Bombings in Manchester - Page 29 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Talk about what you've seen in the news today.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

#14817320
mikema63 wrote:More accurately we live in a system entirely dependent from top to bottom on oil to operate. If we dropped the middle east the whole thing would collapse on our heads.


Why has it not dropped on the heads of the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans? They are not Muslims and they have no military presence in the Middle East. They pursue no particular favouritism in respect to any one power and have no ideological agendas. None of this stops them from securing their energy interests.
#14817329
Why has it not dropped on the heads of the Chinese, Japanese and Koreans? They are not Muslims and they have no military presence in the Middle East. They pursue no particular favouritism in respect to any one power and have no ideological agendas. None of this stops them from securing their energy interests.


Because the west was already doing it when they got there.

They have access to oil through the global market and we are caught defending the global market.

They have the luxury of not getting involved because it's not necessary. If we pulled back they almost certainly would move in.

In the end all that international trade moves on boats powered by oil. If we didn't defend the supply someone else would. If no one did the whole shabang would collapse.

Fundamentally supporting alternative energy and making oil unnecessary to the global economy is the only way to be able to pull out of the middle east entirely.
#14817808
Buzz62 wrote:Mercenaries? Do you consider any and all migrant families to Canada, as mercenaries? Who are these mercenaries?

That you don't know and yet participate in political discussions.... is a sign of how much real history is blocked by our "feel-good" education system and the intellectual emptiness that comes out of letting businessmen control everything.

1. In Acadia, the British brought in New England rednecks to scalp the Mic Mac (as was common in the USA) and then concluded that the Acadians had to be ethnic cleansed.

2. In Ontario, Orangmen (KKK-like racists from the UK) concluded many times that all the "other communities" needed to be massacred.

3. They got their wish in Western Canada where thousands of mercenaries were brought in to kill the Metis and replace them with ... themselves.

Many Canadians are the prodigy of mercenaries who were "imported" here to kill the locals. This has teinted our way of life with "culture-killing" as our primary strategy for economic growth. Which is why we (Anglo-Canada and USA) don't really have a culture or any sense of community. Just commercial buzzwords like Stormsmith mindlesslessly listed (tapestry, multiculturalism, awash in culture).

We aren't "multi-cultural." We're non-cultural. We take people from other nations we mindlessly destroy and turn them into Americans.
By Buzz62
#14818846
QatzelOk wrote:That you don't know and yet participate in political discussions.... is a sign of how much real history is blocked by our "feel-good" education system and the intellectual emptiness that comes out of letting businessmen control everything.

1. In Acadia, the British brought in New England rednecks to scalp the Mic Mac (as was common in the USA) and then concluded that the Acadians had to be ethnic cleansed.

2. In Ontario, Orangmen (KKK-like racists from the UK) concluded many times that all the "other communities" needed to be massacred.

3. They got their wish in Western Canada where thousands of mercenaries were brought in to kill the Metis and replace them with ... themselves.

Many Canadians are the prodigy of mercenaries who were "imported" here to kill the locals. This has teinted our way of life with "culture-killing" as our primary strategy for economic growth. Which is why we (Anglo-Canada and USA) don't really have a culture or any sense of community. Just commercial buzzwords like Stormsmith mindlesslessly listed (tapestry, multiculturalism, awash in culture).

We aren't "multi-cultural." We're non-cultural. We take people from other nations we mindlessly destroy and turn them into Americans.

OH MY GAWD!
So being the great great great grandchild of a guy who shot Indians and so forth, shares and should carry the monocle and shame of the act perpetrated hundreds of years ago?
And what's wrong with being "American"? Or "Canadian"?
You can complain about "the conquerors" all you like. But "When in Rome"...
I happen to believe your incessant complaining STUNTS the assimilation and growth of the native peoples.
I happen to like being Canadian. I want to remain being a Canadian.
I think we need to consider taking steps to protect Canada and the Canadian culture.
#14818869
QatzelOk overlooks the times the French Empire hired the First Nation mercenaries, or warriors to kill Brits, and the number of First Nation the French Empire killed. He fails to mention the French were exploiting the resources first, long before the Brits. I'm surprised he hasn't revisited Harfleur and Agincourt.

