Tunesia, Egyt and now Yemen: a domino effect in the Middle East?

@msolga,

1. When you make a big noisy splash jumping in the water - you are going to get wet.
2. Don't embarrass the other women here by whining for personal apologies every time someone braces or teases you.
3. Are you sure you want to stand by your inference that you've made no personal criticisms/comments about anyone else in this thread?
4. You are one of those famous bothersome, shortsighted people who love to dish it out - and simply cannot take it.

1 Reply

@aidan,

Quote:

America and by association Americans are damned if we don't and damned if we do.
If it turns out wrong, bad, unsuccessful, whatever - oh - that pesky American intervention.
No one believes in American methods or motivation anymore (except for when they stepped in to get the Chilean miners free).
Not even me - and I'm American.
I think we should give it a rest and see what happens.

Aidan, this is that tired old line that Lash was trying to bullshit everyone with. America is not damned for anything other than their rapacious attacks on innocent countries. America deserves some "damn you's" for this stuff in the ME. For dog's sake, the US is the one that has been supporting the brutal dictators since forever.

It has nothing to do with intervention; intervention can be a great thing. The problem is the US intervenes solely for its own selfish interests.

I can see this escaping the likes of Finn and Gob, but you're much too much a thinking person for this.

The US is given some flack, though rarely, for their bragging about how they have saved the world. But it's simply because it's bragging. No one likes to hear anyone bragging. It's really crass.

During WWII, it was the Russians, the Brits and some others who really suffered the brunt of the war. Of course, the US participated and did a bang up job, no pun intended, but it's always about us us us.

2 Replies

@JTT,

Quote:

During WWII, it was the Russians, the Brits and some others who really suffered the brunt of the war. Of course, the US participated and did a bang up job.

Yeah--when everybody else was exhausted. The US could have saved most of the Jews. And the US blunder in '56 led to this lot and more to come.

1 Reply

@revelette,

Quote:

I was for the first gulf war because Saddam invaded Kuwait, I thought we should have stayed with it when Saddam retaliated against the uprisings, but we ignored it.

Saddam was the US's dictator. He was supplied with chemical and biological weapons by the USA which he used. He was supported by the US in the torture of his own people and in the war crimes he committed against the Kurds and the Iranians.

The US gave Saddam a strong indication that differences between Arab states were not the business of the US, and in this they were right, they were exercising one of the few moral judgments they've made in history.

Why Saddam chose to believe a country that regularly vomits perfidy is anyone's guess.

Now, why do you get your panties in such a bunch about Qaddafi?

2 Replies

@JTT,

It might be good fun getting panties in a bunch. Have you thought of that JT?

1 Reply

@Lash,

1. When you make a big noisy splash jumping in the water - you are going to get wet.

Yet, you seem to think that the US walks on water and shouldn't even suffer a splash, Lash. Why is that?

4. You are one of those famous bothersome, shortsighted people who love to dish it out - and simply cannot take it.

I think if you were being honest, you'd note that these attacks on Olga, which are fairly vociferous considering your usual standard, Lash [and she, being an adult, can speak and defend herself], come because of her exposure of the US for its duplicity, its crimes, its perfidy, its brutality, its [you fill in the blankity].

Speaking about "cannot take it", why might Gob, Finn and you have me on "ignore"?

1 Reply

@spendius,

Yeah, Spendi, sometimes, the thought of giving you a "panties in a real tight bunch" wedgie comes to mind. Wink

0 Replies

@Irishk,

the sad fact is, it could be a true story, i'm sure someone has thought about it

1 Reply

@JTT,

JTT - I'm in total agreement with the message inherent in the 'satirical' article IrishK posted. I'm not fooled for a minute that the US intervenes with pure and unselfish motives in the majority of situations in which they choose to intervene.
There's always an agenda.
My point is that there's always an incentive or an agenda for any government.
And oil is a big one.

