General Discussion: Politics thread


Show original post
-DiscoTits-
-DiscoTits- avatar

760 posts since 26/11/07

29 Oct 2019 16:58
I’m well aware that the Syrian situation is far more complicated than most can comprehend. I’m just sick of seeing the west involving itself in everyone else’s business when we’ve got a lot of pressing issues in our own countries that could do with resolving.
fudge.dredd
fudge.dredd avatar

969 posts since 15/12/12

posted 29 Oct 2019 17:05, edited 29 Oct 2019 17:05
^ agreed. The way the original post was framed was that it was already agreed that Trump’s decision to pull troops out was a bad one. It wasn’t. Let them deal with their own shit.

I met an Israeli chap recently who said that the only reason Israel is safe right now is because the Muslims hate each other more than they hate the Jews.

The Sunni and Shiites have been at each other’s throats for 1400 years. Its never going to stop.

And I come from a Sunni family, so I’m well aware of the intricacies of the hatred.
Superprecise
Superprecise avatar

2115 posts since 16/7/11

posted 29 Oct 2019 18:00, edited 29 Oct 2019 18:00
I didn't think it needed spelling out but I was referring to the manner in which the US withdrew rather the idea that they stop getting involved in wars in the Middle East to begin with. Two totally different conversations. They were already there, they should have extricated themselves properly. They left their ally defenceless and Trump knew Erdogan had an incursion in mind. The Kurds always get fucked over, it's disgusting.

And Ukraine?
nothingelseworked
nothingelseworked avatar

3365 posts since 21/2/10

29 Oct 2019 19:09
lock this thread
lock this thread
lock this thread
lock this thread
lock this thread
Burt
Burt avatar

5713 posts since 3/1/10

29 Oct 2019 20:30
fudge.dredd wrote: …Shiites…
DuffMan
DuffMan avatar

14313 posts since 21/2/07

29 Oct 2019 23:05
macgy
macgy avatar

212 posts since 26/11/11

30 Oct 2019 08:59
People seem to misunderstand that a lot of the awful involvements in the middle east is due to security reasons at home. It's the same reason the US got involved in other conflicts throughout history.
People are wary of being involved but in the end do not get fooled that the US is involved out of humanitarian reasons alone. Their primary objective have and will be the security of the US.

That being said Syria is a shit show and was also during Obama. Read this to get a short view on a complicated situation: https://foreignpolicy.com/2019/10/17/assad-syria-turkey-kurds-leadership/

What Walt doesn't get into is Europe's big headache of returning fighters.
ismvil
ismvil avatar

786 posts since 16/9/11

30 Oct 2019 10:01
This is a great podcast on how the US created this mess in the first place https://overcast.fm/+H5as81odw
fudge.dredd
fudge.dredd avatar

969 posts since 15/12/12

30 Oct 2019 10:25
Burt wrote:
fudge.dredd wrote: …Shiites…

Laughing out loud
fudge.dredd
fudge.dredd avatar

969 posts since 15/12/12

30 Oct 2019 10:34
nothingelseworked wrote: lock this thread
lock this thread
lock this thread
lock this thread
lock this thread

Strange why you want to strangle conversation and debate? This isn’t a ‘safe space’ for you.
-DiscoTits-
-DiscoTits- avatar

760 posts since 26/11/07

30 Oct 2019 12:20
Security of the US which is thousands of miles away and in no immediate danger from most Middle Eastern countries. They do not have the long range weapons nor the resources to carry out any sort of attack on the US?? Oh and invading another country and trying to impose US style democracy is really going to work and keep all these Middle Eastern counties happy isn’t it?

The only reason the US invade other countries is to shore up their military foothold on the world and to raid these countries of natural resources.
Superprecise
Superprecise avatar

2115 posts since 16/7/11

posted 30 Oct 2019 12:36, edited 30 Oct 2019 12:36
fudge.dredd wrote: Strange why you want to strangle conversation and debate? This isn’t a ‘safe space’ for you.

Your references to culture war shite (safe spaces here, non-playable characters elsewhere) suggests you spend too much time on the internet getting riled up by bullshit.