The First Nations chose Canada to Quebec in the last referendum by 96%, so we're good. Not perfect, but good.
#14819256
Stormsmith wrote:The First Nations chose Canada to Quebec in the last referendum by 96%, so we're good. Not perfect, but good.

Now that you realize English Canada is leftover mercenaries, it's time to change the subject.

Mercenaries don't want values or truth, they just want to (need to) win all their wars.
#14819276
Buzz62 wrote:OH MY GAWD!
So being the great great great grandchild of a guy who shot Indians and so forth, shares and should carry the monocle and shame of the act perpetrated hundreds of years ago?
And what's wrong with being "American"? Or "Canadian"?
You can complain about "the conquerors" all you like. But "When in Rome"...
I happen to believe your incessant complaining STUNTS the assimilation and growth of the native peoples.
I happen to like being Canadian. I want to remain being a Canadian.
I think we need to consider taking steps to protect Canada and the Canadian culture.

What is Canadian culture? Quebec may have their culture, but what made English Canada distinct was being populated by loyalists fleeing the US to remain under the British Crown. But from my childhood, all of the old British colonial trappings: flag, anthem, British North America Act etc. were jettisoned to try to create a bilingual Canada that only existed in the mind of Pierre Elliot Trudeau!

And that version of Canadian culture couldn't fly because the first thing Trudeau had to do was to try to completely erase the treaties, the languages and the cultures of the first nations who lived here for more than 11,000 years before British, French or Scandinavians for that matter, started arriving on these shores. Right now, Canada at 150 is no closer than it was at the Centennial in trying to come to terms with treaties signed(but never intended to be fulfilled) with the first nations of these lands.

As I see it, the problems almost all first nations have around the world in trying to survive the encroachment, exploitation and marginalization of conquering invaders is the fundamental different ways of living each group had. Many...maybe most first nations have lost the ability to live within the limits of what a natural environment provides because they are mostly forced onto smaller, environmentally degraded tracts of land, often with toxic water resources as well! The invaders brought a culture with them that still sees nature as unexploited resources/rather than the framework that determines the real limits of our economic development. Right now we're a species in overshoot: consuming 1.6 times planetary resources. Humans have exhausted a year’s supply of natural resources in less than eight months

So, I don't see a problem of natives not assimilating and growing by modern capitalistic standards/ I see the problem as the exact opposite! We've created a way of life that is fast running out of resources to feed itself, and have no idea how to turn off the pointless exploitation, production and consumption of mostly unnecessary products, while we've destroyed the natives' ancestral knowledge of how to live sustainably. So, instead of talking about how the natives are going to get with our culture, we have to adopt their culture or ways of living sustainably, or look forward to a massive human population die-off...like happens to every other species that overshoots its available resources!
#14819279
QatzelOk wrote:Now that you realize English Canada is leftover mercenaries, it's time to change the subject.

Mercenaries don't want values or truth, they just want to (need to) win all their wars.


Once again, you missed the point. We all have mercenaries in our past. It just the French Empire started the ball rolling. Next post on this topic should go in a new thread.
By Buzz62
#14819356
right to left wrote:What is Canadian culture? Quebec may have their culture, but what made English Canada distinct was being populated by loyalists fleeing the US to remain under the British Crown. But from my childhood, all of the old British colonial trappings: flag, anthem, British North America Act etc. were jettisoned to try to create a bilingual Canada that only existed in the mind of Pierre Elliot Trudeau!

