I think it is not unfair to say that since she supported the war in Iraq, and has also supported policies to undermine the Syrian regime, which is increasingly seen as very important to containing and eventually defeating ISIS, HRC helped to foster both the genesis and the growth of ISIS.
I'm puzzled by his emphasis on Russia becoming more dependent on Iran and Iraq. He seems to be overemphasizing the obvious point that Russia does have some interest in the region. Of course, but the Russians are hardly in a position, like the US, to simply impose its will on countries in the ME. It seems more fitting to say that Russia, through its military, is allowing Iran, Iraq, and Syria to achieve various goals and, in the process, they will become more reliant on Russia to maintain whatever gains they can achieve. I'm sure they hope to regain greater autonomy down the road, but this is hardly like the mid-20th century, when such aid would likely be tied in with tolerance of a local communist party, etc.
I think it is not unfair to say that since she supported the war in Iraq, and has also supported policies to undermine the Syrian regime, which is increasingly seen as very important to containing and eventually defeating ISIS, HRC helped to foster both the genesis and the growth of ISIS.
I'm puzzled by his emphasis on Russia becoming more dependent on Iran and Iraq. He seems to be overemphasizing the obvious point that Russia does have some interest in the region. Of course, but the Russians are hardly in a position, like the US, to simply impose its will on countries in the ME. It seems more fitting to say that Russia, through its military, is allowing Iran, Iraq, and Syria to achieve various goals and, in the process, they will become more reliant on Russia to maintain whatever gains they can achieve. I'm sure they hope to regain greater autonomy down the road, but this is hardly like the mid-20th century, when such aid would likely be tied in with tolerance of a local communist party, etc.