It just gets a little tiresome to constantly hear people from other countries try to make out that if THEIR government intervenes it's for the purest of motives. That's bullshit. People are people. Governments are governments.

I agree that Americans are probably more spoiled and used to acquiring and accessing things with relative ease compared to other people in the rest of the world - but I don't believe that other people in other countries- and certainly not their GOVERNMENTS- are automatically more moral or less self-absorbed or selfless in their stances on certain issues or world affairs.

If these countries had the power and resources the United States has historically had, would they have used it any differently? I don't know - I'm asking.

You know - other countries and empires have acted just as rapaciously as 'super powers' throughout history around the world - the difference is, it wasn't in the past fifty or sixty years and into the internet age when the news has become global and immediate.
I think it's disingenuous on a psychological or human level to try to pretend or convince oneself that Americans are inherently more 'evil' or self-protective or nationalistic than other citizens of other countries.

We might be more selfish and complacent - I will give you that - but part of that is because we've not historically been as dependent as other countries that have had to manage as a part of a union or commonwealth or empire- while America has historically managed more apart and alone and independently.

I really do think it probably is time for America to mind its own business and step back - and stop being so rapacious and grasping, getting involved in these shady situations.
I'd like to see how that changes things- and I'd hope it would be for the better..for the entire world.

3 Replies

@djjd62,

djjd62 wrote:

the sad fact is, it could be a true story, i'm sure someone has thought about it

I agree. My loose definition of satire might be taking a truth, or the frailties/faults of a truth, and exposing its hypocrisy.

See...

CHARLIE SHEEN TO HELP ARABS TAKE FREEDOM TO ‘NEXT LEVEL’

0 Replies

@JTT,

JTT,
Sometimes, before I log on, I peruse the threads - and when I do, I noticed my Ignore Feature is disarmed...so, I see everything on the thread. I smacked myself smartly for doing so, after I saw this post of yours addressing me. I thought to ignore that, too, but didn't have a compelling reason to...

The reason I have you on ignore is likely best described by a post to you I saw recently by someone whose name escapes me. They said to you something like,

"Jtt, why don't you just make one post - and copy and paste it everywhere - for every response you make at A2K - because you are saying the same thing over and over. For every problem in the world, you blame the US..."

Reading your posts is a waste of my time. I know in advance what you're going to say.

Every

time.

The US and I are quite willing and able to consider criticisms. We have been splashed by the best of them. We are both resilient and continually working on self-awareness. Not perfect, but not too bad, comparatively.

When you set yourself in a polemic bunker - it shuts down dialogue, rather than opens it. That type of exchange is to be avoided. You are the Czar of Polemics....the gold medalist in the (P)Olympics...

I don't like having anyone on Ignore, but you clutter my page with meaningless, redundant skid marks of hatred. If you ever decide to branch out and talk of anything that doesn't source from your hatred of America, let me know.

2 Replies

@aidan,

Well, this is the second time ever I've really brava'd aidan, and the other was about grammar, so I'm not sure that even counts.

Very good post!

2 Replies

@aidan,

Quote:

People are people. Governments are governments.

I agree that Americans are probably more spoiled and used to acquiring and accessing things with relative ease compared to other people in the rest of the world - but I don't believe that other people in other countries- and certainly not their GOVERNMENTS- are automatically more moral or less self-absorbed or selfless in their stances on certain issues or world affairs.

If these countries had the power and resources the United States has historically had, would they have used it any differently? I don't know - I'm asking.

In an overall sense, that's all true, Aidan. But offering various what ifs isn't much help. If only John Gotti hadn't been fired from his apprentice plumbing job, ... .

The fact of the matter is, right now, now being the last century, it's the USA that is the dominant raptor.

In actuality, there are many countries who could perform actions in a more selfish manner and don't. The Scandinavian countries stand out as a group that directs more of their wealth to helping under privileged countries.

One telling feature of this aid is that none of it is tied aid, which means, if you don't know, that the donor does not demand that the receipient buy from them. The effect of tied aid drastically reduces the effectiveness of such aid, of course not to the donor country.