It sounds like you are a disgruntled Canadian.
May I show you the door? You're quite well come to go find a better place to live...if you can.
Try Siberia. I hear there's not Brits there...
BTW, not that I have any love for Pierre or his spawn Pixey-Dust, but he was one of the world's greatest politicians. So I suppose that makes his legacy a little more impressive than say...the average Chief. :knife:

right to left wrote:And that version of Canadian culture couldn't fly because the first thing Trudeau had to do was to try to completely erase the treaties, the languages and the cultures of the first nations who lived here for more than 11,000 years before British, French or Scandinavians for that matter, started arriving on these shores. Right now, Canada at 150 is no closer than it was at the Centennial in trying to come to terms with treaties signed(but never intended to be fulfilled) with the first nations of these lands.

As I see it, the problems almost all first nations have around the world in trying to survive the encroachment, exploitation and marginalization of conquering invaders is the fundamental different ways of living each group had. Many...maybe most first nations have lost the ability to live within the limits of what a natural environment provides because they are mostly forced onto smaller, environmentally degraded tracts of land, often with toxic water resources as well! The invaders brought a culture with them that still sees nature as unexploited resources/rather than the framework that determines the real limits of our economic development. Right now we're a species in overshoot: consuming 1.6 times planetary resources. Humans have exhausted a year’s supply of natural resources in less than eight months

So, I don't see a problem of natives not assimilating and growing by modern capitalistic standards/ I see the problem as the exact opposite! We've created a way of life that is fast running out of resources to feed itself, and have no idea how to turn off the pointless exploitation, production and consumption of mostly unnecessary products, while we've destroyed the natives' ancestral knowledge of how to live sustainably. So, instead of talking about how the natives are going to get with our culture, we have to adopt their culture or ways of living sustainably, or look forward to a massive human population die-off...like happens to every other species that overshoots its available resources!

OK I have 2 questions:
1. Is it productive or counter productive to be actively segregating the native indians from the society?
2. You cannot undo history. Why is it people like you continue to cry over spilled milk?
#14819395
Buzz62 wrote:It sounds like you are a disgruntled Canadian.
May I show you the door? You're quite well come to go find a better place to live...if you can.
Try Siberia. I hear there's not Brits there...

Canada! Love it or Leave it!
No, I've been paying my taxes all my adult life, and since I arranged to have myself born during the Baby Boom and came of age in the 70's..when industrial trades paid a middle class income(without a college degree), I worked my way up to where some of my earned income qualifies for that 2nd tier higher tax rate. But unlike business owners who can deduct large portions of their tax assessment as "business expenses" us wage-earners get stuck paying on whatever we can't squirrel away in an RRSP. All that aside, my point is as long as Canada claims itself to be democratic and enshrine free speech, part of that speech is the right to criticize government and also the right not to wear patriotism on my sleeve and not engage in flag-waving at the upcoming Sesquicentennial celebrations!
BTW, not that I have any love for Pierre or his spawn Pixey-Dust, but he was one of the world's greatest politicians. So I suppose that makes his legacy a little more impressive than say...the average Chief. :knife:

I don't criticize Pierre for everything, but his notion of Canadian nationalism was fascistic! It wasn't just the Quebec nationalists who were up in arms, it kicked off activism among Aboriginals, who were trying to end the forced indoctrination along with all the abuses of mandatory residential schooling/and beginning to try to re-establish their languages and traditions.

When it comes to the son...he's not much more than a combination of cheerleader/public relations guy who promises everything to everyone; BUT at least he's not Harper, and better than having Conservatives in power!

OK I have 2 questions:
1. Is it productive or counter productive to be actively segregating the native indians from the society?
2. You cannot undo history. Why is it people like you continue to cry over spilled milk?

1. Actively segregating? I'm not sure what you're referring to, but if it's about bands who don't allow outsiders to move in and buy property, they have to protect what little they have left from developers who are encroaching on all sides.
2. Just like with Black America, the complaint about "rewriting" history is trying to avoid the teaching of real history and challenging the historical myths that saturate school textbooks to this day. What the wider societies have to do is take an honest look at their past, because it explains most of the modern festering problems today! Here's one example:
Canada’s Obligation to End the First Nations Water Crisis
#14819405
Buzz62 wrote:OH MY GAWD!
So being the great great great grandchild of a guy who shot Indians and so forth, shares and should carry the monocle and shame of the act perpetrated hundreds of years ago?
And what's wrong with being "American"? Or "Canadian"?...

