Blast in Beirut, Lebanon - Page 14 - 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

#15113290
wat0n wrote:
No, it's not a tangent. I find it hard to believe Marx was unaware of the existence of the shtetls.



*If* he was unaware of the shtetls that doesn't make him / anyone an antisemite.


wat0n wrote:
I'm not sure about what part of my arguments is false. Did Saddam Hussein gas Iraq's Kurds? Did Syria allow Kurds to use their language freely and recognize their citizenship claims before the Civil War? Does Syria even do that now?

If you want to stand with fascists because of geopolitical convenience that's your right. But then don't be surprised if people point that out.



I'm saying that the *West* has no business *interfering*, as with backing the FSA -- which just passed the Western weaponry onto the Islamists, who have sectarian and separatist interests, even if anti-Assad.

I don't / didn't support Saddam Hussein. That was a CIA matter, anyway.

I don't defend Syria against Kurdish nationalist-liberation interests. I'm pro-Kurdish / pro-oppressed-minority.
#15113291
I enjoy watching this youtube channel which is a Lebanese dude that is a badass at guitar. He never makes videos that stray outside of guitar stuff, but of course he had to stray from that for a moment.

It's mostly just him trying to encourage donations for help, but he gives some other context that's interesting.

Anyway, just his perspective.
#15113303
anasawad wrote:The clerics' regime in Iran is imperialist. The Baath party is Imperialist.
You're not anti-empire or anti-imperialism, you're anti-west only.

Well then, if everything is an Empire, than the word no longer has any meaning. Perhaps the keyboard I'm typing on is also an empire, and so was my mother. And the cat that just meowed outside my window may be some kind of small empire as well.

I think a lot of your "points" tend to depend upon erasing the meanings of words like this, anawawad. :lol:
#15113305
@QatzelOk
If we ran by the traditionally recognized meaning of Imperialism:

"a policy of extending a country's power and influence through colonization, use of military force, or other means."

Then the Iranian regime attempting to conquer and control Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, etc is it being imperialist.

The Syrian Baath party attempting to conquer and annex Lebanon and Jordan is being imperialists.
The Iraqi Baath party attempting to conquer Iran and Kuwait is it being imperialist.

China attempting to expand its control and political dominance all over the world is it being imperialist.
Russia attempting to control and dominate Ukraine, Belarus, Central Asia, Syria, etc is it being imperialist.

The only one attempting to change the meaning of words here is you and western leftists attempting to attach being white or western as a condition to being imperialist.
#15113342
wat0n wrote:fascists

What did you expect? The post-colonial strongmen, dictators, ruled according to the borders erected by the Europeans and faced all the same problems they did.

That said, when the majority of US allies in the region are far from democratic, you must be incredibly naive to believe the motivation for seeking regime change in Syria had anything to do with democracy.

The United States will use military force, unilaterally if necessary... when our livelihoods are at stake.

— President Obama’s Commencement Address at West Point May 28, 2014


:lol:
#15113358
As examples of empire, anasawad wrote:Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen

These are four countries that the Empire or its allies have recently destroyed.

Once again, I would like you to re-consult the dictionary, but this time, add an atlas so you can see just how many countries the Empire is currently killing people in.

The Empire is the main suspect in virtually any act of war-promotion, since war-fighting is the Empire's primary vehicle for status quo maintenance.
#15113374
So has the world settled on an official story yet?

Are we just putting this incident down to an accident waiting to happen or what?
#15113375
@QatzelOk

Two or more imperialist powers can exist in the same time.

And those countries were destroyed by proxy wars, which, by definition, require 2 or more imperialist powers to fight each other through proxy.

I know, mind blown.



@ness31
Still
By wat0n
#15113380
ingliz wrote:What did you expect? The post-colonial strongmen, dictators, ruled according to the borders erected by the Europeans and faced all the same problems they did.


Not necessarily, though. After all, didn't Egypt and Syria even form an union at some point? Yet it still broke up eventually.

ingliz wrote:That said, when the majority of US allies in the region are far from democratic, you must be incredibly naive to believe the motivation for seeking regime change in Syria had anything to do with democracy.

The United States will use military force, unilaterally if necessary... when our livelihoods are at stake.

— President Obama’s Commencement Address at West Point May 28, 2014


:lol:


I don't think I ever implied anything like that. Of course it's about geopolitical interests, which is what Soviet support for them was (mostly) about as well. Ideological affinity helps but often isn't the main factor why different powers form coalitions.
#15113402
ness31 wrote:So has the world settled on an official story yet?

Are we just putting this incident down to an accident waiting to happen or what?