Maybe nothingelseworked finds this thread futile and embarrassing, I very much doubt he wants to stifle free speech or debate as you are suggesting. Stop being such a reactionary baby.
joeyjojo
joeyjojo avatar

4092 posts since 24/8/06

30 Oct 2019 13:12
-DiscoTits- wrote: Security of the US which is thousands of miles away and in no immediate danger from most Middle Eastern countries. They do not have the long range weapons nor the resources to carry out any sort of attack on the US?? Oh and invading another country and trying to impose US style democracy is really going to work and keep all these Middle Eastern counties happy isn’t it?

The only reason the US invade other countries is to shore up their military foothold on the world and to raid these countries of natural resources.

Yep
nothingelseworked
nothingelseworked avatar

3365 posts since 21/2/10

30 Oct 2019 15:15
Superprecise wrote: Maybe nothingelseworked finds this thread futile and embarrassing, I very much doubt he wants to stifle free speech or debate as you are suggesting. Stop being such a reactionary baby.

Nailed it.

This thread is just 2 incels crying. And the best thing is, I don't even have to say their names and everyone (including them) knows who I'm talking about.
MLI
MLI avatar

4632 posts since 6/10/09

31 Oct 2019 09:47
joeyjojo wrote: The only reason the US invade other countries is to shore up their military foothold on the world and to raid these countries of natural resources.

Yep

Nope. What discount did the USA get on Kuwaiti oil after Desert Storm? Oh yeah, that's right, it was 0% and they paid the same as everyone else. Sorry you simple anti American walking cliches.
morning mist
morning mist avatar

3193 posts since 29/5/05

posted 31 Oct 2019 10:55, edited 31 Oct 2019 10:55
MLI wrote:
joeyjojo wrote: The only reason the US invade other countries is to shore up their military foothold on the world and to raid these countries of natural resources.

Yep

Nope. What discount did the USA get on Kuwaiti oil after Desert Storm? Oh yeah, that's right, it was 0% and they paid the same as everyone else. Sorry you simple anti American walking cliches.



Did they not drop a couple of hundred thousand troops in Saudi Arabia to protect their investments in oil? Did that not put Saudi Arabia in dept to the US? Did they not repay parts of that dept by buying a massive amount off weapons from the US? Did they not pay the rest of that dept by supporting the US in backing them in the peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians?

Also, after Vietnam the American military might was in question. Desert Storm was a show of force, Bush even stated that "new world order has begun".
EssexBoyII
EssexBoyII avatar

6605 posts since 5/6/07

31 Oct 2019 13:47
I agree with what you’re saying but why are you saying ‘dept’?
andymakesglasses
andymakesglasses avatar

20285 posts since 26/1/06

31 Oct 2019 13:59
Maybe because English isn't his first language.
macgy
macgy avatar

212 posts since 26/11/11

31 Oct 2019 14:19

-DiscoTits- wrote: Security of the US which is thousands of miles away and in no immediate danger from most Middle Eastern countries. They do not have the long range weapons nor the resources to carry out any sort of attack on the US?? Oh and invading another country and trying to impose US style democracy is really going to work and keep all these Middle Eastern counties happy isn’t it?

The only reason the US invade other countries is to shore up their military foothold on the world and to raid these countries of natural resources.

9/11? Deadliest single attack on US soil as far as I recall. One always sounds like a nutter for bringing it up but to Americans the importance cannot be understated. The US is still in a state of Emergency from 9/11.

I agree the US have other interests than their security and use security as a disguise for some of these other interests but as previously stated it is after all their main motivation for being involved. Look at how long they stayed in Afghanistan and are still involved. And as you state they fight for their military foothold in the world and to the US that equals security - ten fights abroad is better than one at home.

State building is of course utter shite but there is no alternative unless you want to hand things over to dictators and the like - which if you're a realist (in FP terms) can be the right thing to do sometimes like Walt writes in the piece previously posted.

They do get some natural resources out of it but without knowing the numbers I would imagine the military campaigns are way more costly than any war spoils.

All of this is just the US perspective though. It's another discussion if you look at it from fx the Afghan people's POV - is it fair that some yankees just ride in and dictate everything because of some fucked mountain terrorist was able to hijack some planes? Probably not…
morning mist
morning mist avatar

3193 posts since 29/5/05

31 Oct 2019 16:31
EssexBoyII wrote: I agree with what you’re saying but why are you saying ‘dept’?
andymakesglasses wrote: Maybe because English isn't his first language.

haha, i have good and bad days, mostly bad tho