It's not shame that is important to feel or recognize here. It's that these two fake "cultures" have never changed.

Today, it's the Iraqis, Syrians, Libyans, and many other resource colonies that are the new Cherokees, Metis, and Sioux. We lie about all the other people we kill (via our commercial media) and the valueless mercenary "cultures" just lap up their marching orders and kill who they're supposed to kill.

And this is where this lack of culture or values links up with the Manchester story. As a valueless and cultureless band of mercenaries, America and allies create and use terrorists from other countries to destroy other countries for us (the Empire), and occasionally this blows up in our faces. But our lying media just uses our own self-harm to justify more killings of "foreign varmints."

This has never changed. If you want to be ashamed of this kind of behavior in the past, it's probably because you're ignoring feeling shame for the same behavior in the present.

Taking orders from psycho businessmen is what mercenaries do.

Stormsmith wrote:Once again, you missed the point. We all have mercenaries in our past.

It's not a question of everyone having a few mercs in their DNA. That was no one's point. In America and Anglo-Canada, the majority of the people brought in to kill and displace the natives.... were mercs. Enough that a non-culture of mercenaries is the Frankenstein-like result that persists to this day and puts the entire earth at risk.

This is why we are still blowing up other nations and, occasionally, paying the price.
By Buzz62
#14819541
right to left wrote:Canada! Love it or Leave it!
No, I've been paying my taxes all my adult life, and since I arranged to have myself born during the Baby Boom and came of age in the 70's..when industrial trades paid a middle class income(without a college degree), I worked my way up to where some of my earned income qualifies for that 2nd tier higher tax rate. But unlike business owners who can deduct large portions of their tax assessment as "business expenses" us wage-earners get stuck paying on whatever we can't squirrel away in an RRSP.

Ya I know that sounds mysteriously like Archie Bunker, but weren't you saying there is no Canadian culture? I mean really...if Canuckland is so detestable, it's a small world today. I've lived abroad. It's quite eye-opening.
I came "of age" in '80. I remember the '70's clearly, and I know what you mean about the middle income wage at the time. The ultra-capitalists have fucked that up but good.
I am one of those business owners and believe me, your perception of the tax benefits for expenses is quite incorrect. RRSPs are safe. But real estate has been way better.
But I'm sensing anger in you. And perhaps a tad of jealousy?
You don't have to be angry at successful people. At least not the ones who figured out a way to make the system work for them.
right to left wrote:All that aside, my point is as long as Canada claims itself to be democratic and enshrine free speech, part of that speech is the right to criticize government and also the right not to wear patriotism on my sleeve and not engage in flag-waving at the upcoming Sesquicentennial celebrations!

Then as I was suggesting...you sound like a total malcontent.
Look everyone knows things are not perfect. But you live in one of the most entitled places on Earth.
Maybe you should try living somewhere else so you can appreciate Canada for what it really is?
right to left wrote:I don't criticize Pierre for everything, but his notion of Canadian nationalism was fascistic! It wasn't just the Quebec nationalists who were up in arms, it kicked off activism among Aboriginals, who were trying to end the forced indoctrination along with all the abuses of mandatory residential schooling/and beginning to try to re-establish their languages and traditions.

Yes I was there. I do remember. I had a buddy who came from a reserve in Kananaskis. Great left-winger. Nice guy. Kindo' quiet but a good sense of ha-ha. He went home for Christmas the one year, and came back a little ragged. Seems his brothers and cousins didn't like the idea of him getting a "white" education. So I asked him, why not go to school there? He told me that he wanted to go to university, and knew that if he tried to finish high school at home, he'd never finish.
An interesting perspective...don't you think?

right to left wrote:When it comes to the son...he's not much more than a combination of cheerleader/public relations guy who promises everything to everyone; BUT at least he's not Harper, and better than having Conservatives in power!

