03-05-2017, 03:03 PM
(03-05-2017, 02:28 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote:(03-05-2017, 11:19 AM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: <snip my stuff>
Quote:I'm sympathetic to all of the above. I'd emphasize a few points.
Thank you Bob. That remark is not a smartass, sort of thing.
Quote:The rebel factions that count for much have external patrons who wish to increase their influence in the area. These would include Iran, Turkey and the embryo Kurdistan. Russia would count too.
I certainly agree. "Rebels" is not a singular, but an assortment of factions , which as you stated above have sponsors.
Quote: While there likely are pure innocent natives striving only to live free under their own traditions, if such folk aren't accepting 'help' from an external sponsor they aren't apt to be significant players. The situation is better perceived as power play with several tribes / governments / religious factions attempting to expand influence and prevent the others from expanding influence.
I'd concur with the above.
Quote: As the sort of insurgent war being fought favors keeping one's faction alive over entirely suppressing all the other factions, the common dynamic is quagmire.
Heh. Bingo, above.
Quote:Western Civilization is part of the problem. We are tempted to see the West's central virtues in democracy, human rights and a free economy. The Middle East has seen Big Oil. They have been victims of corporate crony-ism, and view the west from that perspective. To them, the Western virtues are Big Lies, promises spoken but never delivered on.
Yes, it is. I've tried, but it seems to no avail to get Eric to see things, in what appears to be our [Bob,Rags] POV. That is to state, for clarity for you, Bob, is the folks in the Mideast don't want any form of US meddling there. For such is at the least hypocrisy. At the most, it's just another mundane attempt at control of oil resources there.
Quote: The problem is that Islamic religion promotes virtues that appeal to the locals more than corporate crony-ism. Given the history of the region, this is an entirely understandable choice.
Well, given the larger picture where the US uses the trope of "humanitarian interventionism"/outright regime change, goes beyond the Mideast to say Latin America. I dare say the US has a sordid past to reconcile with there as well. Pinochet, Honduras, Iran-Contra, and the list continues onward. Chalmers Johnson is correct in stating that blow-back is the result of interventions in the internal affairs of assorted nation states. That is to say karma is real and does assert itself , even at the nation state level.
Quote:Alas, the governments that result from embracing Islam tend towards Agricultural Age autocratic tyranny. From a safe vantage point half a world away immersed in a culture centered on Enlightenment values, I can say the emphasis in Islam is a mistake. It will prolong the instability typical of cultures transitioning from the Agricultural to the Industrial pattern.
And , it for that reason I stand against accepting refugees in general from that region. I do know there are of course exceptions like Christian Arabs, and even quite moderate Islamic folks like the Kurds as well. Those exceptions , I can accept as refugees, since they won't upset the apple cart, so to speak.
Quote: Of course I feel the same way of the red cultures of Appalachia and the Rust Belt. It is one thing to shake one's head in dismay at those committed powerfully and irrationally to the past. It is another to convince a people immersed in older values that they someday eventually are going to have to catch up.
I'd add the "old South", which usually includes Oklahoma. The meme of self reliance runs deep here indeed. There is a peculiar hostility to even state level provision of public services which to me is odd. An obvious example that one is just one car wreck away from bankruptcy is something that can't even penetrate that meme within my family even. Like you allude to often, values lock, runs deep.
Quote:So, meanwhile, I'll ask Powell's Questions. If there isn't a clear path to something clearly better, a path that includes bringing our forces home after the goal is achieved, that's a bad hand. Fold.
Yes....
Quote:Obama did try to train a local set of proxies. He wanted a bunch of people willing to fight for American goals using American tactics. The US had a big problem finding volunteers. They had another big problem with people deserting as soon as they were trained and equipped. (Thank you, America! Good bye!) The tiny force that remained was torn to pieces in its early engagements. Obama anticipated failure, but bowed to the pressure from Eric like thinkers to at least try some sort of proxy war. While in theory using local proxies to advance one's goals is a good idea, you need local proxies whose goals are aligned with one's own. They are hard to find. Turkey, Iran, Russia and Kurdistan find such proxies easier to recruit. After his initial prototype proxy effort failed, Obama gave up on it. I don't expect Trump will try to repeat the experiment.
Bob, another poker term, pot equity. Essentially, you have to have a hand that has some chance of winning the pot, before you proceed to continue on with the hand. The US has a lousy hand , with 0 pot equity , and thus should fold. Eric, why do you insist on playing lousy hands based on numerology or somesuch?
---Value Added