ISIL, ISIS, Daesh discussion thread.

h4rm0ny said:
Who is Burger King and what are "Burgers" in this analogy. Because if you think the burgers are only weapons you're ignoring that the USA actually provides military assistance not just weapons. They have troops situated nearby and have in the past bombed sites in Yemen at the request of Saudi Arabia. They moved a carrier group into the region a couple of weeks ago. Burgers are a poor analogy for what the USA provides to Saudi Arabia. Which also brings us onto who you think Burger King is in this analogy? Russia? Because I don't see Russia arming a country that would like to see Iran overthrown or which aids IS in Syria on their doorstep. If Saudi Arabia wanted to buy burgers from Russia Burger King they'd have to settle down and behave 'cause otherwise they're just going to be kicked out of the restaurant. China? China doesn't do that.

Seriously, your analogy is hyper-reductive. Geopolitics is far, far more complicated than a Burger King analogy can provide. It is the backing of the USA that allows the Saudi regime to behave as it does and there aren't swap-in substitutes for that.

Also, I have never, ever been convinced of the argument that "if we didn't do it somebody else would". Especially not when applied to making money by propping up an oppressive regime that promotes terrorism in other countries.
Click to expand...
Haha, no Russia just sells and supports practically everyone else with "burgers" :)

Thanks for highlighting that politics are more complicated than burgers though.
 
h4rm0ny said:
Surely the relevant question is not the hyperbolic "will it suddenly fix everything" and more the real-world ones of "will it help?", "is it right to sell weapons to a despotic monarchy that oppresses women and supports IS?" and "are we comfortable knowing that those weapons will be used on people in Yemen who ask for a right to vote?"

Saying it wont fix everything as an argument against not doing something is like saying not eating that burger wont make you immediately thin so eat it. (Since you communicate via burger analogies).



StriderX may be a militant socialist and you'll find me debating with them in many other threads. But I am an arch-Capitalist and admirer of Ayn Rand and I also think US policy towards Saudi Arabia is wrong. Being anti-war is not a Right or Left issue. It's a humanitarian one. It's a democratic one. If you're getting both socialists and capitalists disagreeing with you, that should tell you something.
Click to expand...

I disagree with people who support dictators who kill their own people, simply because that leader aligns with their political view. Yet here I am being preached to about morals.
 
RoboCod said:
I disagree with people who support dictators who kill their own people, simply because that leader aligns with their political view. Yet here I am being preached to about morals.
Click to expand...

So you're against the USA providing arms and military support to the Saudi regime?
 
h4rm0ny said:
.

??? I said that Russia would not arm Saudi Arabia with its current policies and goals. You respond with the above. Not to the point, I feel.
Click to expand...

The point is,

USA selling arms to SA = not ok
RUSSIA selling arms to Iran, Syria et al = ok

Am I right?
 
RoboCod said:
The point is,

USA selling arms to SA = not ok
RUSSIA selling arms to Iran, Syria et al = ok

Am I right?
Click to expand...

In general no, in the idea that Russia isnt preaching to the world that it is the hero of freedom... yes.

This isn't even that important, it should not be happening and it is purely profiteering for US companies and ego stroking at the Pentagon/Langley.
 
The hypocrisy! Russians foreign policy, rather than proclaiming to be "the hero of freedom", is just annexing its neighbouring countries.
 
ThestigGT999 said:
he isn't against arming the moderate jihadist tho

also when does iran bomb funerals or weddings like SA does in Yemen
Click to expand...

Their two examples were Syria and Iran. Iran is by far the most defensible. They are not aggressors and haven't been historically. The closest you can get with making Iran out to be a terrorist state is Hezbollah. Which was formed in response to Israeli occupation and even after that their biggest confrontation was again a defensive one where Israel crossed the borders into Lebanon and Hezbollah kicked their arses a second time. So not a great example of Iranian aggression. You could similarly attempt to make them out as aggressors in supplying some training and arms to Shia militias in Iraq after the USA tore that country apart. But I don't think anyone here, including Robocod, would begrudge communities trying to defend themselves in war torn Iraq after the US and UK invasion of that country.

Syria is a less good example (or a better one if you're Robocod) because Assad's regime is hardly a Good Guy. But he was at least Secular and not worse than others we have supported. The point in the case of Syria is not that Assad is good, it's that we're making a deal with the devil and wreaking havoc because we want to advance our political interests in the region. That's not good on us, even if the target is Assad's regime.
 
RoboCod said:
The hypocrisy! Russians foreign policy, rather than proclaiming to be "the hero of freedom", is just annexing its neighbouring countries.
Click to expand...

Firstly, you seem to have a very Either / Or approach. If someone says the USA is bad, you immediately attack Russia. The faith that there must always be a Good Guy and a Bad Guy in real world situations is one of the reasons so few people understand the Middle East in the first place. It's like some psychological blindspot. Secondly, Russia didn't annexe "a country". They annexed a peninsula of that country populated by people who are ethnically Russian, speak Russian and want to be part of Russia. That area has also historically been Russian. The people in the Crimea were pleased to join Russia. Also, you might want to look into the recent history of US manipulation in the Ukraine - which is next to Russia and one Ocean and half a continent away from the USA. US Congress approved a pretty large budget for CIA operations in the Ukraine prior to the "Orange Revolution". I vaguely recall it being something like a billion US dollars but I could dig out the figures if necessary. If Russia was funnelling a billion dollars and sending intelligence agents into Northern Ireland, you can bet the UK would have something to say about it. Just for a little context here.
 
h4rm0ny said:
If Russia was funnelling a billion dollars and sending intelligence agents into Northern Ireland, you can bet the UK would have something to say about it. Just for a little context here.
Click to expand...

