What do you think of this so called "Arab Spring"? DaveMoral - 4-22-2011 at 09:29 AM
We'll see how it all turns out. On the one hand I think it's great that the people are rising up against the douches that have been in power,
supported by our government, for decades. And on the other, I'm skeptical about anyone that steps into the power vacuum because let's face it...
there's not a good track record that... and there's also a concern on my end that goes in too different directions, whether Salafi/Wahhabi
fundamentalists get into power or how much the people(or some new dictator) choose to Westernize and abandon their religion. I think abandoning it and
attempting to follow a European or American model would be just as bad as embracing fundamentalism.
That said, the hypocrisy of the United States drives me nuts. There was almost nothing said to truly support the Egyptians because Mubarak was a
valued ally. Tunisia was just kind of "meh" because Tunisia is of little importance to the US stategically or economically. And the glaring hypocrisy
of the military support for the Libyan uprising while turning a blind eye to what's going on in Bahrain, complete with interference by the Saudis in
support of the "king" of Bahrain, really pisses me off.Voodoobillyman - 4-22-2011 at 11:52 AM
Quote:
the glaring hypocrisy of the military support for the Libyan uprising while turning a blind eye to what's going on in Bahrain, complete with
interference by the Saudis in support of the "king" of Bahrain, really pisses me off.
I would have to say this is being watched closely, but the king in bahrain has not begun wholesale slaughtering the protesters as of yet. I believe
that is the fundamental difference in our approach to the two nations. bahrain is also a key ally in the Gulf (houses 5th fleet base of ops) and Libya
is not. You are obvioulsy going to see transparency in this countries responses to these different scenarios based on our level of interest in the
different areas. No one nation in the history of man has deviated from that formula, you only get involved if there is something in it for you.Voodoobillyman - 4-22-2011 at 12:00 PM
Syria is much worse than Bahrain right now with all of the assistance from Iran in"quelling" that uprising. They just killed another 17 people today
confirmed. I think the only reason we do not get involved there is because it has the potential to drag us into a larger conflict in the region and
create a third warfront for an already stretched thin armed force.BDx13 - 4-22-2011 at 02:09 PM
"No one nation in the history of man has deviated from that formula, you only get involved if there is something in it for you."
Wholly agreed, but it's just so painful to hear officials trying to make public statements about why they are intervening in one case but not another.
They can;t stand the smell of their own bullshit!
And yeah, I was going to mention Syria. Unfortunately, it's looking like a lot more than 17 at this point. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_syriaVoodoobillyman - 4-22-2011 at 02:38 PM
With Libya it's a bit different. They only account for like 2% of the oil supply (proven) so I have no idea what our ulterior motive is for being
involved unless the President truly does want to see innocents being slaughtered stop. I still think the powers that be would like to get more
involved in Syria, but it is waaaaay too risky as far as becoming something much larger. Iran is just looking for a reason to begin a larger conflict
in the region to drag Isreal in to but do it by being the protagonist rather than antagonist. that's why they always do this shit on the low low. They
are some scheming motherfuckersrandom - 4-22-2011 at 03:58 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Voodoobillyman
With Libya it's a bit different. They only account for like 2% of the oil supply (proven) so I have no idea what our ulterior motive is for being
involved unless the President truly does want to see innocents being slaughtered stop.
Cheap political points. Lots of people have strong feelings because of PanAm103/Lockerbie.
I'll admit that I've missed everything about Syria and only ever kept loose tabs on their internal politics. My guess, given what I know about the
history, is that Syria has a fairly secular government that has kept the "Islamic fundamentalists" in Hezbollah (Hizb Allah, i.e. "party of God") in
check, at least from our perspective. I know Hezbollah made some gains a few years back after the brief conflict with Israel, but I don't know how
much that changed the government (and it probably won more public support for Hezbollah than it did political support). I'd guess that our stance on
Syria is much like it was on Egypt, a wait-and-see approach where we want to support secular allies but don't want to end up on the wrong side of a
mass democratic uprising.Six66Mike - 4-22-2011 at 08:55 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Voodoobillyman
Syria is much worse than Bahrain right now with all of the assistance from Iran in"quelling" that uprising. They just killed another 17 people today
confirmed. I think the only reason we do not get involved there is because it has the potential to drag us into a larger conflict in the region and
create a third warfront for an already stretched thin armed force.
So you have Iran supporting the squashing of uprising, and on the other hand you have the US providing support for the uprising.