Harper did get a bit long in the tooth after so many terms.
The country survived the great recession under him though. Not bad for the ol' resume...
I actually like the deficit spending Pixey-Dust is doing though.
It's good for the economy in the long run, and good for the people in the short-term.
On the other hand, I'm not a fan of his ideas about immigration and refugees.
right to left wrote:1. Actively segregating? I'm not sure what you're referring to, but if it's about bands who don't allow outsiders to move in and buy property, they have to protect what little they have left from developers who are encroaching on all sides.

OK that's not really what I was talking about, but you do touch on the idea.
Here's the thing...it is possible to be a proud native person and have a desire for the comforts of the "white man's" society. Note I didn't say "culture". One does not have to forsake his culture, in order to achieve success in Canada. That is, unless your culture tells you to destroy the existing culture. To re-fit the existing society to fit your desires. That's not on I'm afraid. Not for native peoples and not for Islamist freaks.
Now I do agree that the native people must protect the reserves. It's a part of "Canadiana" and needs to be preserved. Just as I agree that the French Canadian culture must be preserved. If developers are trying to usurp reserve land, they need to be stopped.
However I also believe in the saying, "When in Rome".
It may not "taste" good to you, but the white guys did conquer North America and shaped it to their liking. Is it perfect? Fuck no! Hell Donny-Boy is President of the blessed USA! So what we made is not perfect...by any means. But I think it's a far sight better than living in a trailer in the middle of nowhere with cut-lines for roads, and poor sanitation. If you are not willing to live in the present, you are doomed. In many ways.
God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, courage to change the things I can, and wisdom to know the difference.
right to left wrote:2. Just like with Black America, the complaint about "rewriting" history is trying to avoid the teaching of real history and challenging the historical myths that saturate school textbooks to this day. What the wider societies have to do is take an honest look at their past, because it explains most of the modern festering problems today! Here's one example:
Canada’s Obligation to End the First Nations Water Crisis

I agree.
Facts are facts.
I'd be interested in knowing a certain fact.
How is it that the reserves have such bad water conditions?
Could it have to do with some sort of moneys having already been granted the nations, and already spend perhaps unwisely?
#14819601
The thread is drifting from the bombings to about 'culture'. Can I point out we ought to stick to the thread title topic?
#14819640
Buzz62 wrote:Ya I know that sounds mysteriously like Archie Bunker, but weren't you saying there is no Canadian culture? I mean really...if Canuckland is so detestable, it's a small world today. I've lived abroad. It's quite eye-opening.

OK, I still don't know what that's got to do with culture. I use the anthropologists definition of culture: the customs, traditions, and values of a society. And, by that definition, I don't like the way modern capitalist culture is moving in...mostly destroying social cohesion that existed previously. An American study (and sure it's based on self-reported poll data) found that US surveys on personal happiness and satisfaction, taken over several decades, finds that they peaked in the 1950's and have been in steady decline ever since. Makes sense to me, since optimism about the future has become a thing of the past, and most people are working longer hours to keep up and feeling more isolated than previous generations reported.

I came "of age" in '80. I remember the '70's clearly, and I know what you mean about the middle income wage at the time. The ultra-capitalists have fucked that up but good.

What I read now about the era of the post-war boom tells me that this era when workers shared in growth in productivity was an anomaly, that didn't exist prior to the war and has been shut down since the end of the Soviet communist threat, means no more need to be benevolent capitalists, and cut the employees in for a slice of the profits. That post-war manufacturing boom couldn't last forever, because Europe and Japan rebuilt and started exporting manufactured products. But productivity still continued to increase over here...it's just that more and more profits get siphoned off at the top. So, when it comes to income stratification, we're right back to the Guilded Age of the early 20th century.

