Et puis des fois Joshua Landis a d’excellentes fulgurances comme celles-ci :
▻https://twitter.com/joshua_landis/status/695244317112213504
Magnet theory of jihadism is goofy. I cannot understand it.
Nidal
@nidal
“You know what I did? I left troops to take the oil. I took the oil. The only troops I have are taking the oil, they’re protecting the oil. I took over the oil.”
-
-
En fait, comme à chaque fois, je me demande s’il l’a dit avant. En cherchant « magnet » (qui est le terme consacré) sur son blog Syria Comment, la seule occurence pertinente que j’ai trouvée, c’est l’interview de novembre 2015 :
►http://www.joshualandis.com/blog/regime-change-without-state-collapse-is-impossible-in-syria-landis-intJL: This is true, but many top US generals, like the Syrian opposition, continue to insist that Assad is the magnet drawing ISIS into Syria and thus must be destroyed first. This argument makes little sense. After all, when did Al-Qaeda pour into Iraq? Only after Saddam was deposed and the Americans ruled the country. I don’t think any of the US generals who now claim that Assad must be destroyed in order to defeat ISIS would also argue that America had to be destroyed in Iraq in order to rid it of al-Qaida.
À moins qu’il ait dénoncé cette théorie en d’autres termes ailleurs (je n’en ai pas souvenir), je ne comprends pas pourquoi il a fallu attendre fin 2015 pour énoncer que la « théorie de l’aimant » est « idiote », alors que c’est l’un des axes principaux de la narrative occidentale.
-