He says the people should be left to choose their own fate without foreign influence, this also includes foreign influence from other countries such Russia as well. Assad was a Russian puppet, Julani is a US/Israeli puppet: spot the difference.
What about other countries?
If you dare to say the truth, you will be attacked, this is evidently the case with this fellow too.
I cannot think of a time in history when countries did not try to influence one another — whether through open military operations or clandestine means. So, all he’s doing is drawing attention to a couple countries he doesn’t like (and one specifically) while pretending it doesn’t happen elsewhere. That’s not truth-telling. That’s cherry-picking. What should we expect from a Columbia Professor in this era?
There's a categorical difference in influencing one another and what the US/UK has been doing in the ME since 18th century.
No argument from me on *that* point.
I’m only questioning the professor’s bias and pointing to the many examples in history where countries “influence” others (by various means both peaceful and not). Note that I’m not saying that this makes it okay, just that it’s disingenuous to claim otherwise, or that the US/UK are somehow unique in this.
