Jeg skrev at Flynn "mener det var villet politikk fra USA sin side at Islamsk Stat fikk blomstre".

Fordi jeg tolket Flynn slik. Fordi så og si hele internett tolket Flynn slik, fordi han uttalte seg så kryptisk om saken.

Nå ser jeg at han har snakket med CNN, og her kommer han med litt informasjon som gjør at en kan få et litt klarere bilde av hva han mener. Han sier at Obama-administrasjonen ignorerte faren for at noe slikt som IS kunne komme ( noe som altså medførte at det fikk blomstre ), men han oppgir en annen grunn for at Obama-folkene ignorerte faren :

"President Barack Obama's former top military intelligence official said Tuesday that the White House ignored reports prefacing the rise of ISIS in 2011 and 2012 because they did not fit its re-election "narrative."

"I think that they did not meet a narrative the White House needed. And I'll be very candid with you, they just didn't," retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, the former head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told CNN's Jake Tapper on "The Lead."

Flynn, who has been critical of both Obama's and former President George W. Bush's handling of the Iraq War and involvement in the Middle East, said that Obama was served poorly by a small circle of advisers who were worried about his re-election prospects at the time.

The story they needed to tell, he said, was that pulling troops from Iraq would not leave the region vulnerable to the rise of a radical Islamic group like ISIS."

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/12/01/po...sis/index.html

Så Flynn mener at Obama-administrasjonen lot det blomstre i hagen som ble til IS, men han gir en annen grunn enn det folk på internett har trodd det var snakk om.