The US is the worst of the "rich" countries for both giving aid, which is mostly military in nature, and for requiring tied aid. That simply doesn't match the rhetoric, does it?

Quote:

You know - other countries and empires have acted just as rapaciously as 'super powers' throughout history around the world - the difference is, it wasn't in the past fifty or sixty years and into the internet age when the news has become global and immediate.

I think it's disingenuous on a psychological or human level to try to pretend or convince oneself that Americans are inherently more 'evil' or self-protective or nationalistic than other citizens of other countries.

We might be more selfish and complacent - I will give you that - but part of that is because we've not historically been as dependent as other countries that have had to manage as a part of a union or commonwealth or empire- while America has historically managed more apart and alone and independently.

I really do think it probably is time for America to mind its own business and step back - and stop being so rapacious and grasping, getting involved in these shady situations.
I'd like to see how that changes things- and I'd hope it would be for the better..for the entire world.

I'm well aware of the general nature of people, the horrible things that they can do. Those are issue that are extraneous to the point at hand.

What frequently happens when Americans, or anyone for that matter, are faced with these issues, is that the person takes it personally. It wasn't you, Aidan, or even your kith and kin [in all likelihood] who committed these fowl deeds. But there's simply no way, no logical way, no moral way to make excuses for them.

America has loathsome criminals [as does every country] but you don't feel a need to apologize for them. So too, you should feel no need to apologize for the loathsome war criminals/terrorists that have seriously besmirched the good names of the vast majority of US citizens.

2 Replies

@Lash,

Quote:

Sometimes, before I log on, I peruse the threads - and when I do, I noticed my Ignore Feature is disarmed...so, I see everything on the thread. I smacked myself smartly for doing so, after I saw this post of yours addressing me. I thought to ignore that, too, but didn't have a compelling reason to...

You needn't make excuses, phony or otherwise, for you childish use of "ignore", Lash. It speaks for itself and you really shouldn't be chastising others for something that you don't feel applies to you.

Quote:

The reason I have you on ignore is likely best described by a post to you I saw recently by someone whose name escapes me. They said to you something like, ...

Convenient that it escapes you who it was. Such a person, so severely delusional that they haven't been able to address any of the material I've posted, which, again, yet again, I must remind you, mostly comes from US government sources,

Quote:

The US and I are quite willing and able to consider criticisms. We have been splashed by the best of them. We are both resilient and continually working on self-awareness. Not perfect, but not too bad, comparatively.

I've seen the resilience, but it would much better be described as avoidance. And the "working on self-awareness"; you are the world's leader in self-awareness, again, much more accurately described as self absorption.

And your contentions are absolutely false. If such were the case, the US would abide by world decisions made against its numerous brutalities. It doesn't, Lash, ever.

When the ICC held that the US had committed terrorist/war crimes against Nicaragua, the US simply relied, first, on the crazy contention that the court had no jurisdiction, and then, like a petulant child, "we see things differently".

I know the Nazis and some other pretty brutal people in history see the slaughter of innocent men, women and children differently, but, come on, Lash, let's be realistic, shall we?

Quote:

I don't like having anyone on Ignore, but you clutter my page with meaningless, redundant skid marks of hatred. If you ever decide to branch out and talk of anything that doesn't source from your hatred of America, let me know.

How might this be said to be "continually working on self-awareness". If the material I post is inaccurate, it should be child's play for you to knock it down.

Who do you figure is ahead in the "continually working on self-awareness" game, you or the USA?

0 Replies

@JTT,

Wow I do think that the both of you, "You and Aidan have offered some good insight! Be careful about those who complement you an those who put you down,"Even me" Do not trust the thumbs up or down by the majority!

The reason I do not think that the complements and the put downs from the majority are so critical is because the majority are not critical thinkers. Just wander around and find where most discussion are being held.

