence apparatus, and more specifically the CIA.  Khashoggi was working at the Washington Post to write stories, approved by Qatar, favorable to the Muslim Brotherhood.   The CIA Director was John Brennan – the former head of U.S. CIA Saudi office.

Notice how the pro-Brotherhood ideological gang is all connected around Khashoggi?  Turkey, Qatar, CIA (Obama, Brennan) etc.

Oh, and one last thing.  Remember that 2014/2015 massive natural gas reserve discovery off the coast of Israel?

Remember that?

Well, there was a 2018 development:

JERUSALEM (AP) — Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday said that Israel, Greece and Cyprus will sign an agreement early next year to build a pipeline to carry natural gas from the eastern Mediterranean to Europe, while the United States pledged its support for the ambitious project.

The $7 billion project, expected to take six or seven years to complete, promises to reshape the region as an energy provider and dent Russia’s dominance over the European energy market. It also could curtail Iranian ambitions to use Syria as a gateway to the eastern Mediterranean.

Speaking at a summit with the Greek and Cypriot leaders in southern Israel, Netanyahu said the three nations reaffirmed their commitment to the pipeline and discussed “important aspects” of the project. Italy is also a partner in the pipeline’s planning. Cyprus President Nicos Anastasiades said the project is waiting for a green light from the European Union to move forward.

“We’re going to sign formally, officially, this agreement in a few months,” he said.

In another boost for the project, U.S. Ambassador David Friedman hailed the pipeline as integral to the “stability and prosperity of the Middle East and Europe,” and urged all countries in the region to ensure its success.

Washington is eyeing the east Mediterranean with renewed interest. In a meeting with the Greek foreign minister earlier this month, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called the region “an important strategic frontier” for Washington, which is working to strengthen its relations with “democratic allies there like Greece and Cyprus and Israel.”  (read more)

Do you know who was the original energy policy consultant; the person who constructed the obscure -at the time- policy paper plan to avoid an EU pipeline through Turkey; and who put all of these regional heads together that ultimately ended with this announced deal?

That would be the little known, generally invisible young energy adviser, who would eventually become the central figure in the “spygate” targeting, George Papadopoulos.

Yes, for those following the granules as they expose… that energy extraction strategy alone would have put Papadopoulos in opposition to the interests of President Obama, candidate Clinton, Turkey, Qatar and ultimately Iran and Russia.

Huh… Funny that.

It’s almost as if…..  I digress.

FAST FORWARD TO 2019

December 16, 2019, the White House released a letter sent by President Trump to President Erdogan, of Turkey, dated October 9th.

The letter was sent two days after President Trump made the decision to pull 28 members of the U.S. military out of harm’s way; two days before President Trump outlined the sanctions against Turkey; and five days before President Trump initiated those sanctions through Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin.

The warning was clear.  President Trump was clear-eyed about the motives and intentions of the Turkish president, and Erdogan’s ideological alignment with political Islam via The Muslim Brotherhood.

One of the reasons this strategy is better than any military action, is simply because Turkey is a unique NATO ally, and the NATO alliance within Europe is insufferably incapable and unwilling to take action to defend their interests.

European NATO members wanted the benefits of a perpetual U.S. military presence. That EU outlook was simply beyond the limits of what President Trump was willing to do.

President Trump wanted to bring our troops home.

President Trump made it clear that any action by Turkey into Syria was unilateral.  There will be no assistance by the U.S. on any aspect – including if Turkey was counter-attacked by Russia/Syria or organized Kurdish forces.

Essentially, Trump left Erdogan naked to a myriad of his enemies.

The U.S. part of the NATO shield is removed. The Europeans will not evoke the NATO defense treaty without the U.S. Heck, the EU is essentially spineless without the power of the U.S. military.  Additionally, President Trump is calling out the duplicity of the entire situation by calling all of their bluffs. President Trump is calling out: NATO, weak EU ‘allies’ and Turkey.

In essence, the Trump White House approach was a major Gordian knot being cut. It is unlikely President Erdogan expected to have this framework made so public.

With Europe refusing to stand up to defend their own interests, President Trump removed U.S. forces from the untenable position of guarding all the big cat cages, ad infinitum, to keep the zoo status intact.

Instead, President Trump supported the Arab coalition and the GCC that has been assembling a military coalition to protect itself from the Muslim Brotherhood.

That, along with the strategic need to keep global oil prices low to offset any influence by Iran and Russia, is why President Trump was willing to support Saudi Arabia with more troops – while simultaneously withdrawing from Syria where the U.S. was having to stand alone to protect the interests of Europeans who will not protect themselves.

In one regional area, the U.S. would support and defend Israel, Egypt and Jordan. In the Southern region the U.S. will support the Gulf Cooperation Council (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Oman, Yemen, Bahrain and Qatar).

Will political Islam likely have a resurgence in the region, and will Recep Erdogan rise as the head of the Ottoman Empire once again? The former is likely, the latter is unknown.

President Trump was correctly withdrawing U.S. troops from a position of adversarialism against a NATO member. Why should the U.S. protect the interests of allies who will not be standing up to protect themselves?

President Trump was correct.

President Trump used economic weapons against Turkey.  And, in keeping with the economic doctrine, Europe was also in the crosshairs.

President Trump would use economic weapons, a new U.S-EU trade deal, against the EU for creating this mess and refusing to defend themselves.

President Trump would only use military weapons to protect allies that were: (A) willing to protect themselves, and (B) willing to pay for the support of the U.S. military protection.

It really was a commonsense doctrine.  Help those who help themselves.

This was one of those weird “be careful what you wish for” scenarios for Turkish President Erdogan, because in his lust to recreate the Ottoman Empire ,he just might get removed. By isolating Erdogan on these issues, President Trump effectively left him naked to an alliance of his enemies

After President Trump talked to Kurdish General Mazloum Kobani Abdi, the commander of the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces, President Trump then discussed the options available to President Erdogan. As a result of that conversation, Erdogan requested the U.S. mediate negotiations.

Erdogan’s request and acceptance happened immediately after President Trump signed an executive order [See Here] triggering the sanction authority of Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin as leverage against Turkey.

That’s how President Donald Trump was able to finally remove U.S. troops from Syria and get us out of the quagmire created by Washington DC foreign policy.