Francesco Sisci responds to Angelo Codevilla and Norman Bailey

The question should be answered by insiders of the administration. But may I present some wild ideas?
-The Sunnis are now al-Qaeda and ISIS. Both are very dangerous. Are they more so than the Shiites?
-Turkey has become the great sponsor of ISIS, while it has become less reliable under Erdogan. Is there a need to hedge Ankara vs. Tehran by playing a balance of power game?
-The Washington pundits (say they’ve) managed to find the method in Iran’s madness. Since Freud, we know that madness is not absence of logic but the perversion of it — which with patience could be unraveled. Angelo and Norman have said something along these lines in previous posts.
-Iran is an important stepping stone for the Chinese New Silk Road. So as Beijing talks to Burmese Aung San Suu Kyi, so Washington talks to the Ayatollahs …
-(Is this part of) the old adage: Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer?

Categories: Chatham House Rules, Francesco Sisci

Tags: , , , , ,

  • Lion Heart

    Francesco Sisci, David Goldman and Norman Bailey are ALL Neocon……they almost agree on everything:
    1. Iran should be bombed
    2. Israel should not be questioned for its WMD
    4. Israel did good thing while killing children in Gaza…more should be killed—-their parents to be blamed
    5. Hiroshima was Japan’s fault…it deserve to be nuked
    6. Vietnam war was fault of communists

    Guess what they pretend to be writing “response”……….its called “agreeing”—-not responding

  • Daniel Berg

    Excellent writing,thanks Lion,

  • timrawlinstantrum

    Have to agree with Lion Heart.
    Francesco Sisci looks like some kind of strange, weird, nasty propagandist (Spengler). He is some kind of ‘agent’ for an ‘agenda’. He writes about China in order to mobilize hatred in the reader against China. He writes about Iran in order to promote hatred in the reader for Iran, by playing on potential prejudices. This is in order to build some kind of collective ‘normative framework’ in the readership that will support policies designed ‘against’ China and Iran. If politics were real Sisci would be suicided by the Chinese intelligence services. However politics are NOT real. The Chinese and Iranian elite are naturally in cahoots with their ‘enemies’ as the farce of ‘cold war’ is an excellent tool for social control everywhere. So Sisci, is at the end of the day neither nasty or dangerous. He is someone’s nice uncle serving the power status quo everywhere in order to maintain the ILLUSION of political history and continuity.
    Ladies and gentlemen the matrix has fallen apart. If the moon landings were a hoax, and 9/11 was THEATER. What then COULD be real? Sisci is an actor. One of thousands. Of millions? Of billions?