How the Arab World Came Apart • Hacker News Board

Re: How the Arab World Came Apart

#301

Post by kobayashi » Thu, Aug 11, 2016, 6:57 PM UTC

gotchange wrote: post #283

return0 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you know what i mean, but you like to twist my words. I m not american. This is a cynical view from Europe. Believe it or not it's closer to the truth rather than believing that having elections suddenly would fix all the problems in countries like egypt, libya, syria.

If you think that this was an unfair characterization of your comment, can you please refute the points that I raised in my counterargument? Because just taking your word for it won't cut it, sorry. > "elections suddenly would fix all the problems in countries like egypt, libya, syria" I'd take ballot-box-only democracy and majoritarianism over tyrannical strongman rule or military dictatorships anytime of the day bu…

>It is not the fault of the countries in the Eastern part of the Arabic speaking world that they're surrounded by reactionary forces in the region like the oil sheikhdoms or nationalist-led Israel that they would do everything they can to undermine the then-nascent democratic experiments to protect their interests and save their thrones but this is the topic of another article.

Woh, woh, woh, what on Earth does Israel have to do with this? Israelis haven't done anything to undermine the "democratic experiments" in any of its neighbouring states. In fact, Israel is the only regional country to consistently support Kurdish democracy, which it has done for decades.

Re: How the Arab World Came Apart

#302

Post by hacker42 » Thu, Aug 11, 2016, 7:14 PM UTC

abalone wrote: post #298

hacker42 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not call the flaws what they are? The diffusion of values seems to be a very slow process, if it works at all given the ever growing Muslim population. The percentage of third generation Muslims in Western countries who still don't really oppose ideas of violence and misogyny in the Quran and who would prefer to return to a social order of the lifetime of Muhammed is astonishingly high (~30%), and Muslim fanatics…

And what would be the percentage of Christians in Western countries who don't really oppose ideas of violence[1] and misogyny[2] in the Bible and would prefer to return to a traditional social order? [1] http://commonsenseatheism.com/?p=21 [2] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/10635510/Women-...

There is a difference in the percentages and arguably in the degree of accepted violence and actually lived misogyny. There is definitely a difference in the extremes (Islam is currently the only ideology to produce suicide bombers in such large quantities). There is also a difference in that the Bible is regarded to consist of interpretations of God's words, whereas the Quran is regarded to contain a direct transcript of Allah's words.

Re: How the Arab World Came Apart

#303

Post by bogomipz » Thu, Aug 11, 2016, 7:27 PM UTC

metaphorm wrote: post #288

bogomipz wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am not confused at all. I am pointing out that it is a BS term, with no accepted definition. That's hardly pedantry. And no you can't just say "Middle Eastern counties, the countries of the Mahgreb are "on fire" and they are not geographically part of the Middle East. So according to you the meaningful distinction is that its "currently on fire"? What happens if its not on fire or stabilizes politically? Does its s…

yeah yeah I've read Edward Said as well. Sure, its Orientalism and Imperialism crystalized into a language idiom. That's how language and culture works. We can find it distasteful all day but there's not much good to come from arguing semantics on the internet.

You are the one that suggested pedantry and then when given a a response now want to go suggest semantic arguments. It's as if you arguing with yourself.

Re: How the Arab World Came Apart

#304

Post by dd9990 » Thu, Aug 11, 2016, 7:29 PM UTC

anonu wrote: post #77

My view on the Middle East: it has been a playground for the powers of the world to muck around. The fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end WWI allowed the region to be carved up between the French and the British. Secret agreements like Sykes-Picot cemented borders that should never have been there. After WWII a considerable amount of support was put behind Israel (and rightly so). However, the ongoing conflict and l…

>After WWII a considerable amount of support was put behind Israel (and rightly so).

I'm guessing those who lost their families and homes at gunpoint would disagree with that being "right". Each intervention creates more victims, it's just that some are more easily written out of history.

