Global Events & Politics Überthread

Jaw said:
Understanding of Middle Eastern politics has a really high buy-in that I've just never been willing to pony up. I also feel like you need quite a bit of cultural knowledge that's nearly impossible to acquire if you aren't a native or long term resident of the region. That leads me to a desire to minimize our presence and interference in the area, and to say little else about it so I don't reveal my ignorance.
Click to expand...

We have very important interests there. But all the parties involved need us more than we need them. Hence my point that from a psychological perspective it makes sense to be somewhat aloof. We have no need for a stallion. There are no stallions there anyhow. Just a bunch of decrepit camels. Very rich decrepit camels mind you, but decrepit camels nonetheless.
 
Jaw said:
Understanding of Middle Eastern politics has a really high buy-in that I've just never been willing to pony up. I also feel like you need quite a bit of cultural knowledge that's nearly impossible to acquire if you aren't a native or long term resident of the region. That leads me to a desire to minimize our presence and interference in the area, and to say little else about it so I don't reveal my ignorance.
Click to expand...

I’m not sure that I can get behind this logic.
 
Julio3000 said:
Accepting MBS as a fact of life is one thing. Embracing him to the extent that we have is quite another (including possibly having our bumbling dauphin giving theirs our intelligence product to effect his little elite roundup).

FWIW, the way their succession has historically worked, being the king’s son doesn’t mean he’s a fait accompli.

So far, he’s stepped on his dick a few too many times for comfort. If it’s not our business who’s running the show there, surely it is our business what we co-sign and underwrite.
Click to expand...

If I’m a contrarian, I’m not sure what this position makes you.

Namby-pamby?

I mean ... read that first paragraph again. Guess there’s a difference between opposition and petulant opposition.
 
nsacpi said:
We have very important interests there. But all the parties involved need us more than we need them. Hence my point that from a psychological perspective it makes sense to be somewhat aloof. We have no need for a stallion. There are no stallions there anyhow. Just a bunch of decrepit camels. Very rich decrepit camels mind you, but decrepit camels nonetheless.
Click to expand...

1) They don’t need us. Russia and/or China could easily step into that void. Russia has arguably made that move already.
2) “Somwhat aloof” sounds a lot like Naive Neville
3) What about those decrepit camels with nukes? Are they like a little less decrepit? On the subject of continuums, I’m pretty sure both Stallions and decrepit camels exist on the same plane.
 
Hawk said:
1) They don’t need us. Russia and/or China could easily step into that void. Russia has arguably made that move already.
2) “Somwhat aloof” sounds a lot like Naive Neville
3) What about those decrepit camels with nukes? Are they like a little less decrepit? On the subject of continuums, I’m pretty sure both Stallions and decrepit camels exist on the same plane.
Click to expand...

They can hitch their wagon to Russia. I believe Syria offers the model there. I wish them the best if they choose that model.

We can be aloof and at the end of the day the clear-eyed realists in those countries will see the very limited benefits and not inconsiderable downside of cozying up to the Russians. They are not our allies because we act chummy with them. They are our allies because of benefits they derive from their relationship with us. They need us much much more than we need them.
 
Last edited:
What would be a downside of allying with the Russians - from an Iranian perspective?
What would be a downside of allying with the Chinese - from MBS' perspective?

What is a benefit of allying with the United States that these two countries can't offer?

They don't need us - at all. We need them.
 
Hawk said:
What would be a downside of allying with the Russians - from an Iranian perspective?
What would be a downside of allying with the Chinese - from MBS' perspective?

What is a benefit of allying with the United States that these two countries can't offer?

They don't need us - at all. We need them.
Click to expand...

Inferior military technology. No more phone calls from Jared.

I'm sure the princelings will enjoy their university years in Beijing and Moscow.
 
Last edited:
Hawk said:
I’m not sure that I can get behind this logic.
Click to expand...

I kind of stated it out of order. Basically it seems to me like we should be less involved but I admit I am ignorant on the subject and generally just keep my mouth shut as far as ME policy is concerned. I do enjoy a few of you who comment here and at least seem more informed on the subject.
 
The general idea of our foreign policy in the middle east is that in dealing with these countries we can slowly influence them to be more moderate and that by ignoring and isolating them will only make them more extreme. We generally will put up with a dictator or tyrant so long as they ally with us. A brutal dictator who loves us is preferred over democratically elected leaders who dont bow to our will. Its never been about promoting freedom. Its about empire building.




Not saying I agree with this. Just that this is our ME strategy.
 
