Red Mosquito

Bush's stupidity will have good company when the Obama administration starts arming the Syrians, or sets up a no fly zone. Betwen this and Ghaddafi it's like we've decided to go after only those dictators that try to play nice with us. North Korea and Belaruss seem to have nothing to fear.

Harry Lime wrote:

malice wrote:

Could the Americans really have been such idiots?, the Russians ask. Of course we could. George Bush and his advisers actually believed that we were going to bring democracy to Iraq and the rest of the Middle East.

Was all this supposed to happen over night? What do you think all these young protesters in the region have been rallying against the past couple years?

It's going to be a shit storm in the coming years, but I have hope for progress.

I don't know what this is supposed to mean in relation to my comments - do you think that the Bush administration was making correct assumptions about bringing supposed 'democracy' to the Middle East? because I certainly do not.

I found it ridiculous then (during that administration) and i find it out and out retarded now - Syria being a prime example. sure, sure, they all tried to follow the leader with the shit that went down in other countries in that region, but if you'll notice, they aren't doing all that well either right about now - this isn't the kind of thing that can be accomplished by some college aged people with high aspirations, and it can't be accomplished by an unhappy general populous.
this isn't 1776, it isn't 1966, it isn't even 1996, or 2006 or whatever - this is the modern world, where tyrannical dictatorships have an entire arsenal of high end military weapons at their disposal, and are more than happy to use it on their own people.
You have hope for the future?
In what regard?
You have hope that in 50-60 years they'll be stable governments in the mid-east with nice happy democratic political leanings?
If so, you're stupid.
This shit has been unraveling for thousands of years and is likely to continue so for the next couple thousand- you think good old USA can go ramming it's way in there and make everything all better? We're not even the right fucking religion for them. I'd hazard to guess that even people who are muslim in the US aren't anywhere NEAR muslim enough for the likes of the mid-east.

And in fact, most of the problems that are present in the Mid-east right now are direct results of American foreign policy decisions over the last 50 or 60 years - we keep sticking our feet in the muck over there and then wondering why we're tracking dirt all over the floor...

to me, that's fucking funny. the fact that the Russians think it's all some grand plan? HI-LAR-I-OUS

simple schoolboy wrote:Bush's stupidity will have good company when the Obama administration starts arming the Syrians, or sets up a no fly zone. Betwen this and Ghaddafi it's like we've decided to go after only those dictators that try to play nice with us. North Korea and Belaruss seem to have nothing to fear.

#Most-Transparent-Government-Ever.

malice wrote:

Harry Lime wrote:

malice wrote:

Could the Americans really have been such idiots?, the Russians ask. Of course we could. George Bush and his advisers actually believed that we were going to bring democracy to Iraq and the rest of the Middle East.

Was all this supposed to happen over night? What do you think all these young protesters in the region have been rallying against the past couple years?

It's going to be a shit storm in the coming years, but I have hope for progress.

I don't know what this is supposed tomean in relation to my comments - do you think that the Bush administration was making correct assumptions about bringing supposed 'democracy' to the Middle East? because I certainly do not.

I found it ridiculous then (during that administration) and i find it out and out retarded now - Syria being a prime example. sure, sure, they all tried to follow the leader with the shit that went down in other countries in that region, but if you'll notice, they aren't doing all that well either right about now - this isn't the kind of thing that can be accomplished by some college aged people with high aspirations, and it can't be accomplished by an unhappy general populous.
this isn't 1776, it isn't 1966, it isn't even 1996, or 2006 or whatever - this is the modern world, where tyrannical dictatorships have an entire arsenal of high end military weapons at their disposal, and are more than happy to use it on their own people.
You have hope for the future?
In what regard?
You have hope that in 50-60 years they'll be stable governments in the mid-east with nice happy democratic political leanings?
If so, you're stupid.
This shit has been unraveling for thousands of years and is likely to continue so for the next couple thousand- you think good old USA can go ramming it's way in there and make everything all better? We're not even the right fucking religion for them. I'd hazard to guess that even people who are muslim in the US aren't anywhere NEAR muslim enough for the likes of the mid-east.

