US launches airstrike against Iranian-backed forces in Syria - Page 4 - 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

By late
#15158687
ckaihatsu wrote:
Yes, I do, and I already addressed it






Reality is kinda complicated, one can hardly blame you for wanting to avoid it.
User avatar
By ckaihatsu
#15158688
late wrote:
Reality is kinda complicated, one can hardly blame you for wanting to avoid it.



And *now*, instead of addressing politics on a political forum, you're resorting to projecting a 'math-is-hard' line onto myself, as an ad-hominem attack.

Glorious.
User avatar
By noemon
#15158692
You have not addressed his argument but simply dismissed it as "white supremacist".

Your images for personal development are spam.
User avatar
By ckaihatsu
#15158693
noemon wrote:
You have not addressed his argument but simply dismissed it as "white supremacist".

Your images for personal development are spam.



Well, his line *is* Western-imperialist / white-supremacist.

My graphics are meant to provide a broader, 'universal' context to the subject matter at-hand.

I'm not going to get caught-up in the minutiae of his geopolitical concerns when the direction of what he's concerned about is imperialist and white-supremacist, politically / ideologically.
User avatar
By noemon
#15158696
His argument about Iran is not white supremacist.

If you do not want discuss geopolitics then you're in the wrong topic & forum.

Your images are off-topic spam and will be treated as such.
User avatar
By ckaihatsu
#15158697
noemon wrote:
His argument about Iran is not white supremacist.



I haven't *disagreed* with his empirical conclusions / extrapolations, though I certainly don't share his support for U.S. exceptionalist imperialist militarist invasions of certain countries in the Middle East.


noemon wrote:
If you do not want discuss geopolitics then you're in the wrong topic & forum.



He stopped discussing, and I'll be glad to complement that action if he *continues* to not-discuss.


noemon wrote:
Your images are off-topic spam and will be treated as such.



I keep the images themselves in spoiler tags so that they're not a visual imposition on anyone. I also don't rely on them to make any points in my posts since the norm is written text.
User avatar
By noemon
#15158699
You stopped discussing and started name-calling, you're still there.

You 're not adding anything to the topic and your off-topic images are spam regardless.
By Patrickov
#15158700
ckaihatsu wrote:You sound like you're making the White Man's Burden argument, that the peoples of the world "need" to be transformed from above, by the Western countries.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_White_Man%27s_Burden


They do have that burden.

If what all of you said is true, they have the responsibility to clean up this mess themselves.

I really don't trust pestered people to be in a psychologically capable position to handle such matters. Gandhi was an exception, most of them act more like Pol Pot.


ckaihatsu wrote:You're implying that petroleum, and the U.S. dollars used to valuate the petroleum resource / commodity, are both politically *neutral*, when that's actually *far* from the reality.


It is neutral. It's how the people see and do with them which is wrong.

As I said, the West have been consistently wrong.

But admittedly, I probably hold similar view against nationalism and patriotism like yours against petrodollars.
It should be neutral, but if people are consistently wrong with them then it's better not be used.

(Sorry I omitted the rest of your post because this one point is enough)
Last edited by Patrickov on 28 Feb 2021 03:18, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
By ckaihatsu
#15158703
Patrickov wrote:
I don't really see the alternatives any better.

What the West has consistently been wrong is that they install proxies instead of doing the hard work of transforming the societies themselves.



---


Patrickov wrote:
They do have that burden.



Well, which *is* it -- do imperialist countries like the U.S. have the social "responsibility" to play supercop to the rest of the world, imposing its Western fundamentalist values, as with warfare, or should economics be 'politically neutral', as you contend later in this post of yours -- ?

Here's the *economics* backdrop to the U.S.' invasion of Iraq, exposing the 'weapons of mass destruction' pretext to be imperialist *bullshit*, while revealing the real, imperialist-opportunist reason for the invasion and slaughter of Iraqi people:



Iraq nets handsome profit by dumping dollar for euro

Faisal Islam, economics correspondent

Sat 15 Feb 2003 20.55 EST
435

A bizarre political statement by Saddam Hussein has earned Iraq a windfall of hundreds of million of euros. In October 2000 Iraq insisted on dumping the US dollar - 'the currency of the enemy' - for the more multilateral euro.