I really enjoyed this opinion piece -
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/15/opinion/nationalism-trump-globalization-immigration.html

In Mr. Trump’s version of nationalism, Muslims and Mexican-Americans are stigmatized, and African-American football players who protest racial injustice by kneeling during the national anthem are denounced. Some of his applications of “America first” — repudiating the Paris climate agreement or abandoning the Iran nuclear deal — may not even prove to be in the national interest.

But these failings should not lead you to dismiss the value of nationalism, which, by itself, is neither good nor evil, liberal nor conservative. The perception of a common national identity is essential to democracies and to the modern welfare state, which depends on the willingness of citizens to pay taxes to aid fellow citizens whom they may never have set eyes upon.
...
In all of these areas, Mr. Trump has harmed, not strengthened, our nation. Yet in the United States, the liberal opposition has generally failed to acknowledge what is valid in the today’s nationalist backlash. Many liberal pundits and political scientists continue to echo Hillary Clinton in characterizing Mr. Trump’s supporters in 2016 as deplorables. They denounce Mr. Trump’s tariffs without proposing any plausible means of counterbalancing the huge surpluses from China and Germany. They dismiss as a lost cause the attempt to revive the towns of the Midwest and South by reviving manufacturing. They rightly insist that the United States find a way to integrate and assimilate the country’s 12 million or more unauthorized immigrants, but they ignore the continuing flood of people without papers crossing the border or overstaying their visas and they dismiss attempts to change national priorities toward skilled immigrants.

Here is the simple truth: As long as corporations are free to roam the globe in search of lower wages and taxes, and as long as the United States opens its borders to millions of unskilled immigrants, liberals will not able to create bountiful, equitable societies, where people are free from basic anxieties about obtaining health care, education and housing. In Europe, social democrats face very similar challenges with immigration, refugees and euro-imposed austerity. To achieve their historic objectives, liberals and social democrats will have to respond constructively to, rather than dismiss, the nationalist reaction to globalization.
 
Its being reported that he was killed brutally over several minutes. Also being reported that SA is preparing to come out and say he was killed in a botch interrogation. No matter what comes out Trump wont do anything meaningful. He is weak as weak gets. The only people he is tough with is our allies who are content to wait until him out until an adult takes over. Trump cant even fire his own chief of staff. He just ignores him when he tries to fire him.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Its being reported that he was killed brutally over several minutes. Also being reported that SA is preparing to come out and say he was killed in a botch interrogation. No matter what comes out Trump wont do anything meaningful. He is weak as weak gets. The only people he is tough with is our allies who are content to wait until him out until an adult takes over. Trump cant even fire his own chief of staff. He just ignores him when he tries to fire him.
Click to expand...

The butler did it...Saudi style
 
New details on what happened to Khashoggi.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/17/...tion=click&module=Top Stories&pgtype=Homepage

His killers were waiting when Jamal Khashoggi walked into the Saudi consulate in Istanbul two weeks ago. They severed his fingers during an interrogation and later beheaded and dismembered him, according to details from audio recordings published in the Turkish news media on Wednesday.

It was all over within a few minutes, the recordings suggested.

A senior Turkish official confirmed the details that were published in the pro-government daily newspaper Yeni Safak.

The leaking of such details, on the same day Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was visiting Turkey, reflected an escalation of pressure by the Turkish government on Saudi Arabia and the United States for answers on the fate of Mr. Khashoggi, a prominent dissident journalist who wrote for The Washington Post.

The Turkish leaks implicating Saudi officials in the Khashoggi case have followed a distinctive pattern, beginning quickly after his disappearance. The leaks stopped when President Trump suggested that he was taking the accusations seriously and sent Mr. Pompeo to Saudi Arabia for answers.

But the leaks appeared to resume after Saudi leaders repeated their denials of involvement to Mr. Pompeo, and Mr. Trump defended the crown prince as having been unfairly accused.
 
Last edited:
Also from the Times article:

As they cut off Mr. Khashoggi’s head and dismembered his body, a doctor of forensics who had been brought along for the dissection and disposal had some advice for the others, according to the senior Turkish official.

Listen to music, he told them, as he put on headphones himself. That was what he did to ease the tension when doing such work, the official said, describing the contents of the audio recording.

Such information would not have been disclosed in Turkey without the consent of the government. Turkish media outlets and newspapers are closely controlled: They are either government-controlled or owned by pro-government business executives. Censors are often present in newsrooms, and reporters and editors take close instructions from officials in the presidency.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top