Funnily enough the US did this... though it wasn't "official" and the UK barely said a thing, other than Thatcher grumbling once that clearly didn't get heard across the pond.
 
I offer the anti Russian points as an attempt to at least offer some balance to the overwhelming anti West vitriol that people with that agenda like to drum.

As for the good guy, bad guy mantra. I've never suggested there were any, I'm not the one failing to at least acknowledge Assad has done many bad things. It seems the status quo is in fact the opposite and proclaim his "achievements" and his excellent regime policies. Then we divulge into meaningless rants about western arms dealing, as if they are the only ones who do that and as if it has much bearing. THAT is depicting a good guy, bad guy vision.

Thanks for patronising me with the good guy, bad guy assumption though. I hope you feel you achieved something today ;)
 
Essentially - if you like your western lifestyle, support US. If you don't like western lifestyle, support anyone but US. Russia is trying to discredit US almost out of spite, despite Putin saving his ill gotten gains in USD and selling their oil in USD. Russia as a country has absolutely nothing to gain in going against US - but Putin has a lot to gain by looking good to his people and be anti-western.
 
RoboCod said:
I'm not the one failing to at least acknowledge Assad has done many bad things. It seems the status quo is in fact the opposite and proclaim his "achievements" and his excellent regime policies.
Click to expand...

Sadly I feel Assad is a classic case of the road to hell is paved with good intentions and you can't be a strong man in that region of the world and not get your hands dirty. Unfortunately the truth is with or without Western involvement and even with the best intentions Syria was heading towards an irrevocable position without clear cut good or bad people on both sides and some very bad people on both.

If you watch some of the footage captured from the earliest days in some of the cities its very uneven in how it unfolds - in some areas there are influxes of young, seemingly hardline Islam backed, fighters who are later replaced by much more established terrorist linked groups in other areas it opens with government backed forces involved in violent repression. Whole thing is a mess.
 
Think a few places are going to start to fall fairly quickly now in Syria - latest lot of updates show many of the heavily armed/equipped Jihadi types in many places have faded away replaced by some of the younger, lighter armed, fighters that were more prevalent in the opening stages of the war.

EDIT: Seen another explanation - some claiming al-qaeda backed groups are using these younger fighters as cannon fodder rather than being signs of a pull out of "higher value" forces.
 
Last edited:
Hannibal Buress said:
Essentially - if you like your western lifestyle, support US. If you don't like western lifestyle, support anyone but US. Russia is trying to discredit US almost out of spite, despite Putin saving his ill gotten gains in USD and selling their oil in USD. Russia as a country has absolutely nothing to gain in going against US - but Putin has a lot to gain by looking good to his people and be anti-western.
Click to expand...

Spot on
 
Hannibal Buress said:
Essentially - if you like your western lifestyle, support US. If you don't like western lifestyle, support anyone but US. Russia is trying to discredit US almost out of spite, despite Putin saving his ill gotten gains in USD and selling their oil in USD. Russia as a country has absolutely nothing to gain in going against US - but Putin has a lot to gain by looking good to his people and be anti-western.
Click to expand...

I'd say if you like your Western lifestyle focus less on waging wars in oil rich areas of the Middle East and more on energy independence and not giving ever more of your tax dollars to the military-industrial complex (if American). Exacerbating civil unrest in the Middle East and antagonising other world powers is not going to make your new dishwasher cheaper or keep house prices down.

The USA enforces the use of the USD for oil selling. They made Saudi Arabia legally commit to selling in USD in the Seventies! They destroyed Iraq which was trying to sell oil in Euros. Libya wanted to sell oil using a new "African Euro" backed by their own gold reserves, Venezuela was threatened for daring to buy oil from Iran. The US really, really doesn't like people selling oil other than in USD and responds with sanctions and / or missiles if you try. The reason being that having the US dollar be the global reserve currency gives them a huge amount of influence and ensures endless credit to service their £20trn in debt.

Also, Russia "discredits the US out of spite"? So sanctions imposed by the USA on Russia, military forces by the USA on their doorstep surrounding their country, attempts to build US power bases throughout the Middle East? These have nothing to do with it? Russia is just inherently spiteful and likes criticising the USA? Also, you realise that Russia has been attempting to reach out to the USA and improve relations for years? Does that sounds "spiteful" to you?
 
Now it's entirely pointless arguing because we've entered the tit-for-tat regime of politics, with Trump at the helm, it can only continue (not that Clinton would have care about stopping something that is so inherently American).

This is ultimately what the defense contractors wanted all along, it's amazing how many ex-generals/senators/congressmen seem to have strange connections to companies like Raytheon or BAE, or security companies that develop ultra-intrusive scanning devices in Airports... they want people to die, because it suits their pocket and now that it is self-serving "you hit us, we hit you" ideologues... they just sit back, lobby a little bit and suddenly we live in a **** hole where you can't open your mouth for fear of endangering your life prospects. A lot of this is also hidden in Israel away from prying US regulators, there's a good reason why Israel is supported as much as it is.

/lolconspiracytheory
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom