Hi Chris,

Thanks for your comment.

You are absolutely right when you mention geopolitics. I didn’t delve into them because that wasn’t the focus of this article – the past is done and dusted. This is about the future. But given that you have brought it up, I’ll say this:

The train of thought that led to this being written starts with American foreign policy and geopolitics in mind. I do believe that it should be common knowledge by know that American geopolitical strategy, with reference to the Middle East, since the War on Terror started has been nothing but a disaster. It’s going to take some ground-breaking and previously unrevealed evidence to suggest that it has done more good than harm. The nations that were subject to American violence are now a shadow of their former selves.

Obama did not save the world from horrific violence – he was the inflictor of horrific violence. No dictator toppled, no regime changed, no chemical weapon arsenal could have done the damage put together than Obama did in one go. He himself described the aftermath in Libya as a “shit show.” The American administration had countless wars of their own (which absolutely failed) to analyse whilst forming their strategy. All his interventions did was achieve the opposite of what America wanted. The Middle East is now awash with terrorism, human rights abuses and failed states.

I do not say this to cause offence, but you have spoken like someone who is unaware of the horror these people have had to go through. I do highly recommend you research what the reality on the ground has been like, and then you may realise it wouldn’t be stretching the truth to say that this can amount to a genocide of Muslims.

As far as the war in Syria goes, American intervention started after Assad had “allegedly” used chemical weapons against his own people. I am by no means an Assad supporter, but there is no concrete evidence to suggest he actually did so. The American government found a narrative and ran with it just like they did in Iraq. And the American media seems to have bought it.

When it comes to “dropping bombs randomly” – I did extensive academic research on the U.S. drone war in Pakistan when I was writing my International Relations thesis. Chris, the CIA had an operation based in Nevada where they’d use joysticks (like those arcade games) to drop bombs on innocent people. They directly targeted civilian gatherings and residential zones. The CIA was described as an “organisation consumed with manhunting.” They had clearance to go after low-level suspects who they could not even identify. Many civilians died as a result. This is not “well-reasoned and carefully applied” strategy. The fact that you suggested this could be a possibility and would therefore deserve our respect only reinforces my belief that you are, and I do say this with respect, utterly unaware of the reality of American foreign policy and its consequences.

This, Chris, is what you call war crimes.

But that wasn’t what this article was about. It was with all the aforementioned information in mind that I chose bomb statistics. It was meant to get a point across because this discussion was geared more towards Joe Biden and the type of president he could prove to be.

And I think I’ll end it there. I would suggest that you conduct some thorough academic research on the topic. Had you done so in the past, you might not have commented with the assumption that Obama’s strategy was, let alone “well-reasoned and carefully applied”, even compliant with international law.

Best,

Sikander.