Re: How the Arab World Came Apart

#305

Post by 6stringmerc » Thu, Aug 11, 2016, 7:31 PM UTC

hedonistbot wrote: post #297

This piece was a huge waste of time. Following the personal stories of a number of individuals in most of the Middle East countries does not give any information to the reader about any of the geopolitics or power plays in the region. It just leaves the reader confused and depressed that nothing can be done and we should probably leave this matters to people more knowledgeable. Is this some new form of journalism. An…

As much as I respect the NY Times, I still have trouble reconciling why they give space to Brooks & Friedman, who are both increasingly out of touch, hackish, and self-interested to the point of combining their forces to snatch away gobs of credibility and flush them down the proverbial toilet.

Re: How the Arab World Came Apart

#306

Post by webXL » Thu, Aug 11, 2016, 7:32 PM UTC

6stringmerc wrote: post #227

How did it come apart? Almost exactly like Dick Cheney thought it would 20 years before cheering for the invasion. From an episode of Meet The Press in 2014[1]: CHUCK TODD: All right, let me ask you a couple of quick questions. I want to play for you an interesting clip of you 20 years ago about Iraq and Saddam Hussein. Take a look. DICK CHENEY (ON TAPE): That's a very volatile part of the world. And if you take down…

Eerie he's so prescient there. If only youtube was a thing then we could have all been sending this around.

To give backers of the war the benefit of the doubt, a whole lot of shit changed after that video. Hindsight is 20/20 and we can't back test strategies like the stock market. It would be nice if we could.

Re: How the Arab World Came Apart

#307

Post by webXL » Thu, Aug 11, 2016, 7:42 PM UTC

mytddu wrote: post #236

jcbeard wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The invasion of Iraq was stupid. It was likely illegal, based on false pretenses, and well....shouldn't have happened. The invasions initial execution was beautiful (first few days). The US Military performed splendidly. The follow through (driven by political leaders) was idiotic. Stupid decisions like not listening to his generals (Bush), disbanding the Iraqi security forces (Paul Bremer), and the odd focus on turn…

> The invasions initial execution was beautiful (first few days) The initial "Shock and Awe" campaign in Baghdad killed an estimated 6,600+ civilians. [1] It's stated purpose was to " impose this overwhelming level of Shock and Awe against an adversary on an immediate or sufficiently timely basis to paralyze its will to carry on ... [to] seize control of the environment and paralyze or so overload an adversary's perc…

Please don't redefine terrorism. Terrorists don't give fair warning. Terrorists don't primarily target military installations. Terrorists don't accept surrender. As abhorrent and terrifying as war is, nothing can excuse the deliberate targeting of civilians. Yeah, it was disgusting, but the whole world watched because the whole world's media decided to broadcast it. Without the terror of Saddam's reign coupled with the "shock and awe" of 9/11, none of this would have ever happened.

Re: How the Arab World Came Apart

#308

Post by imprudence » Thu, Aug 11, 2016, 8:00 PM UTC

marcusgarvey wrote: post #212

bogomipz wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed on this point. The NY Times is the newspaper of record in the United States. And as such they hold responsibility both for their editorial policy that allowed Judith Miller's stories about WMDs. What's more remarkable is how unapologetic she is about her own involvement. This is worth a listen(the second half) http://www.wnyc.org/story/bobs-grill-1-judith-miller/

Iraq, the surprising arrival of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, Brexit shock, rise of Trump...the commentator classes of New York, DC, London and other "tastemaker" cities need to reckon with their failures and understand why they were so utterly wrong. Instead, in most cases, we see doubling down and demonization of the other side. It's quite extraordinary. The black swans are coming fast and…

"The prudent doth keep silence in such a time; for it is an evil time." Amos 5.13

> The black swans are coming fast and thick.

"Therefore thus saith the LORD, the God of hosts, the Lord: Lamentation shall be in all the broad places, and they shall say in all the streets: 'Alas! alas!' and they shall call the husbandman to mourning, and proclaim lamentation to such as are skilful of wailing." Amos 5.16

Re: How the Arab World Came Apart

#309

Post by jessaustin » Thu, Aug 11, 2016, 8:08 PM UTC

jomamaxx wrote: post #280

jessaustin wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without USA+Europe, I believe the Arab world would look like Libya does now internally. This is irony, right? Without Europe and USA, Libya wouldn't look like it does now, and this isn't ancient history: it happened five years ago! It astounds me how much people forget in such a short time. We have a sort of "Forget Disastrous Military Interventions" Complex.