And in fact, most of the problems that are present in the Mid-east right now are direct results of American foreign policy decisions over the last 50 or 60 years - we keep sticking our feet in the muck over there and then wondering why we're tracking dirt all over the floor...

to me, that's fucking funny. the fact that the Russians think it's all some grand plan? HI-LAR-I-OUS

Yes. I guess I'm stupid. And it's not so much "yes" as it is me being open minded about it

I think the Bush administration wrongly assumed Iraq would turn democratic over night. But fail or not, I see it right now as a symbol of what could be. While you'll disregard those pictures of Iraqis holding up purple fingers after they've voted, I still see it as an important image.

And again, I don't expect this change to happen over night. And yes I do have faith in the younger genernations; generations getting more involved technologically. They'll soon figure out that in order to keep up with the world they have to adapt to it. They can't stay in the stone age for too long (that includes increased secular way of thinking). We're young generations doing this sort of thing in the past? I'm not an expert on the region, so please inform me if they have. But if they didn't, I call that progress.

And who says that we're sticking our nose in all their business? Right now they seem to be taking matters into their own hands. And hell, the Syrian rebels want us there helping anyway. But I admit that'd probably be a mistake.

what i think you're missing here is that the USA, while largely successful as a democratic society, is basically an instruction manual on how not to set up a society. We're the result of a bunch of accidents, coincidences, wars that had nothing to do with establishing freedom and justice for all, the wholesale murder of an entire civilization that lived here for thousands of years without destroying one another, as well as the violent captivity and enslavement of an entire OTHER civilization of people to use as manual labor to build the country.
Societies don't arise out of well thought out (or even ill-conceived) plans and actions. they come out of chaos and external factors that no one is aware of while they occur - it's too big on a mathematical scale to be able to control- The United States can no more impose it's value system on another part of the world and expect clean and clear results than taking a deck of cards, throwing it in the air, and assuming they'll all land face up because that was the plan.
to think we can make a difference (whatever THAT amorphous concept entails), or that groups of well meaning young people can change the world is naive, and often dangerous.
We don't KNOW, NOT AT ALL, what's going to happen in Iraq - purple fingered voters or not.
It's too complicated and we're too close to the (supposed) end of that 'war'.

They'll soon figure out that in order to keep up with the world they have to adapt to it. They can't stay in the stone age for too long (that includes increased secular way of thinking).

really? good luck with that one too, btw - the middle east has been doing exactly that forever - living in the stone age, being left behind by the rest of the world - they're just fine with that - and the countries that are supposedly more 'evolved' - technologically or more part of the world community, such as the UAE (Saudi Arabia and the like)? they're more than happy to take our money in trade for oil, but don't dare teach the women to drive, or, perish the thought - vote! I'd be willing to bet good cash on how quickly they turn medieval on our asses...

Were young generations doing this sort of thing in the past? I'm not an expert on the region, so please inform me if they have. But if they didn't, I call that progress.

you understand, of course, that younger generations are only afforded the privilege of holding alternate views and acting on them when they have the luxury of education, food, shelter, etc etc and the tolerance of their governing bodies.
Think that's the case in the mid-east? I don't.
Know who groups like al-kaida look for to populate their ranks? unhappy, poor, young people.
know why? because you're young and stupid (sorry, that's a generalization, but you get my meaning, I assume) and are easily swayed to believe that all you need to do is 'believe' and sooner or later it'll all work out in the end, and exactly they way you wanted it to work out.

ultimately, I'm not as negative as I'm coming across about the possible evolution of the mid-east, but to think that it's all gonna work out fine simply because there's a generation of people willing to at least try to change their society is to admit the incredible lack of perspective on the world today, as well as the vast history of not only that region, but of the entire globe.

and in the context of this thread, or more in the context of the article that I commented on - it's really funny that we're as stupid as we are, yet other major players on the world stage STILL think we're aiming at total world domination.

malice wrote:what i think you're missing here is that the USA, while largely successful as a democratic society, is basically an instruction manual on how not to set up a society. We're the result of a bunch of accidents, coincidences, wars that had nothing to do with establishing freedom and justice for all, the wholesale murder of an entire civilization that lived here for thousands of years without destroying one another, as well as the violent captivity and enslavement of an entire OTHER civilization of people to use as manual labor to build the country.
Societies don't arise out of well thought out (or even ill-conceived) plans and actions. they come out of chaos and external factors that no one is aware of while they occur - it's too big on a mathematical scale to be able to control- The United States can no more impose it's value system on another part of the world and expect clean and clear results than taking a deck of cards, throwing it in the air, and assuming they'll all land face up because that was the plan.
to think we can make a difference (whatever THAT amorphous concept entails), or that groups of well meaning young people can change the world is naive, and often dangerous.
We don't KNOW, NOT AT ALL, what's going to happen in Iraq - purple fingered voters or not.
It's too complicated and we're too close to the (supposed) end of that 'war'.