Is it in places of logical reasoning or is it in places like rap, movies, football and the so forth?
Even people who seem to be intellectual have some very twisted minds! But then again what do I know as I can not speak in empirical terms!

0 Replies

@Lash,

Quote:

and the other was about grammar, so I'm not sure that even counts.

Given your apparent knowledge of grammar, I'd have to agree. Wink

Quote:

Well, this is the second time ever I've really brava'd aidan, ...

Very good post!

Is a "very good post" simply one that makes a pleasing sound in your little echo chamber, Lash? Do you have that little a respect for the truth?

1 Reply

@JTT,

Quote:

In actuality, there are many countries who could perform actions in a more selfish manner and don't. The Scandinavian countries stand out as a group that directs more of their wealth to helping under privileged countries.

One telling feature of this aid is that none of it is tied aid, which means, if you don't know, that the donor does not demand that the receipient buy from them. The effect of tied aid drastically reduces the effectiveness of such aid, of course not to the donor country.

The US is the worst of the "rich" countries for both giving aid, which is mostly military in nature, and for requiring tied aid. That simply doesn't match the rhetoric, does it?

No it doesn't. Shameful. And this continues to be true under Obama?

Quote:

I'm well aware of the general nature of people, the horrible things that they can do. Those are issue that are extraneous to the point at hand.

Not really though because it is all this grasping jockeying for power and control and resources that has gotten the world to the point that we're at.

Quote:

What frequently happens when Americans, or anyone for that matter, are faced with these issues, is that the person takes it personally. It wasn't you, Aidan, or even your kith and kin [in all likelihood] who committed these fowl deeds. But there's simply no way, no logical way, no moral way to make excuses for them.

America has loathsome criminals [as does every country] but you don't feel a need to apologize for them. So too, you should feel no need to apologize for the loathsome war criminals/terrorists that have seriously besmirched the good names of the vast majority of US citizens.

You know though, I do wish Americans could experience the reality of the world as it is for most of its inhabitants. I'm not saying that I have to any great extent, but living and traveling in a different reality has opened my eyes somewhat.
On facebook, one of my friends was taking a poll of what people around the US were currently paying for a gallon of gas. I think the responses ranged anywhere from $2.98 in Houston to $3.50 in California.
Only one person asked 'yeah but what is the cost in human lives?'
'What is the cost to the rest of the world - our ridiculous rate of consumption?'
But a lot of Americans don't even think about that. They just think about what it costs THEM..but in truth, I think that's how most people are or would be if they could be, or if they were conditioned to be as Americans have been.

I can't and don't even make excuses for that apathy and complacence anymore - much less the war crimes and criminals.
My question is though that when anyone else is put in a position of taking and obtaining and using - how many of them say no?
And that's not an excuse - it's just pragmatism and realism.
I'm not making excuses - I truly do hope that we've gotten to the point that our reputation is so suspect that we realize we've gotten to the end of the line and need to start rehabilitating it by being less self-serving.

But is THAT even a pragmatic or realistic hope? I don't know.
Somehow even asking the question makes me feel naive and ridiculously optimistic.
And that's sad.

2 Replies

@aidan,

I, in this post, and in all your posts, Aidan, appreciate your sense of honesty, truthfulness and candor.

That may well be why Lash has only seen fit to 'bravo' two of your posts, and given your uncommon good sense, she probably accurately "bravoed" your grammar post.

Excuse my forwardness.

{{{{{{{a big friendly hug from one human being to another}}}}}}

1 Reply

@JTT,

She was even-handed and realistic....and I agree with what she said.
There are a lot of truths.

1 Reply

@aidan,

But is THAT even a pragmatic or realistic hope? I don't know.
Somehow even asking the question makes me feel naive and ridiculously optimistic.
And that's sad.

I do hope that it is realistic! You may be ahead of many others in your ethics.

1 Reply

Tunesia, Egyt and now Yemen: a domino effect in the Middle East?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know