False flag to stoke regime change on behalf of Israel and it allies... clearly. There is no way a government could be negligent like that.
#15113450
anasawad wrote:
@QatzelOk
If we ran by the traditionally recognized meaning of Imperialism:

"a policy of extending a country's power and influence through colonization, use of military force, or other means."

Then the Iranian regime attempting to conquer and control Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Yemen, etc is it being imperialist.

The Syrian Baath party attempting to conquer and annex Lebanon and Jordan is being imperialists.
The Iraqi Baath party attempting to conquer Iran and Kuwait is it being imperialist.

China attempting to expand its control and political dominance all over the world is it being imperialist.
Russia attempting to control and dominate Ukraine, Belarus, Central Asia, Syria, etc is it being imperialist.

The only one attempting to change the meaning of words here is you and western leftists attempting to attach being white or western as a condition to being imperialist.



At *worst* you could say a regional power like Israel is 'adventurist', meaning imperialist at a local scale.

But all of the examples you've provided *pale in comparison* to the U.S.'s imperialist military footprint across the entire world:



Despite recently closing hundreds of bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States still maintains nearly 800 military bases in more than 70 countries and territories abroad—from giant “Little Americas” to small radar facilities. Britain, France and Russia, by contrast, have about 30 foreign bases combined.

By my calculation, maintaining bases and troops overseas cost $85 to $100 billion in fiscal year 2014; the total with bases and troops in warzones is $160 to $200 billion.



https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... 20combined.
#15113453
anasawad wrote:@QatzelOk

Two or more imperialist powers can exist in the same time.

And those countries were destroyed by proxy wars, which, by definition, require 2 or more imperialist powers to fight each other through proxy.

I know, mind blown.



@ness31
Still

Image
#15113456
ckaihatsu wrote:At *worst* you could say a regional power like Israel is 'adventurist', meaning imperialist at a local scale.

But all of the examples you've provided *pale in comparison* to the U.S.'s imperialist military footprint across the entire world:


Yes, we all understand that position and most times I share it. Even Russia would fall under the 'regional power' definition while maintaining the largest landmass of any country in the world. When Russian tanks roll into Georgia, their artillery levels Chechnya or their soldiers are 'vacationing' in Ukraine; none of these countries would claim that the US is the greater evil.

This position is shared by many factions in the Middle East that view the US as the lesser evil compared to other 'regional powers'. The US Empire has lost a lot of goodwill and prestige over the past 20 years at least but they would not be able to maintain these military bases by sheer force or coercion alone.
#15113458
MadMonk wrote:
Yes, we all understand that position and most times I share it. Even Russia would fall under the 'regional power' definition while maintaining the largest landmass of any country in the world. When Russian tanks roll into Georgia, their artillery levels Chechnya or their soldiers are 'vacationing' in Ukraine; none of these countries would claim that the US is the greater evil.

This position is shared by many factions in the Middle East that view the US as the lesser evil compared to other 'regional powers'. The US Empire has lost a lot of goodwill and prestige over the past 20 years at least but they would not be able to maintain these military bases by sheer force or coercion alone.



You sound like a Public Relations office for the U.S.

You seem *naive* about how militaries function -- the U.S. empire's military *is* sheer force and coercion, and that's why it has 800 bases installed internationally. *Many* local areas have asked the U.S. military to leave, and it hasn't / didn't, as in Okinawa and Vieques:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Okinawa_I ... _the_bases

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vieques,_ ... tates_Navy


You're ignoring the recent *actual history* of the countries you mentioned, which is the following:



Military buildup in Abkhazia

In late April 2008, Russia said that Georgia was amassing 1,500 soldiers and police in the upper Kodori Gorge area and planning to invade Abkhazia.[42] President Saakashvili, in his televised address, pledged to pursue only a peaceful line in the conflict areas and called upon the Abkhaz and Ossetians to unite with Georgia in defying attempts by "outrageous and irresponsible" external force to trigger bloodshed.[43] Russia accused Georgia of trying to solve the Abkhazia problem by force and of sending its troops in the Georgian-controlled upper Kodori Valley in Abkhazia. Russia announced it would increase its military in the region and threatened to "retaliate" militarily to Georgia's efforts.[44] The Georgian Prime Minister Lado Gurgenidze said Georgia would treat any additional troops in Abkhazia as aggressors.[44] The European Union also urged caution, saying to increase troop numbers would be "unwise".[44] The United States called on Russia "to reconsider" "some provocative steps" it had taken in respect of Abkhazia.[45]

Georgia suspended Russia's admission to the World Trade Organization (WTO).[44] Russian Cossacks and North Caucasian volunteers declared their readiness to fight Georgia in the case of a renewed confrontation in Abkhazia.[46] On 6 May 2008, the Georgian state minister for reintegration Temur Iakobashvili said Georgia was on the verge of war with Russia.[47]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Russ ... n_Abkhazia



And:



Leaked State Department documents provide further evidence that United States authorities knew that the ex-Soviet republic of Georgia, a key ally of Washington in the Caucasus region, initiated the August 2008 war with Russia.