They'll soon figure out that in order to keep up with the world they have to adapt to it. They can't stay in the stone age for too long (that includes increased secular way of thinking).

really? good luck with that one too, btw - the middle east has been doing exactly that forever - living in the stone age, being left behind by the rest of the world - they're just fine with that - and the countries that are supposedly more 'evolved' - technologically or more part of the world community, such as the UAE (Saudi Arabia and the like)? they're more than happy to take our money in trade for oil, but don't dare teach the women to drive, or, perish the thought - vote! I'd be willing to bet good cash on how quickly they turn medieval on our asses...

Were young generations doing this sort of thing in the past? I'm not an expert on the region, so please inform me if they have. But if they didn't, I call that progress.

you understand, of course, that younger generations are only afforded the privilege of holding alternate views and acting on them when they have the luxury of education, food, shelter, etc etc and the tolerance of their governing bodies.
Think that's the case in the mid-east? I don't.
Know who groups like al-kaida look for to populate their ranks? unhappy, poor, young people.
know why? because you're young and stupid (sorry, that's a generalization, but you get my meaning, I assume) and are easily swayed to believe that all you need to do is 'believe' and sooner or later it'll all work out in the end, and exactly they way you wanted it to work out.

ultimately, I'm not as negative as I'm coming across about the possible evolution of the mid-east, but to think that it's all gonna work out fine simply because there's a generation of people willing to at least try to change their society is to admit the incredible lack of perspective on the world today, as well as the vast history of not only that region, but of the entire globe.

and in the context of this thread, or more in the context of the article that I commented on - it's really funny that we're as stupid as we are, yet other major players on the world stage STILL think we're aiming at total world domination.

This is a fairly good treatise with the proper cynicism.

Although Malice remains too politically correct to implicate Islam.

Islam certainly plays a (large?) role in keeping these folks "living in the stone age", and a percentage of practitioners certainly seem to find justification for violence.

Anyhow, nice try Malice.

malice wrote:what i think you're missing here is that the USA, while largely successful as a democratic society, is basically an instruction manual on how not to set up a society. We're the result of a bunch of accidents, coincidences, wars that had nothing to do with establishing freedom and justice for all, the wholesale murder of an entire civilization that lived here for thousands of years without destroying one another, as well as the violent captivity and enslavement of an entire OTHER civilization of people to use as manual labor to build the country.

I get your point, but applying modern morals to 18th and 19th century behaviors will always lead to this conclusion. I am not justifying those events or the people who participated in them, but much like in the ME, to understand context we need to understand their world views and not frame behaviors in ours if we as American society seek to help them.

malice wrote: Societies don't arise out of well thought out (or even ill-conceived) plans and actions. they come out of chaos and external factors that no one is aware of while they occur - it's too big on a mathematical scale to be able to control- The United States can no more impose it's value system on another part of the world and expect clean and clear results than taking a deck of cards, throwing it in the air, and assuming they'll all land face up because that was the plan.
to think we can make a difference (whatever THAT amorphous concept entails), or that groups of well meaning young people can change the world is naive, and often dangerous.
We don't KNOW, NOT AT ALL, what's going to happen in Iraq - purple fingered voters or not.
It's too complicated and we're too close to the (supposed) end of that 'war'.

Absolutely correct.

http://www.kcentv.com/story/22647545/ri ... l-training

Riot Control Training

(KCEN) -- A group of soldiers are preparing for their deployment to Egypt with riot training on post.

They're planning ahead for violent protests or riots and the possibility of protecting the country's border with Israel.

Soldiers encountered Molotov cocktails and other dangerous items in the training.

Lt. Matthew Wilkinson says, "Just what I've seen over the course of the past week than we were a week ago."

PFC Perez Alexander says, "We want to be as professional as possible... Know what we're doing."

They wrap up training today before preparing to ship out in the near future.

Have US troops ever actively defended Israeli land before? I recall them operating Patriot missile batteries in Israel during Desert Storm, but not in direct combat.