The changeover was announced on almost exactly the same day that the euro reached its lowest ebb, buying just $0.82, and the G7 Finance Ministers were forced to bail out the currency. On Friday the euro had reached $1.08, up 30 per cent from that time.

Almost all of Iraq's oil exports under the United Nations oil-for-food programme have been paid in euros since 2001. Around 26 billion euros (£17.4bn) has been paid for 3.3 billion barrels of oil into an escrow account in New York.

The Iraqi account, held at BNP Paribas, has also been earning a higher rate of interest in euros than it would have in dollars.



https://www.theguardian.com/business/20 ... aq.theeuro



---


Patrickov wrote:
If what all of you said is true, they have the responsibility to clean up this mess themselves.



The U.S. and NATO made the 'mess' themselves in the first place, so they're not trustworthy entities for 'cleaning up' the mess -- the U.S. military has *no business* being in Iraq currently, nor did it *ever* in the first place.


Patrickov wrote:
I really don't trust pestered people to be in a psychologically capable position to handle such matters. Gandhi was an exception, most of them act more like Pol Pot.



People should have the autonomy / self-determination / sovereignty to handle *their own* matters, and that includes countries as well -- you're saying that the external imposition of 'pestering' a nation renders that country psychologically unfit for self-governance. That's simply convenient for the imperialist types doing the 'pestering'.


---


ckaihatsu wrote:
You're implying that petroleum, and the U.S. dollars used to valuate the petroleum resource / commodity, are both politically *neutral*, when that's actually *far* from the reality.



Patrickov wrote:
It is neutral. It's how the people see and do with them which is wrong.



But only the United States has the privilege of designating its *own* currency to be the world's *reserve currency*, or standard, for all subsequent economic activity, including for the petroleum industry.

This means that whenever the U.S. issues a new U.S. dollar, that new dollar has just as much economic legitimacy and worldwide acceptance as any other dollar already in circulation, which is a *lot* socially and geopolitically.

So, no, not all national currencies are the same, or 'neutral', geopolitically.


Patrickov wrote:
As I said, the West have been consistently wrong.

But admittedly, I probably hold similar view against nationalism and patriotism like yours against petrodollars.
It should be neutral, but if people are consistently wrong with them then it's better not be used.

(Sorry I omitted the rest of your post because this one point is enough)



What has the West been 'consistently wrong' about, and where did you already say that, in this thread?

I don't argue for currency neutrality, as you're implying. You may want to explain what your position is on nationalism and patriotism.

(No prob.)

I advocate for a workers-collectivist kind of 'internal' currency, as part of the overall transitional period to workers-of-the-world socialism, outlined here:



global syndicalist currency

by Chris Kaihatsu, ckaihatsu@gmail.com, 10-18


The overall rationale for potential use of a 'global syndicalist currency' is to better-see the surplus labor value that is currently expropriated by private ownership, through the ongoing exploitation of the working class -- anything not directly for the maintenance and reproduction of labor-power going-forward (typically capitalist 'wages') could be represented quantitatively as this workers currency, to enable cash-like purchases from one workplace to another, as an expedient convenience.

This would be a *transitional* material-economic measure, until the ruling class is fully overthrown, to catalyze relationships among those nascent worker-controlled workplaces, over any arbitrary geographic terrain and topology of real-world physical linkages.



viewtopic.php?f=16&t=174857
By late
#15158744
Igor Antunov wrote:
Covid relief payments since election: $0




They're coming.

Can I count on you to complain about Covd relief after it happens?
User avatar
By ckaihatsu
#15158757
late wrote:
And you didn't?



No, I didn't. I've already explained that there's a difference between a *characterization* and *name-calling* -- I provided evidence, from your own words, for the characterization I made of your imperialist politics.


late wrote:
I oppose Realpolitik.



Your international geopolitical concerns have been the exact *description* of what realpolitik is.
By late
#15158765
ckaihatsu wrote:


Your international geopolitical concerns have been the exact *description* of what realpolitik is.



You let your emotions lead you around by the nose.

A lot of what you say here is accurate. Which is why you don't see me arguing against it. But you keep taking it a conclusion too far. Which is why you don't see me participating in support.

An empire in decline can easily lead to a world war.

