Global Events & Politics Überthread

mqt said:
there’s no real indication the Trump Administration gives two shits what happens to these people, and we seem content to let these nations continue to do whatever the fuck they want to their citizens as long as we gain control over their oil industry.
Click to expand...
It is possible (even likely} that this is true.

At the same time, it is possible (even likely) that the removal of Maduro and the weakening of the theocratic regime in Iran will lead to better outcomes for Venezuela, Iran, their neighbors, the United States and the rest of the world.

There is no sure thang in life. We have to go on our best estimate of the probabilities.

I don't have a positive assessment of the Trump administration. I view them as malign and incompetent. But in my view what they have done in Venezuela and Iran moves thangs in a positive direction. I'm concerned that Trump's incompetence, ignorance and impulsivity will come back to bite us in the end. But I see what they are doing so far in a positive light. Fingers crossed.
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
It is possible (even likely} that this is true.

At the same time, it is possible (even likely) that the removal of Maduro and the weakening of the theocratic regime in Iran will lead to better outcomes for Venezuela, Iran, their neighbors, the United States and the rest of the world.

There is no sure thang in life. We have to go on our best estimate of the probabilities.
Click to expand...
You’re not wrong, but I am having a hard time seeing the vision that leads us there and accepting that as some sort of obvious goal of this particular bunch, given their other views on these populations as a whole. If one wants to argue both that we’re nobly saving Iranian people from the oppression of theocratic authoritarian rule and that bringing over refugees from Iran is social engineering to destroy the West, I can’t say I think much of the validity of their moral position.

I would also question the efficacy of our approach in Iran in particular on this front. The thing about broad bombing campaigns against ruthless regimes is that it’s not necessarily effective, and involves needless casualties and destruction that might just lead to even harsher governance against the already vulnerable population.
 
mqt said:
You’re not wrong, but I am having a hard time seeing the vision that leads us there and accepting that as some sort of obvious goal of this particular bunch, given their other views on these populations as a whole. If one wants to argue both that we’re nobly saving Iranian people from the oppression of theocratic authoritarian rule and that bringing over refugees from Iran is social engineering to destroy the West, I can’t say I think much of the validity of their moral position.

I would also question the efficacy of our approach in Iran in particular on this front. The thing about broad bombing campaigns against ruthless regimes is that it’s not necessarily effective, and involves needless casualties and destruction that might just lead to even harsher governance against the already vulnerable population.
Click to expand...
My best guess is that the regime in Iran survives for the foreseeable future. But it won't be throwing its weight around the same way in the region.
 
Tapate50 said:
Yeah but mqt you like hyperventilate at everything at first news then never backtrack when appropriate
Click to expand...
Where would you like me to backtrack? I accept that Trump’s thus-far one and done operation in Venezuela hasn’t led to destruction, but has it led to tangible, positive outcomes for the Venezuelan people? Replacing Maduro with another dictator isn’t necessarily a long-term win for Venezuela, and the wealth we extract from their oil industry will be felt.
 
nsacpi said:
My best guess is that the regime in Iran survives for the foreseeable future. But it won't be throwing its weight around the same way in the region.
Click to expand...
That’s certainly a likely outcome, but I’m at best agnostic on what becomes of the region as a whole once another state rushes to fill the power vacuum. But these are rather straight-forward arguments about the use of military force in larger geopolitical conflicts, which isn’t *really* where my criticisms lie in this particular discussion. I’m questioning why the anti-intervention and forever war crowd is suddenly a bunch of hawks, and whether I can take seriously their moral arguments about the citizens of Iran.

It’s admittedly a less important discussion than what actually happens in the region, but it is still a different discussion to me.
 
Tapate50 said:
I get being anti war

But if you can’t get behind freeing Iranian women from being reduced to property and genocide of your own people

Like what can you get behind ? I guess most don’t hold women as highly as others
Click to expand...
Eh… that’s what we’re over there for now?

I guess maybe we should let a few of these drones hit the Saudi’s then. They’re not much better w.r.t. women’s rights and not killing its own citizens.
 
Tapate50 said:
I get being anti war

But if you can’t get behind freeing Iranian women from being reduced to property and genocide of your own people

Like what can you get behind ? I guess most don’t hold women as highly as others
Click to expand...
I’m pretty fond of the approach being taken in Iran. Cut the head off and rip out the claws. Repeat as necessary and convenient without committing ground troops. If we had done only this from Desert Storm onwards the US would be in a much better place.

We don’t need to control of these countries via puppets, we don’t need to upend their culture by imposing our version of democracy on them, and we certainly don’t need to occupy them. Just deliver a few swift kicks to the ass when they become a problem and then go about our business.
 
chop2chip said:
Eh… that’s what we’re over there for now?

I guess maybe we should let a few of these drones hit the Saudi’s then. They’re not much better w.r.t. women’s rights and not killing its own citizens.
Click to expand...
Sure

Got no problem with it either

Refresh my memory… are the saudis protesting a terrorist funding leader in the streets begging for change?
 
