U.S. middle east policy, pros and cons: discuss

This thread is about Morsi and the pros and cons of his take.

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

An not all of them alike. But getting more so, given, from my view, provocation.

It's hardly "provocation" to prevent Muslims from massacring innocents or committing genocide.

0 Replies

Since at least two of you have questioned my use of the expression "little red schoolhouse version", maybe I'd better explain this now obsolescent (or, perhaps, obsolete) bit of idiomatic American English. Back in the 1960s it was not uncommon to refer to a simplistic, somewhat naive exposition of a complex problem as a Little Red Schoolhouse version. The reference was to the once ubiquitous little one-room rural schoolhouses where anything more complicated than the three Rs was quickly explained in simplistic terms that even a 12-year-old farm child could easily understand. "We're fighting [insert name of current enemy] because we're good and freedom-loving and they're all evil." That sort of thing.

3 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

My hundred year old aunt taught at one of those in the San Juan Islands somewhere around 1919, and my university, UCLA, was known as that in the fifties - indeed, our nuns would not sent our high school transcripts there.

I figured you knew the expression, Andy.

0 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

Thanks for the cultural translation, Andrew.

0 Replies

@ossobuco,

ossobuco wrote:

This thread is about Morsi and the pros and cons of his take.

No pros.

The cons are that he is just doing the standard Muslim shtick of wanting to attack non-Muslims and then blame his victims for defending themselves.

Nothing to do but stand ready to fight when Egypt starts another war.

0 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

"We're fighting [insert name of current enemy] because we're good and freedom-loving and they're all evil." That sort of thing.

In today's world, sometimes that can be the actual truth, as opposed to something oversimplified.

Interesting times, I guess.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

Lustig Andrei wrote:
"We're fighting [insert name of current enemy] because we're good and freedom-loving and they're all evil." That sort of thing.

In today's world, sometimes that can be the actual truth, as opposed to something oversimplified.

Interesting times, I guess.

Only you, Oralloy (or someone very much like you) could possibly claim with a straight face that anything that simplistic is ever, under any circumstances, the actual truth rather than a childish over-simplification. We didn't even fight the Nazis simply because Hitler was somehow "evil." The true motivation is always much more complex.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Don't you mean:

"In your fantasy [sic] world, sometimes that can be the actual truth, as opposed to something oversimplified."

2 Replies

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

Only you, Oralloy (or someone very much like you) could possibly claim with a straight face that anything that simplistic is ever, under any circumstances, the actual truth rather than a childish over-simplification.

Maybe so. But that is because I refuse to do anything other than tell the absolute truth. And the same applies to those who are very much like me.

The Islamic extremists wish to commit genocide against all non-Muslims. And even within Islam, they think that women should not be allowed to read, going so far as to pour strong acid on the faces of six-year-old girls to punish them for trying to learn to read.

Nothing wrong with calling them evil. They are evil.

And they hate our freedom. They insist vociferously that Islam is not compatible with democracy (because the laws come from man instead of from God). Their ultimate goal besides the extermination of all non-Muslims and the oppression of all women, is the abolishment of all democracy.

So, yes. We're good, they're evil, and they hate our freedom.

Lustig Andrei wrote:

We didn't even fight the Nazis simply because Hitler was somehow "evil." The true motivation is always much more complex.

I can agree with a different motive for the war on terror (albeit still a simple one):

The reason we are at war is because they are attacking us and we are defending ourselves.

But that does not in any way change the reality that we are good, they are evil, and they hate our freedom.

0 Replies

@Val Killmore,

Val Killmore wrote:

Don't you mean:

"In your fantasy [sic] world, sometimes that can be the actual truth, as opposed to something oversimplified."

No. I don't have a fantasy world. I just point out what the truth is.

If you don't like the truth, your dispute is with reality, not with me. I'm just the messenger.

0 Replies

@Val Killmore,

I'm thinking Oralloy may be borderline personality - some of his rantings are just bizarre.

As for Morsi's views - I find them both right, and simplistic. Overall US interest in the ME is related to Oil. There's no other reason for so much US activity there. US interest in Israel is related to both Oil and the large Jewish lobby in the US. Anyone that thinks the US is going to stop interfering in the ME before the oil runs out (or they lose so much power that they can no longer interfere) isn't living in the real world.

I note that the whole of the ME hates Israel, and the US for supporting them, even though Israel has not direct effect on so many countries that hate them.

I also recall that the one time Israel said to Arafat 'we will give you everything you asked for in exchange for peace', Arafat then doubled his demands...that of course was the end of that. It appeared a genuine offer, and Arafat and his party bear responsibility for that.

US ME policy goes beyond Israel of course, to Turkey, the bases in Saudi Arabia, supporting of particular kingdoms, being the currency most ME oil is bought in (Iran uses Euro's last I checked), and perhaps rather loosely, Diego Garcia.

Of note is actions & hatreds against the US :

Iran sponsored terrorist cells in the 70's & 80's after the CIA coup against their president in 51, and after Ayatollah Khomeini seizing power (CIA : a legacy of ashes - 2007 pulitzer prize winner; All the Shahs Men)

Many of the above came from Palestine/Lebanon - which suffers under Israel, which the US directly supports.

I'm not sure about Libya.

Saudi Arabians were the main participants in 9-11, and the US has major bases there & supports their draconian rulers (and also a more extreme form of Islam)

Al-Qaeda itself was born out of the remnants of the CIA's efforts to stop Russia from taking over Afghanistan (read up on it, there's lots of books out there on this - too long to explain here)

This sort of reaction to US involvement isn't new. Much of South America is anti US for somewhat similar reasons.