Which is something a lot on the Left ignore, or are unaware of the implications.

It's really quite tricky.
User avatar
By ckaihatsu
#15158768
late wrote:
You let your emotions lead you around by the nose.

A lot of what you say here is accurate. Which is why you don't see me arguing against it. But you keep taking it a conclusion too far. Which is why you don't see me participating in support.

An empire in decline can easily lead to a world war.

Which is something a lot on the Left ignore, or are unaware of the implications.

It's really quite tricky.



Well, we've both been discussing geopolitics, but you've definitely expressed *partisanship* for one country or another, particularly Saudi Arabia, which is monarchical, anti-democratic, and not for the civil rights of its people.

Sure, people should be as knowledgeable about world / geopolitical developments as possible, but, being a far-left-winger myself, I'm definitely not *partisan* to any one bourgeois nation-state or another as global dynamics unfold.
User avatar
By Beren
#15158770
I wonder if the reasons for the bombing have already been asked or mentioned in this thread, however, in case they haven't and anyone's interested:

Breitbart wrote:The PMF are intensely anti-American and have refocused much of their efforts to attacking U.S. troops and assets, particularly in Iraq where they are formally part of the military. The attack Biden used to justify his strikes was a bombing of American assets in Iraqi Kurdistan last week, for which a small militia known as the Saraya Awlia al-Dam, or “Guardians of Blood Brigades,” took credit. The group is believed to be part of the PMF. The Agence France-Presse (AFP), citing American and Iraqi officials, described the group as a “smokescreen” for KH and other jihadists in the PMF.

About the PMF, Wikipedia wrote:The Popular Mobilization Forces, also known as the People's Mobilization Committee and the Popular Mobilization Units, is an Iraqi state-sponsored umbrella organization composed of some 40 militias that are mostly Shia Muslim groups, but also include Sunni Muslim, Christian, and Yazidi groups.
User avatar
By libertasbella
#15158790
Scamp wrote:How about The Biden administration. Syria got bombed a lot faster than anyone received the stimulus checks they have been promising since November. :lol:


Can't argue with results. Bombing Syria is a great way to heal this divided nation. I wonder how much bombing it will take to fully heal?
User avatar
By ckaihatsu
#15158794
libertasbella wrote:
Can't argue with results. Bombing Syria is a great way to heal this divided nation. I wonder how much bombing it will take to fully heal?




Chapter 14: WAR IS THE HEALTH OF THE STATE

"War is the health of the state," the radical writer Randolph Bourne said, in the midst of the First World War. Indeed, as the nations of Europe went to war in 1914, the governments flourished, patriotism bloomed, class struggle was stilled, and young men died in frightful numbers on the battlefields-often for a hundred yards of land, a line of trenches.

In the United States, not yet in the war, there was worry about the health of the state. Socialism was growing. The IWW seemed to be everywhere. Class conflict was intense. In the summer of 1916, during a Preparedness Day parade in San Francisco, a bomb exploded, killing nine people; two local radicals, Tom Mooney and Warren Billings, were arrested and would spend twenty years in prison. Shortly after that Senator James Wadsworth of New York suggested compulsory military training for all males to avert the danger that "these people of ours shall be divided into classes." Rather: "We must let our young men know that they owe some responsibility to this country."



https://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon ... hea14.html
By Patrickov
#15158976
ckaihatsu wrote:Well, which *is* it -- do imperialist countries like the U.S. have the social "responsibility" to play supercop to the rest of the world, imposing its Western fundamentalist values, as with warfare, or should economics be 'politically neutral', as you contend later in this post of yours -- ?


Yes.

And they let people under their rule effectively enjoy the freedom and non-corruption which they lose under their own people's rule.

The U.S. is a failed example because they (sometimes) rule the world with cowboy mentality, but the British did it pretty well.

In any sense, I see the U.S. a lesser evil than Russia or China. Polish will answer for the Russian question while I can tell you a lot of Chinese atrocities.

We need more Murray MacLehose and Chris Patten.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7

You don't remember he was selling presidential tr[…]

He is even less coherent than Alex Jones. My gu[…]

The safe zones are not safe. Misusing humanitarian[…]

The photo in the article showing tunnels supposed[…]