I’m open to the idea that military action with Iran is necessary. But it would be nice to have our government make that case to us. The justifications are all over the place.
 
chop2chip said:
I’m open to the idea that military action with Iran is necessary. But it would be nice to have our government make that case to us. The justifications are all over the place.
Click to expand...
Since I am stuck on the letter i this morning (incompetence, ignorance, impulsivity) I am favorably inclined to add incoherent as an adjective describing the Trump administration's public messaging efforts. It would be nice if they could explain to the public what they are doing. I think it will hurt them. The public mostly sees what is happening to the price of gas. Public support was low even before it skyrocketed. I do wonder how this plays out politically. Other administrations tried hard (often not successfully) to persuade the public when they engaged in these kinds of actions. This administration is mostly punting on that. Or doing it so incoherently that they look like a bunch of clowns.
 
Tapate50 said:
Sure

Got no problem with it either

Refresh my memory… are the saudis protesting a terrorist funding leader in the streets begging for change?
Click to expand...

www.gc4hr.org

Mass executions of protesters raises alarm that international human rights standards continue to be violated - Gulf Centre for Human Rights

The Gulf Centre for Human Rights (GCHR) deplores the mass execution by the Saudi authorities of 37 citizens, who have been put to death mostly for participating in peaceful protests. They were charged with “terrorism” and sentenced to death in trials that lacked all international standards of...
www.gc4hr.org www.gc4hr.org

www.amnesty.org

Highest execution toll in decades as Saudi authorities put to death 198 people

Despite repeated promises to limit the use of the death penalty, Saudi authorities have ramped up executions.
www.amnesty.org www.amnesty.org

www.bbc.com

Jamal Khashoggi: All you need to know about Saudi journalist's death

Jamal Khashoggi was killed inside the Saudi consulate in Istanbul in 2018. Here's what we know.
www.bbc.com www.bbc.com
 
Jaw said:
I’m pretty fond of the approach being taken in Iran. Cut the head off and rip out the claws. Repeat as necessary and convenient without committing ground troops. If we had done only this from Desert Storm onwards the US would be in a much better place.

We don’t need to control of these countries via puppets, we don’t need to upend their culture by imposing our version of democracy on them, and we certainly don’t need to occupy them. Just deliver a few swift kicks to the ass when they become a problem and then go about our business.
Click to expand...
My objection on this front is not just anti-war wokeness, but the long term effects of such policy on these regions, particularly if we insist on steering the direction of their economy post-intervention in a way that favors American interests. I pretty strongly believe the best path toward global peace and cooperation is not through flexing our muscle militarily or economically as we’ve done often in the past 12 months.
 
chop2chip said:
I’m open to the idea that military action with Iran is necessary. But it would be nice to have our government make that case to us. The justifications are all over the place.
Click to expand...
In a perfect world ? Sure it would make people feel better. But it wouldn’t actually change anything
 
nsacpi said:
Since I am stuck on the letter i this morning (incompetence, ignorance, impulsivity) I am favorably inclined to add incoherent as an adjective describing the Trump administration's public messaging efforts. It would be nice if they could explain to the public what they are doing. I think it will hurt them. The public mostly sees what is happening to the price of gas. Public support was low even before it skyrocketed. I do wonder how this plays out politically. Other administrations tried hard (often not successfully) to persuade the public when they engaged in these kinds of actions. This administration is mostly punting on that. Or doing it so incoherently that they look like a bunch of clowns.
Click to expand...
The problem genuinely might just be that they’re indeed a bunch of clowns, and any positives to their approach here will be tangential.
 
Tapate50 said:
In a perfect world ? Sure it would make people feel better. But it wouldn’t actually change anything
Click to expand...
Our politicians are accountable to us. You seem to be aware of this when it comes to pointing out the failures of democrat polices (which you are correct and justified). Why have such apathy to something of far greater consequence?
 
mqt said:
My objection on this front is not just anti-war wokeness, but the long term effects of such policy on these regions, particularly if we insist on steering the direction of their economy post-intervention in a way that favors American interests. I pretty strongly believe the best path toward global peace and cooperation is not through flexing our muscle militarily or economically as we’ve done often in the past 12 months.
Click to expand...
Yeah I don’t see steering their economy as part of the punitive raids that I’m a fan of. It hasn’t gotten a lot of play in the media, but the declared justification for this campaign, that Iran would soon have enough drones and missiles to deter anyone from interfering with their nuke program, is reasonable. We can see they already had enough that intercepting all of them was impossible. People arguing that it’s none of our business seem to overlook Khomeini stating nonstop that he wanted to wipe our ally off the map. No one has to love Israel but if people don’t understand the stabilizing effect they have on the Middle East then they should probably hold off on expressing public opinions on foreign affairs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top