Cables from US diplomats in the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, were released through the whistleblower website WikiLeaks. They show that Washington was well aware that the Georgian government was intensifying its military build-up near the breakaway province of South Ossetia in the weeks before the outbreak of full-scale hostilities.

South Ossetia has refused to acknowledge Tbilisi’s authority since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, and Russian peacekeepers have been stationed in the province since then.

Prior to the attack on South Ossetia by Georgian forces, a cease-fire was in place between Tbilisi and South Ossetian separatist militants.

The diplomatic reports from the American embassy record that the US was aware that Georgia’s armed forces were “deploying troops to positions in Georgian territory to the south of the Zone of Conflict [the disputed boundary between Georgia proper and the secessionist territory]” and that Tbilisi’s forces were operating on “a heightened state of readiness in order to show their resolve.”

A cable records that US embassy observers witnessed 30 government buses “carrying uniformed men heading north” towards South Ossetia the day of the Georgian attack.

The Georgian assault on South Ossetia, launched August 7, involved the shelling of the main city of Tskhinvali followed by a ground invasion by 1,500 troops. The operation destroyed hundreds of civilian properties and claimed the lives of an estimated 160 South Ossetians and 48 Russian military personnel.



https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2010/12/geor-d06.html



---



On 7 August 1999, Islamist fighters from Chechnya infiltrated Russia's Dagestan region, declaring it an independent state and calling calling for Holy war On 1 October, Russian troops entered Chechnya.The campaign ended the de facto independence of the Chechen Republic of Ichkeria and restored Russian federal control over the territory.[32][33][34]

During the initial campaign, Russian military and pro-Russian Chechen paramilitary forces faced Chechen separatists in open combat, and seized the Chechen capital Grozny after a winter siege that lasted from late 1999 until February 2000. Russia established direct rule of Chechnya in May 2000 and after the full-scale offensive, Chechen militant resistance throughout the North Caucasus region continued to inflict heavy Russian casualties and challenge Russian political control over Chechnya for several more years. Some Chechen separatists also carried out attacks against civilians in Russia. These attacks, as well as widespread human rights violations by Russian and separatist forces, drew international condemnation.

In mid-2000, the Russian government transferred certain military operations to pro-Russian Chechen forces. The military phase of operations was terminated in April 2002, and the coordination of the field operations were given first to the Federal Security Service and then to the MVD in the summer of 2003.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Chechen_War



And:



As always in conflicts between major capitalist powers, there are the declared motives and the real, unstated aims and interests that lie behind the propaganda. A measure of how sharp antagonisms have become is the statement made last Friday by Russian Defence Minister Igor Sergeyev. Accusing the US of supporting the Chechen rebels, he told a meeting of Russian military top brass, "The United States national interests require that the military conflict in the north Caucasus, fanned from the outside, keeps constantly smouldering.” Sergeyev added, “The West's policy is a challenge to Russia with the aim of weakening its international position and ousting it from strategically important regions."

Reporting Sergeyev's comments, the November 15 New York Times noted, “Such suspicions have been fuelled in Russia by American attempts to persuade former Soviet republics in the region to build an oil pipeline that would skirt Russia and Iran.” This broadly hints at a key issue in the present conflict in Chechnya. What is being played out there is a great power struggle between the US, Russia and Europe over control of the strategically vital Caucasus, which borders on the Caspian Sea, site of the world's largest deposit of untapped oil reserves. At stake in this contest are billions of dollars in oil and gas revenues and the vast military and geopolitical advantages that fall to whichever power gains a dominant position in Central Asia.



https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/11/chec-n18.html



---



21–29 November 2013

Euromaidan started in the night of 21 November 2013 when up to 2,000 protesters gathered at Kiev's Maidan Nezalezhnosti and began to organize themselves with the help of social networks.[7] After he heard of the Ukrainian government decree to suspend preparations for signing of the Association Agreement on 21 November 2013,[8][9] opposition party Batkivshchyna faction leader Arseniy Yatsenyuk called, via Twitter, for protests (which he dubbed #Euromaidan) on Maidan Nezalezhnosti.[10] The blog of Yuri Andreev on Korrespondent.net asked people to gather on Maidan Nezalezhnosti that day at 22:30.[11]

Approximately 2,000 people converged in the evening of 22 November on Maidan Nezalezhnosti (Independence Square) to protest the decision of the Ukrainian government to suspend the process of integration of Ukraine into the European Union.[12] In the following days, the opposition and pro-EU parties led the protests.[13]