I am one of those business owners and believe me, your perception of the tax benefits for expenses is quite incorrect. RRSPs are safe. But real estate has been way better.

Even I can't put in the maximum allowable on RRSP deductions. Many Canadians..especially younger people are just getting by and not putting anything away! I look at my RRSP account as merely tax-deferment to draw on in retirement, cause I'm not risking losing it all or a big chunk of it like our company did with our "safe" locked-in pension plan that took a bath during the 08 market meltdown.

ON the other hand, I was doing the taxes for one of my older brothers who had a small home renovation business until he retired a few years ago. He could claim a "home office" and write off a portion of his tax and utility costs. And compared to big business, which has its hand out to the government and has lawyers and lobbyists rewriting tax codes in their favour...well, I'll end with saying I didn't need Thomas Picketty's book to tell me that earned income can't keep pace with investment income...that just keeps growing bigger, like a snowball rolling down a hill.

But I'm sensing anger in you. And perhaps a tad of jealousy?
You don't have to be angry at successful people. At least not the ones who figured out a way to make the system work for them.

Oh bullshit! Ever project much? There's nothing you got that I want, and I mean it! We moved back down to a smaller house several years ago, and I even gave up my last car to one of my kids cause my wife can't drive anymore, and has to take transit or taxis/ and I don't need a car to get to work or need to own a car anymore. When I do need one, I'll just rent one for the day or week. Rest of the time, I'd rather be on my bike or run and walk wherever I'm going.
If there is anger in me it's because the "pie" isn't really growing anymore, and that means you "successful" people are taking a greater and greater share from more people who are struggling to make ends meet.
About 10 years ago, a psychologist- Paul Piff, conducted several studies on behavioural differences between wealthier and poorer subjects. Even players in a rigged monopoly game show the pernicious effects of having wealth and feeling superior to less wealthy..even when the results are fake, players thought they were better at the game than the ones who were losing. They were louder, arrogant, and even took greater share of the snacks on the table...which the losers ignored...just like in real life: Exploring the Psychology of Wealth, ‘Pernicious’ Effects of Economic Inequality

Then as I was suggesting...you sound like a total malcontent.
Look everyone knows things are not perfect. But you live in one of the most entitled places on Earth.
Maybe you should try living somewhere else so you can appreciate Canada for what it really is?

You really don't have a clue do you, about anything else besides what you do in business?
Just like the monopoly game! Seriously, go F yourself with the love it or leave it horseshit! In the grand scheme of things, Canada isn't going to last a whole lot longer than the US will, as capitalism uses up too much, too fast and everything starts to collapse real fast. Then what flags will we all be waving?
#14819869
redcarpet wrote:The thread is drifting from the bombings to about 'culture'. Can I point out we ought to stick to the thread title topic?

I have tried to explain the link between our hopelessly stupid military-cultures, and the non-stop terror attacks that are created and marketed to push us to give consent for more killing of innocent foreigners.

The Natives of North America were a group that rich Western mercs called "terrorists" (as we were genociding them and stealing their land), and the Irish were also treated as "terrorists" and their religion (Roman Catholic) was frequently mentioned as a "cause" of the violence that these victims of British colonialism occasionally mustered.
#14820994
mikema63 wrote:Because the west was already doing it when they got there.

They have access to oil through the global market and we are caught defending the global market.


It is time to let someone else defend the global market.

mikema63 wrote:They have the luxury of not getting involved because it's not necessary. If we pulled back they almost certainly would move in.

In the end all that international trade moves on boats powered by oil. If we didn't defend the supply someone else would. If no one did the whole shabang would collapse.


Why must we defend the global energy supply? If China and Japan can live quite happily without needing to police the Middle East, can't we let someone else do it and then be like them?

mikema63 wrote:Fundamentally supporting alternative energy and making oil unnecessary to the global economy is the only way to be able to pull out of the middle east entirely.