Man in Black wrote:

malice wrote:what i think you're missing here is that the USA, while largely successful as a democratic society, is basically an instruction manual on how not to set up a society. We're the result of a bunch of accidents, coincidences, wars that had nothing to do with establishing freedom and justice for all, the wholesale murder of an entire civilization that lived here for thousands of years without destroying one another, as well as the violent captivity and enslavement of an entire OTHER civilization of people to use as manual labor to build the country.
Societies don't arise out of well thought out (or even ill-conceived) plans and actions. they come out of chaos and external factors that no one is aware of while they occur - it's too big on a mathematical scale to be able to control- The United States can no more impose it's value system on another part of the world and expect clean and clear results than taking a deck of cards, throwing it in the air, and assuming they'll all land face up because that was the plan.
to think we can make a difference (whatever THAT amorphous concept entails), or that groups of well meaning young people can change the world is naive, and often dangerous.
We don't KNOW, NOT AT ALL, what's going to happen in Iraq - purple fingered voters or not.
It's too complicated and we're too close to the (supposed) end of that 'war'.

They'll soon figure out that in order to keep up with the world they have to adapt to it. They can't stay in the stone age for too long (that includes increased secular way of thinking).

really? good luck with that one too, btw - the middle east has been doing exactly that forever - living in the stone age, being left behind by the rest of the world - they're just fine with that - and the countries that are supposedly more 'evolved' - technologically or more part of the world community, such as the UAE (Saudi Arabia and the like)? they're more than happy to take our money in trade for oil, but don't dare teach the women to drive, or, perish the thought - vote! I'd be willing to bet good cash on how quickly they turn medieval on our asses...

Were young generations doing this sort of thing in the past? I'm not an expert on the region, so please inform me if they have. But if they didn't, I call that progress.

you understand, of course, that younger generations are only afforded the privilege of holding alternate views and acting on them when they have the luxury of education, food, shelter, etc etc and the tolerance of their governing bodies.
Think that's the case in the mid-east? I don't.
Know who groups like al-kaida look for to populate their ranks? unhappy, poor, young people.
know why? because you're young and stupid (sorry, that's a generalization, but you get my meaning, I assume) and are easily swayed to believe that all you need to do is 'believe' and sooner or later it'll all work out in the end, and exactly they way you wanted it to work out.

ultimately, I'm not as negative as I'm coming across about the possible evolution of the mid-east, but to think that it's all gonna work out fine simply because there's a generation of people willing to at least try to change their society is to admit the incredible lack of perspective on the world today, as well as the vast history of not only that region, but of the entire globe.

and in the context of this thread, or more in the context of the article that I commented on - it's really funny that we're as stupid as we are, yet other major players on the world stage STILL think we're aiming at total world domination.

This is a fairly good treatise with the proper cynicism.

Although Malice remains too politically correct to implicate Islam.

Islam certainly plays a (large?) role in keeping these folks "living in the stone age", and a percentage of practitioners certainly seem to find justification for violence.

Anyhow, nice try Malice.

I'm hesitant to condemn a religion that has (I don't know how many, honestly) - a billion followers (?) since people vary widely in their beliefs and practices - and i don't know that people who practice that religion are any more or less violent than (for example) Christians - but i get your point.
Of course, the religion of the Middle East has played a huge role in determining what the society is like, and as is (I suspect) the case throughout history, there are groups of more 'politically savvy' people always ready to take advantage of a situation in order to accomplish their own goals - look at Osama Bin Laden - dude was something like the 50th son of some Sheikh, rich as fuck, and what amounted to incredibly bored. not to mention wanting a lot of attention-cum-admiration-cum-idolization (see what happens when you don't receive enough attention from you dad, kids?)- so he seized upon the troubled circumstances of the surrounding populations (in whichever country he was hanging out in, as I believe he moved around quite a bit in his pre-9/11 years) and used the religious standards of the ignorant masses to further his own agenda. and was fairly masterful at it, too.

what i think I most wanted to put across to IHRM (I think that's Harry Lime, anyway) was that the USA doesn't have the ability to overcome thousands of years of (religiously fostered) ingrained myopic world views, and therefore, cannot assume that any actions we take over there will have a beneficial end result for us or for them.

the added issues of Islamic extremist violence really only further my opinions about how minute an impact the US or any world power (if there's others that give a shit about it?) can have on that area of the world.
I don't even have an opinion about what's a good impact, actually - I think all actions, including inaction, lead to much the same outcomes over there as far as we're concerned.

on a side note - thanks for the comment, D - you don't agree with much I have to say so i appreciate the opportunity to discuss things a bit with you from time to time.

