The Fourth Turning Halftime Update

[Ragnarök_62]

(10-24-2018, 07:04 AM)Bill the Piper Wrote:

(10-23-2018, 04:01 PM)Ragnarök_62 Wrote: It's the Neocons who are dumb idealists who think we can create democracies at the barrel of the gun. Everything they have touched has turned the shit. They need to just fucking get booted out. They're too damn dangerous to be near any place of power. Note, Trump has a basket full  of Neocons in his  administration.  I really wish the Democrats would run someone like Tulsi Gabbord. She deserves to be the first Woman POTUS instead of that hack , Hillery.

I'll argue for the opposite: it's the non-interventionists who are a misfortune for mankind. The Continent is especially full of them, despite their overall good domestic policies.

Exhibit 1: Hitler. If the British and French forces decided to topple him in 1933, when German military was very weak, there would be no Holocaust. There would still be a war in the 1940s, because Poland the Soviets would have a fight over Belarus and Ukraine. Japan would also grab territory in East Asia. But there's no denial that without Hitler, WW2 wouldn't be so devastating.

Exhibit 2: Decolonisation. The French gave up their colonial empire, creating a power vacuum soon filled by murderous psychopaths like Mobutu, Bocassa or Pol Pot. The 1960s wouldn't be a bloody red decade if they decided to do some nation building. Britain did, and most of former British colonies are democracies.

Exhibit 3: Syria. Were Bush and Blair in power, Assad wouldn't gas people and there would be no ISIS. Obama acted as if he played France in an RPG and Trump does so as well. Trump's admin might be "full of Neocons", but because of the dotard's crush at absolute rulers, they are guaranteed not to act according to their ideology.

Tell you what I'll do,  I will agree with you that your argument is the default decision process we have now.

I will disagree with the your argument's process.

Exhibit 1:.  OK, let's reword that to get a template of what to do now and the future. We failed to declare war on an enemy that obtained the means and desire to invade us.

This is a stupid policy of course, since it didn't work.  Let's make a policy now and the future and evaluate some wars fought previously to inform us on future decisions.

1.  Do something simple to inform our decision like intelligence gathering. The 2nd Gulf War informs us though intelligence gather is mandatory. However one must account for agendas on the part of intelligence.  The example here of course were statements to the affect of "Saddam Hussein posses banned shit as per assorted treaties". This therefore informs us, while intelligence gathering in a must do, however, this information must also be fact checked with data from news organizations, alternative media, wikileaks, etc.  If the statements from intelligence confirm or agree with, then intelligence gathers sufficient credibility.  

2. Credible final from process as defined in 1. should be distributed in unaltered form as to prevent propaganda.All propaganda is fake news. Those two words mean the same thing.  That means government should present these findings to everyone.

3. These steps make stuff better for everyone. Voters know the real dope. Likewise , the Federal government folks are getting for real intelligence with higher  validity.

4. Track trends in intelligence along with current events.  Now, if this were done, then other countries would have a good idea to prepare for an invasion.

5. If trends and current events indicate combat, then declare war.  Wrt WW
II, given known history the plan would have been to prepare for invasion [at a different date perhaps].

6. OK, even my process fails because , well humans.  Humans have an illness call ostrich syndrome. Like other ailments, this one causes lots of suffering and death.

7. Remember to consider blowback.  Blowback is defined as negative consequences which arise from military or covert intervention. This reality rarely informs official actions or public known information.

Final answer:  We're doomed to respond stupidly because ostrich syndrome.

* ostrich award for humans

Exhibit 2.  Let's consider the road to the Vietnam war for that. The starting point for this was when N Vietnam associated with a proxy the VC.  France tossed that to the US from perhaps decolonization. That probably happened because WWII left the French unable to keep its empire because resources.  Empires require resources like a huge military and enough wealth to keep. So that was why. France didn't have enough resources to have a sufficient military along with other resources to stay  an empire. There resultant power vacuum did leave enough space for <insert bad guys here.>  Also, the US and USSR installed bad guys who were basically patsies for which big guy who put them power. Therefore, unless this->bad guy is at present an existential threat then no intervention is needed at all . If "bad guy = evil" = is the only unqualified reason for intervention, then that's stupid because there has been no logical thought process done to support vague nonsense. Other common vague nonsense are statements of non fact like "national security interest(s)", "human rights", and "friends and allies".
Now let's take the reasons to intervene in Syria.  There was of course some sort of uprising.  The proximate reason for this was high food prices due to drought, not "we want freedoms". The next thing to consider why Assad i= bad guy. Syria as assorted groups, like Kurds,Sunnis,Alawites,Shias,etc. So, with that, some sort of repression happens to keep the infighting somewhat stable. So... since the US chose to intervene, there result was contained chaos. The chaos in Syria is from Russia and Assad. This is better than the results from regime change in Iraq. Failed states are really bad and are certainly worse than Assad. Libya is an even better example.  Regime change turned the space there from a repressive area, but at least folks could eat,drink, and not live in a shithole in general.  Likewise, this is why so many refugees went to Europe and is now a huge clusterfuck. ISIS happened because of Iraq state failure + Mujahedin which are religious crackpots who became Al Qaeda in Afghanistan.
That sequence is ISIS = blowback(Proxy,regime change). There were lots of stupid policy that lead to ISIS, that's for sure.  However all said decision were to intervene someplace. The US proxy fight in Syria of course made territory easier to get in Syria.  The best policy here would be to just blow off what's going down in that country. As for gassing.  Well, that accusation hasn't been independently verified by a valid 3rc party. The "White Helmets" are essentially some monitoring folks from our proxies.  That's not good enough for me.