"It astounds me how much people forget in such a short time." I have not 'forgotten' anything. I watched every moment of the Libya episode. I suggest that it is your posture which is 'forgetting'. A) Libya and Gaddafis totalitarianism, his child rape, corruption, cronyism - and admitted direct involvement in terrorism (Lockerbie bombing) - and then his attempts to mass murder dissenter ARE NOT THE FAULT OF THE WEST .…

Good grief, don't get your neocon underoos in a twist. There was no "advancing genocidal army". That was a convenient lie told by Qaddafi's soi-disant political rivals in Switzerland and retweeted by every lazy-ass media organization in USA. [0] He was raping children? Gosh that's terrible... when they do it in Saudi, UAE, Thailand, Brunei, etc. Scramble the fighter jets! He was corrupt and cronyist? Umm... never mind on those fighter jets, we'll find some other solution for Washington DC.

You're the only one suggesting that the West should "create democracy" anywhere. Libya ain't Lichtenstein. Besides everyone knows that the democracy goalpost gets moved whenever it's convenient, like it did for Mosaddegh. Qaddafi was a violent corrupt warlord, but he wasn't the first in Africa, nor even the only, nor certainly the worst. More Libyans died in Reagan's post-Lockerbie bombing back in the 1980s than passengers died in the bombing itself, and Qaddafi had been fairly tolerable for about a decade before the French philosopher you follow got a hard-on for him.

One can't bomb the fuck out of a place, assassinate its every leader, supply arms to the uneducated violent rabble that show up to replace them [1], and then reasonably blame the mess on the assassinated leaders. Logic doesn't work like that. We could pick out any number of nations in Europe, Asia, or the Americas that would look like Libya does today, five years after violently removing all civil authority and encouraging violent terrorists to move in. That's even considering the "stabilizing framework for the last 100 years". What a joke; next you'll credit Rome's defeat of Carthage.

If you'd like to redpill, consider the fact that USA military-industrial complex makes more money when USA is bogged down in multiple never-ending wars. Consider also the fact that USA news media is basically controlled by the MIC, and has been since the sinking of the Maine. Stop believing the bullshit, and the real world will stop upsetting you so much.

[0] https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/libya/obamas-libya-d...

[1] http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/03/22/libya-and-the-myth-of-hu...

Re: How the Arab World Came Apart

#310

Post by nickik » Thu, Aug 11, 2016, 10:08 PM UTC

k__ wrote: post #234

nickik wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, stability would be good for them and everybody. War and fighting is not good for business in general. The instability we see is definitely not a function of design. If you have studied any of it you will quickly realise that this is situation that has many actors that act based on their own interest and absolutely nobody has control over it. Those that attempt to control it usually end up creating a hole host of…

But if they throw people into war, they have control. I mean, yes these people are now uncontrollable, but they also in a state of chaos that prevents them from getting so advanced that they would be a real problem for first world countries on a global scale.

I don't understand why you don't want them to get advanced (or think US leaders). Economics is not a zero sum game. More developed states are good for us. If these states start to increase their oil production, its good for us.

Also I don't know what advanced threads you think they could become? Other then becoming nuclear powers, they can not pose such a thread. Non of the countries that the US attacked is anywhere close to that level.

The only country that is, Iran, was not attacked by the US and are voluntary not building a nuke.

Also the chaos the created is totally against their interest, now china is a major player in Iraqi oil. Russia and Iran are drawing together more over the Syria issue. They are running into a huge conflict of interest regarding the Turks and the Kurds. That's just the beginning this strategic disaster.

Its far easier to deal with stable regimes and when you want to take one down, you should always have a successor in mind. You can go threw history and look at all the great conqueror in history, they are always trying to set up puppet regimes that they control, and not throw everything into chaos.