Are those US soldiers at least acting under the auspices of the UN? Not much better, I just don't know what mandate Us troops would operate under otherwise.

simple schoolboy wrote:Are those US soldiers at least acting under the auspices of the UN? Not much better, I just don't know what mandate Us troops would operate under otherwise.

The article is too brief to gather any useful information. I don't see any situation in which it's a good idea to put US troops on Egyptian soil between disenfranchised rioters and an Islamist government. There is no obvious path to success here (what ever that may be, since apparently democracy was not enough), so we should probably sit this one out. And the next one. And the next one. Unless it's the Saudis, in which case we probably do need to lend direct support.

broken iris wrote:

simple schoolboy wrote:Are those US soldiers at least acting under the auspices of the UN? Not much better, I just don't know what mandate Us troops would operate under otherwise.

The article is too brief to gather any useful information. I don't see any situation in which it's a good idea to put US troops on Egyptian soil between disenfranchised rioters and an Islamist government. There is no obvious path to success here (what ever that may be, since apparently democracy was not enough), so we should probably sit this one out. And the next one. And the next one. Unless it's the Saudis, in which case we probably do need to lend direct support.

http://rt.com/usa/us-troops-deploy-egypt-185/

They are acting under the auspices of the MFO, which is apparently just an Israeli-Egyptian organization. They've been sending (unarmed?) observers into the Sinai since the peace agreement.
http://mfo.org/

not sure where to share this, but here's a cool picture of egyptian protesters painting a patrolling helicopter with laser pointers.

elliseamos wrote:not sure where to share this, but here's a cool picture of egyptian protesters painting a patrolling helicopter with laser pointers.

Helicopter gunships hovering over protests is a bit intimidating.

Update: Egyptians keep fireworks on hand all year long

Holy shit, Egypt.

Benghazi, the faux scandal that just won't die...

Recent reports have as many as 30 CIA agents on the ground during the attack, with some speculation about a CIA interrogation facility being targeted for a jailbreak. If true, that might explain the administrations reluctance to discuss it, but even so, hasn't the damage already been done? This new (albeit limited) tidbit doesn't smack of scandal so much as intrigue.

simple schoolboy wrote:Benghazi, the faux scandal that just won't die...

Recent reports have as many as 30 CIA agents on the ground during the attack, with some speculation about a CIA interrogation facility being targeted for a jailbreak. If true, that might explain the administrations reluctance to discuss it, but even so, hasn't the damage already been done? This new (albeit limited) tidbit doesn't smack of scandal so much as intrigue.

i've never understood how this was a "scandal."

Certainly the (R)s are playing it up, but it should be a moment for pause considering the background. Saving Benghazi from the vagrancies of Ghaddafi loyalists was our justification for intervention* and this is our thanks.

Before we went in, Qaddafi was keeping tabs on the very people that ended up killing our ambassador. Perhaps we should have waited it out like in Syria in the hopes that the unsavory characters on both sides would thin each other out. It's possible that if we maintained the status quo world oil prices might be slightly more stable, Mali would be better off and 3 more Americans would be alive.
* (R)s who complain about Benghazi outside of the context of our intervention may be presumed to be full of it.

Continuing on that last thread, If we make nice with Iran we might be able to outsource one facet of our war on Al Qaeda.

They were trying to spin it as Administration incompetence and an unwillingness to confront Muslim protestors that lead to the death of an Ambassador and the fall of a diplomatic post. The rapidly changing narrative from the Obama Administration (remember the whole 'this was originally cause by a youtube video' thing?) was supposedly a series of public lies to try and pacify Americans from wanting to seek direct military intervention in Libya, which IMHO is a noble goal but a bullshit method of getting there.

The problem I see here is not the cover-up, covert operations must be protected because the situations are often more complex than 3 minute evening news clip can explain, the problem is the schizophrenic way we appear to behave internationally w/r to revolutions, terrorism, and civil conflicts. I understand each situation is unique but to me, and I am sure to those prone to violence against westerners, it all appears to be some big chess game of violence and exploitation where innocents are suffering and our dwindling resources are being spent to little or no gains in peace and freedom.