2 Replies

@vikorr,

And edit to the above : Saudi Arabians were the main participants in 9-11, and the US has major bases there & supports their draconian rulers (and Saudi Arabia also has a more extreme form of Islam)

0 Replies

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

I'm thinking Oralloy may be borderline personality - some of his rantings are just bizarre.

Funny how you never seem to point out any errors in anything I've said.

vikorr wrote:

I note that the whole of the ME hates Israel, and the US for supporting them, even though Israel has not direct effect on so many countries that hate them.

I also recall that the one time Israel said to Arafat 'we will give you everything you asked for in exchange for peace', Arafat then doubled his demands...that of course was the end of that. It appeared a genuine offer, and Arafat and his party bear responsibility for that.

Actually, what happened is, the Palestinians responded to the peace negotiations by sending wave after wave of suicide bombers to massacre Israelis until the Israeli voters got sick of it and replaced the pro-negotiation government with Ariel Sharon.

Since then the Palestinians have done whatever they could to avoid new peace talks.

vikorr wrote:

US ME policy goes beyond Israel of course, to Turkey, the bases in Saudi Arabia, supporting of particular kingdoms, being the currency most ME oil is bought in (Iran uses Euro's last I checked), and perhaps rather loosely, Diego Garcia.

We don't have bases in Saudi Arabia. Those were only necessary when Saddam was in charge of Iraq.

Oil is purchased in our currency because we are the world's reserve currency, not because of any policy on our part.

vikorr wrote:

Of note is actions & hatreds against the US :

Iran sponsored terrorist cells in the 70's & 80's after the CIA coup against their president in 51, and after Ayatollah Khomeini seizing power (CIA : a legacy of ashes - 2007 pulitzer prize winner; All the Shahs Men)

Hardly a CIA coup. The CIA did acquiesce in it, but the primary actors in the coup were the same clerics who later overthrew the Shah and who rule Iran today.

And even among those playing a minor role, the CIA played only a very small part, as the UK was far more involved than the CIA.

vikorr wrote:

Many of the above came from Palestine/Lebanon - which suffers under Israel, which the US directly supports.

The only thing Israel does to Lebanon or the Palestinians, is defend themselves when they attack Israel.

If Lebanon and the Palestinians do not wish Israel to defend themselves, all they have to do is stop attacking Israel.

vikorr wrote:

Saudi Arabians were the main participants in 9-11, and the US has major bases there & supports their draconian rulers (and Saudi Arabia also has a more extreme form of Islam)

The US has no bases in Saudi Arabia. They became unnecessary after Saddam was deposed.

The 9/11 attackers were enemies of the Saudi government just as much as they were our own enemies.

vikorr wrote:

Al-Qaeda itself was born out of the remnants of the CIA's efforts to stop Russia from taking over Afghanistan (read up on it, there's lots of books out there on this - too long to explain here)

Wrong. The CIA's efforts in Afghanistan did not lead to al-Qa'ida.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Quote:

Funny how you never seem to point out any errors in anything I've said.

I've pointed out many in previous 'discussions' - you lack a balanced mental attitude in most of your replies - it shines through to anyone that reads your posts.

I'm with Osso - I'm not otherwise answering your posts anymore. Prolonged conversation just brings out your irrationality, which makes for nonsensical conversation.

Edit : acknowledgement : the Saudi bases were withdrawn in 2003, after 9-11 (which still makes comments about Saudi involvement based on that valid)

2 Replies

@vikorr,

And don't leave out "a waste of time." Mr. Green

1 Reply

@vikorr,

vikorr wrote:

oralloy wrote:
Funny how you never seem to point out any errors in anything I've said.

I've pointed out many in previous 'discussions'

Liar.

vikorr wrote:

you lack a balanced mental attitude in most of your replies

Liar.

vikorr wrote:

it shines through to anyone that reads your posts.

Liar.

vikorr wrote:

your irrationality

Liar.

vikorr wrote:

which makes for nonsensical conversation.

The nonsensical conversation stems from the fact that you incessantly lie.

1 Reply

@Lustig Andrei,

Lustig Andrei wrote:

There's nothing new here. Morsi is just re-stating the old official Islamist line -- America's support of Israel and Israeli ambitions is what's causing a certain hostility against America and Americans in the Near East. <Yawwn> What else is new?

I'd note that without US support Israel would have been ground into dust years ago and without continued support it will get so ground.

The necessarily discriminatory and oppressive Israeli regime should be ground into dust and be replaced by a truly democratic, egalitarian and pluralistic one that enfranchises all of the peoples of Israel/Palestine.

Offhandedly dismissing the criticisms of the Islamist still leaves the problem of Israel's repression of the Palestinian peoples. You're merely addressing the Islamists' motives, and ignoring the crux of the problem in Israel/Palestine.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

cicerone imposter wrote:

And don't leave out "a waste of time."

All your conversations are a waste of time, since you are too stupid to have a meaningful conversation.

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

The necessarily discriminatory and oppressive Israeli regime should be ground into dust and be replaced by a truly democratic, egalitarian and pluralistic one that enfranchises all of the peoples of Israel/Palestine.

It is hardly oppressive for Israel to prevent Palestinians from running around murdering people.

Your discrimination complaint is silly. Israel is a Jewish state. If the Palestinians want a non-Jewish state, they should get going with negotiations for the creation of their own state.

And 90% of Islam will disappear into nuclear fireballs before Israel is ever ground into dust.

InfraBlue wrote:

Offhandedly dismissing the criticisms of the Islamist still leaves the problem of Israel's repression of the Palestinian peoples.

No such repression. Telling a Palestinian he can't run around murdering people is not in any way repressive.

0 Replies

U.S. middle east policy, pros and cons: discuss

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know