I agree.
#14821120
It is time to let someone else defend the global market.


Why must we defend the global energy supply? If China and Japan can live quite happily without needing to police the Middle East, can't we let someone else do it and then be like them?


Basically it comes down to military power. The west, specifically the US, is the only military power with enough projection power and bases scattered around to actually do it. Our navy also patrols global shipping for much the same reasons. It's not so simple to actually just decide to not do so anymore and have someone else do it because there are some very large logistical concerns in doing so.

Part of the reason the US keeps pushing for NATO countries to raise military spending is because we want our allies to share the burden. It's an enormous drain on our resources which essentially subsidizes the rest of the worlds trade.

Frankly the only countries that seem interested in actually trying to keep up their militaries to a level where we could even speculatively think about them taking up the task themselves are Russia and China and they are far from having the capability to actually do so.
#14821310
mikema63 wrote:Basically it comes down to military power. The west, specifically the US, is the only military power with enough projection power and bases scattered around to actually do it. Our navy also patrols global shipping for much the same reasons. It's not so simple to actually just decide to not do so anymore and have someone else do it because there are some very large logistical concerns in doing so.


Well it would of course be a long term plan. It could not happen overnight and would need to take place in stages. But if the American political elite committed to it, I am sure it would be possible. Let us imagine the American political class would set the target of disengagement from the Arab world by 2065 and developed a long term plan towards it.

mikema63 wrote:Part of the reason the US keeps pushing for NATO countries to raise military spending is because we want our allies to share the burden. It's an enormous drain on our resources which essentially subsidizes the rest of the worlds trade.


Do even anti-Western countries benefit from global stability that the US brings the world?

mikema63 wrote:Frankly the only countries that seem interested in actually trying to keep up their militaries to a level where we could even speculatively think about them taking up the task themselves are Russia and China and they are far from having the capability to actually do so.


I don't think they have the interest, either. Both are quite content to maintan the security of their near abroad and keep outside influence out. Controlling the Middle East is not something that they want to do.
#14821324
Well it would of course be a long term plan. It could not happen overnight and would need to take place in stages. But if the American political elite committed to it, I am sure it would be possible. Let us imagine the American political class would set the target of disengagement from the Arab world by 2065 and developed a long term plan towards it.


Sure, but that sort of long range commitment is very difficult unless it involves an existential threat. One party is liable to lambast the plan as foolhardy and spin it to their benefit and then reverse policy next time they were in power. Ultimately I think that what dictates long term foreign policy (as opposed to short term mistakes and missteps like Iraq) is forces outside of the plans and desires of the government. Usually some kind of economic or electoral force that is inescapable for either party.

Do even anti-Western countries benefit from global stability that the US brings the world?


Since anti-western countries are anti-western because they are getting the short end of the stick I would say generally not. Though non-western countries that aren't involved probably do even though accepting those benefits means being pulled into liberal capitalist institutions and essentially being dragged into a western orbit.

I don't think they have the interest, either. Both are quite content to maintan the security of their near abroad and keep outside influence out. Controlling the Middle East is not something that they want to do.


This is simply untrue, China has the explicit policy of "marching west" and expanding it's influence into the region. Russia is heavily involved in Middle eastern politics and is trying to get it's own oil companies into the region and even has extensive dealings with the Saudi's especially under Obama where the US tried to back away from the relationship a bit and the Saudi's were concerned they needed to find support somewhere else.

Never assume a particular sort of malevolence about the US or the west that other countries wouldn't share in the same position. All humanity, under all it's trappings, is essentially the same creature with the same base nature that will respond to the same incentives in pretty much the same way on the aggregate level of society.
  • 1
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29

@KurtFF8 Litwin wages a psyops war here but we […]

[usermention=41202] @late[/usermention] Are you[…]

[usermention=41202] @late[/usermention] The[…]

I (still) have a dream

Because the child's cattle-like parents "fol[…]