Muslim Press has conducted an interview with Brandon Turbeville, host of a weekly radio show Truth on the Tracks, to discuss U.S. policies in the Middle East.

Below is the full transcript of the interview:

Muslim Press: What's your take on the operation to liberate Mosul? Do you think it could be great victory for Iraqi government?

Brandon Turbeville: Of course it could be a great victory and I wish the Iraqi military well in the battle. Without a doubt, eliminating ISIS forces from Mosul will be a great victory for Iraq but, unfortunately, it seems the NATO powers, particularly the United States has hedged their bets a bit with this operation. Notice where the attacks are being launched from – the east, North, and South. The Western side of the battle for Mosul is completely open. Thus, when the Iraqi military and Peshmerga forces enter Mosul, most of the ISIS fighters need only to rush west and escape defeat. But, more importantly, they rush west toward Syria. This appears to be the goal of the U.S. cooperation in the operation, i.e. pushing ISIS terrorists west in to Syria in a process that I have been calling “death squad herding” for some time, which is the process of using military force, airstrikes, etc. to drive terrorists to or away from sensitive or strategic targets.

Remember also that the Russian military has a major presence over Syria now, particularly the Western coastal areas as well as eastern Syria. After the U.S. bombing of the Syrian military in Deir el Zour, which may actually have been connected to this Mosul strategy, the Russians have issued a warning that future airstrikes against the Syrian military will not be targeted and may, in fact, be shot out of the sky. So the options available for crippling the SAA in eastern Syria are rapidly disappearing for the U.S. if terrorists begin rushing west across the border, however, not only is there plausible deniability for the U.S., but the U.S. can “sit back” and watch their terror hordes wreak even more havoc on Syria.

MP: You have given 36 reasons on why Hillary Clinton should never be president. How many of these reasons are related to the Middle East and her role in the wars imposed on this region?

Brandon Turbeville: In the book, seven or so reasons were related to the Middle East and North Africa. But, keep in mind, I stopped at 36 reasons because the book would have been unwieldy if I had continued and, believe me, there was plenty more material. You can scarcely turn over a political rock and not find a Clinton scandal. Indeed, the reasons are growing daily. I’m not a Trump supporter by the way, but Hillary Clinton is, by far, the biggest danger to the United States and the rest of the world we have ever seen, at least in terms of a U.S. presidential candidate. Unfortunately, our Presidential elections are a sham. Her nomination was openly stolen from Bernie Sanders and her ascendancy to the office of President is virtually assured, whether the American people vote for her or not.

MP: If Clinton becomes president, what could that mean for the Middle Eastern countries?

Brandon Turbeville: It means war. Plain and simple. Hillary Clinton has a 100% pro-war record. Go look it up. I’d like to see someone prove me wrong. From her very first days as First Lady to her tenure as Secretary of State, Clinton has supported every single war that has come across her path. She has given lip service and senate votes in favor of war and has even prosecuted wars herself as Secretary of State. This says nothing of the numerous coups and destabilizations she has supported and been involved in. She has even supported wars that have yet to take place such as war with Iran and even Russia!

If Clinton becomes president, I’m afraid Syria will pay the ultimate price. Clinton is a warmonger of epic proportions only she hides her bloodthirsty war lust under the cover of humanitarian bombing and “Responsibility to Protect.” Under Clinton, Syria will see even more U.S. military involvement. Lebanon, too, should expect chaos. Iran should be incredibly worried. In fact, with her Russophobia and propaganda regarding Putin at a level not seen since the height of the Cold War and McCarthyism of the 50s, we very well may see some type of confrontation with Russia.

And don’t expect the American Left to come running in to protest the war. The Left in America has proven they are not anti-war, they are just anti-Republican. So there will be no real anti-war movement to speak of. This is all just the tip of the iceberg with Clinton but it alone is reason enough for Americans and the rest of the world to insist that she never becomes President of the United States.

MP: What do you think about America's human rights concerns for Syrians and Yemenis. Do you see a double standard in its attitude towards Syrian government and the Saudis?

Brandon Turbeville: What human rights concerns? The U.S. has demonstrated repeatedly that human rights are nothing more than a political tool used to justify foreign military adventures. The U.S. is not truly interested in human rights abroad, and for that matter, with the largest prison population in the world, it is not that concerned with human rights at home either.

To your question, though, yes, there is a clear double standard between the public stances put forward by the U.S. on Syria and Yemen. In Syria, every single civilian death is attributed to Bashar al-Assad and now Russia. According to the U.S., terrorist bullets do not kill civilians in Syria but Syrian government bullets and “barrel bombs” only kill civilians. Human rights and the humanitarian situation are constantly used to justify more American military action in Syria. In Yemen, however, no human rights violation is worthy of discussion in the U.S. media and no barbarous act on the part of the Saudis is too barbaric to be condemned. Why? Because the Saudis are U.S. allies and moneybags for proxy terror.

But we can’t be naïve. The United States is not worried about human rights, it is only interested in using humanitarian catastrophes and civilian deaths to its advantage. And we also have to remember that, in both Syria and Yemen, it is the U.S. who is responsible for those civilian deaths and humanitarian catastrophes to begin with.

MP: What role has the US played in Yemeni conflict?

Brandon Turbeville: The U.S. has, at least up to this point, been content to “lead from behind.” From the very beginning, however, while the Saudis were launching their slapstick bombing campaign against the Yemeni people, the United States was providing KSA with intelligence, logistical support, refueling, etc. So, even if it was not directly involved in bombing missions, it was acting in a support role. While the Houthis might be a bigger threat to the Saudis, it is important to remember that, to the United States as well as the Saudis, they represent an expansion of Iranian influence. It is well known that Iran is next on the chopping block for the U.S./NATO empire so don’t think for a minute that the United States was not more than a passive actor in this operation. Now, of course, with the Saudis flopping and flailing all across Yemen and as the Houthis actually gain territory inside Saudi Arabia, the United States is becoming more involved with the direct war effort. Unfortunately, this appears to be a trend that will continue over the next few months. 

 

Brandon Turbeville is an author and writer based out of Florence, South Carolina. He has written over 550 articles on topics dealing with the Middle East, Geopolitics, Syria, Economics, and Civil Liberties. He hosts a weekly radio show, Truth on the Tracks, which can be heard on UCY.TV. Turbeville has been interviewed by a number of media outlets in the alternative media as well as the independent and mainstream. He has been interviewed by PRESSTV, al-Etejah, FOX, ITAR-TASS, LPR, and Sputnik International.