A larger rally took place on 24 November, when 50,000 to 200,000[14] people gathered on Kiev's Maidan Nezalezhnosti. The pro-EU demonstrators carrying Ukrainian and EU flags chanted "Ukraine is Europe" and sang the national anthem as they marched toward European Square for the rally.[15] News agencies claimed this to be the largest protest since the Orange Revolution of 2004.[16] After a small group of protesters attempted to storm the Government Building, police used tear gas to disperse them.[17] Protesters also used tear gas and some fire crackers (according to police protesters were first to use them).[18] According to the General Prosecutor's Office, more than 400 people were injured from 24 November to 13 December, including 200 policemen and 18 students.[19]

On 25 November jailed former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko began a hunger strike in protest of "President Yanukovych's reluctance to sign the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement".[20]



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_ ... Euromaidan



And:



One group particularly active in the street fighting around Independence Square is the ultra-right nationalist Right Sector, a coalition of right-wing organizations and supporters of local soccer clubs.

In a statement on Monday, the group claimed credit for the violent confrontations with police on Sunday and pledged to continue its activities until President Yanukovych resigned.

The police offensive against the demonstrators followed the mass demonstrations last weekend protesting against new laws imposing harsh restrictions on freedom of assembly, with jail terms of up to 15 years for “participation in mass riots.”

On Wednesday morning, the police repeatedly told protesters through loudspeakers that their actions were “a grave violation of the law” and asked them to disperse. Mobile phone users in the protest zone received a threatening SMS saying: “Dear subscriber, you are registered as a participant in an unsanctioned rally.”

The deaths are the first fatalities since protests began against the Ukrainian government just over two months ago. They came just one day after a warning by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov that the intervention by European governments had aggravated tensions in Ukraine, and that the situation was “spinning out of control.”

Lavrov said, “We have information that much of this is being stimulated from abroad,” adding that “members of several European governments rushed to the Maidan without any invitation and took part in anti-government demonstrations.” Such behaviour, Lavrov said, was “simply indecent.”

Lavrov was referring to the interventions in December by EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton and then-German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle who openly expressed their solidarity with demonstrators. EU incursions on behalf of the opposition were supported by Washington. US Senator John McCain addressed a mass rally in Independence Square and dined with leaders of the opposition parties, including Oleh Tyahnybok, the leader of the ultra-right and anti-Semitic Svoboda party.

Washington and Berlin have mobilized the most right-wing, reactionary forces in their campaign to overthrow Yanukovych and replace him with a regime who would break the country’s longstanding ties with Russia and implement austerity through the EU.



https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/0 ... a-j23.html
#15113461
@ckaihatsu
At *worst* you could say a regional power like Israel is 'adventurist', meaning imperialist at a local scale.

But all of the examples you've provided *pale in comparison* to the U.S.'s imperialist military footprint across the entire world:

Size is irrelevant to whether a country is being imperialist or not.

@MadMonk
Yes, we all understand that position and most times I share it. Even Russia would fall under the 'regional power' definition while maintaining the largest landmass of any country in the world. When Russian tanks roll into Georgia, their artillery levels Chechnya or their soldiers are 'vacationing' in Ukraine; none of these countries would claim that the US is the greater evil.

This position is shared by many factions in the Middle East that view the US as the lesser evil compared to other 'regional powers'. The US Empire has lost a lot of goodwill and prestige over the past 20 years at least but they would not be able to maintain these military bases by sheer force or coercion alone.

Agreed
I'd argue that regional powers' imperialism is even worse than that of global powers as a general rule since regional powers' imperialism has an element of cultural and social-imperialism coming with it and not only lasts longer but also have a larger presence in the target country due to the close distance, while a country like the US or China are far less attached with their imperialism being limited to resources and access without any significant cultural and social elements.
#15113465
ckaihatsu wrote:You sound like a Public Relations office for the U.S.


Maybe I shouldn't have used Russia as an example, that is on me. I agree that the US/NATO/EU troika (or their predecessors) have been the primary aggressors since the Russian Revolution.

I maintain that the current and historical geo-politics of the Middle East is far more complex than simply either demonizing or sanctifying any power faction. What is becoming painfully obvious is that the current national borders, of which we can thank its colonial legacy, are only maintained by fear and terror in one form or another. US allies in the region includes some of the very worst 'bad guys' imaginable and the hypocrisy of painting Iran as the super villain while cozying up with the Saudi Royal Dynasty is nauseating.
  • 1
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 20

To correlate skin color with how a person votes s[…]

First 2020 Debate Thread

I can't believe that I am saying this but the curr[…]

What is Fascism

@Julian658 is once again trying to take this thr[…]

CDC survivability numbers (age 0-19: 99.997%, 20-[…]