News What Exactly Is Happening In the Arab/Persian World?

[alt]

It occurred to me that with the hand-over of power to NATO, President Obama is giving them discretionary spending over $1 million (each) missles - does that bother anyone else?

What, the cost of the missiles ?

 

[WhoWee]

What, the cost of the missiles ?

Among the other costs - yes. If you owned a home improvement warehouse, would you give the keys to a smaller hardware store because they were running a community fix-up project?

 

[alt]

Among the other costs - yes. If you owned a home improvement warehouse, would you give the keys to a smaller hardware store because they were running a community fix-up project?

Well, no, to run with your analogy - I wouldn't.

So I'm reading this that your concern is a monetary one (I'm not criticizing that - I just wnat to make sure I understand you).

 

[WhoWee]

Well, no, to run with your analogy - I wouldn't.

So I'm reading this that your concern is a monetary one (I'm not criticizing that - I just wnat to make sure I understand you).

I'm much more concerned that we don't seem to have a plan regarding the "Libyan Strongman" - given his pledge to hurt US. That aside, does it make sense to turn (our) asset allocation/use strategies over to other people? Were there any limits imposed?

 

[Proton Soup]

"Netanyahu-gate": I could go into the humiliating details, but I won’t. Overreactions and infractions speaks for itself, further comments superfluous.
[/URL]

oh, that is very interesting indeed.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/checkpoint-washington/2010/07/netanyahu_america_is_a_thing_y.html

Netanyahu also bragged how he undercut the peace process when he was prime minister during the Clinton administration. "They asked me before the election if I'd honor [the Oslo accords]," he said. "I said I would, but ... I'm going to interpret the accords in such a way that would allow me to put an end to this galloping forward to the '67 borders. How did we do it? Nobody said what defined military zones were. Defined military zones are security zones; as far as I'm concerned, the entire Jordan Valley is a defined military zone. Go argue."

transcript and video: http://mondoweiss.net/2010/07/the-world-wont-say-a-thing-netanyahu-on-ongoing-israeli-expansion.html

 

[DevilsAvocado]

oh, that is very interesting indeed.

ahh... huum... I think there might be some misunderstanding... my fault...

When referring to "Netanyahu-gate", I was addressing the "Private Little War" that has erupted since I was claiming nismaratwork is talking bull when says he "knows" Benjamin Netanyahu and has made a "psychological profile" on him. I don’t want to go into the details (since he has threaten me with "Dark internet retaliation" if I do ), but if he did meet him (which I strongly doubt considering the mess) nismar was just a little kid – not capable of "profiling". But enough is enough, his reaction speaks for itself, and now he got banned on top of everything (I did not report him).

You don’t have to be a genius to figure out that Netanyahu is mean bastard; probably a lot would be very different in the ME without him. He started a smear campaign against Yitzhak Rabin and the Oslo Accords, and addressed protesters of the Oslo movement at rallies where posters portrayed Rabin in a Nazi SS uniform or being targeted by the cross-hairs of a sniper. All this madness resulted in the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin on November 4, 1995. Netanyahu strenuously denied provoking the violence...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9MTx8O_1hzU

(Hello? Sarah Palin? waky waky)

 

[Proton Soup]

yeah, OK. I'm really not interested in any name-dropping tho, because it doesn't change anything. and I'm not going to think more or less of people if they are related by marriage or some other nebulous interaction. the facts on file are plenty sufficient for discussion if i just ignore it. such as the close ties between Netanyahu and the settlers. i would agree, they are plenty scary. the settlers are ultra right-wing zealots and they have been making a lot of trouble lately.

 

[BobG]

I'm much more concerned that we don't seem to have a plan regarding the "Libyan Strongman" - given his pledge to hurt US. That aside, does it make sense to turn (our) asset allocation/use strategies over to other people? Were there any limits imposed?

So your real issue is belonging to groups such as NATO? Or belonging to any multi-national force?

And it's your opinion that the way these groups work is that member nations turn their people and weapons over to the lead country to be used however the lead country pleases?

I think the latter assumption is wrong. Even when fighting as a part of NATO or some other group, our military forces and weapons still belong to the US and the US can decide to pull its troops out of the alliance at any time. Of course, then we wouldn't be seen as a very reliable ally, so there is pressure to go along unless any issues the US has with the overall strategy/asset allocation are serious enough to justify the repercussions.

 

[DevilsAvocado]

yeah, OK. I'm really not interested in any name-dropping tho, because it doesn't change anything. and I'm not going to think more or less of people if they are related by marriage or some other nebulous interaction. the facts on file are plenty sufficient for discussion if i just ignore it. such as the close ties between Netanyahu and the settlers. i would agree, they are plenty scary. the settlers are ultra right-wing zealots and they have been making a lot of trouble lately.

Yeah, agree 100%. It’s a disgrace that the U.S. – as the only one of the 15 members in the U.N. Security Council – vetoed the http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41671189/ns/world_news-mideast/n_africa/" as "illegal under international law".

IMHO this is not 'compatible' with the Obama Speech in Cairo on June 4, 2009...

 

[WhoWee]

So your real issue is belonging to groups such as NATO? Or belonging to any multi-national force?

And it's your opinion that the way these groups work is that member nations turn their people and weapons over to the lead country to be used however the lead country pleases?

I think the latter assumption is wrong. Even when fighting as a part of NATO or some other group, our military forces and weapons still belong to the US and the US can decide to pull its troops out of the alliance at any time. Of course, then we wouldn't be seen as a very reliable ally, so there is pressure to go along unless any issues the US has with the overall strategy/asset allocation are serious enough to justify the repercussions.

Let's not over-complicate the discussion. I asked if it bothered anyone else that President Obama is willing to let someone else decide how many of our $1 million missles will be destroyed. Did any of the Arab states offer to reimburse us for the 100+ missles that were used the first day?

 

[Proton Soup]

working conditions in Dubai
http://www.vbs.tv/watch/vbs-news/the-slaves-of-dubai

 

[MrQuarky]

What Exactly Is Happening In the Arab/Persian World?

They are fighting to gain rights and the people in Wisconsin are fighting to stop their rights from being taken away.

"We Stand With You as You Stood With Us": Statement to Workers of Wisconsin by Kamal Abbas of Egypt's Centre for Trade Unions and Workers Services.

The Arab world is fed up with The United States supporting dictators, which prevents democracy in the region, and ensures that The United States keeps control over the oil.

"One of the greatest material prizes in world history": U.S. State Department.

 

[alt]

What Exactly Is Happening In the Arab/Persian World?

They are fighting to gain rights and the people in Wisconsin are fighting to stop their rights from being taken away.

"We Stand With You as You Stood With Us": Statement to Workers of Wisconsin by Kamal Abbas of Egypt's Centre for Trade Unions and Workers Services.

The Arab world is fed up with The United States supporting dictators, which prevents democracy in the region, and ensures that The United States keeps control over the oil.

"One of the greatest material prizes in world history": U.S. State Department.

I didn't think that the Arab / Islamic world had a penchant for democracy.

 

[Char. Limit]

I didn't think that the Arab / Islamic world had a penchant for democracy.

Most of the world doesn't. Really, democracy is NOT the norm in the world, no matter how much we seem to think it is. Sometimes people just prefer the security of a dictatorship or a monarchy to the liberty and freedom of a democracy. And I don't blame them, because in these parts of the world, democracies tend to be dangerous.

 

[alt]

Most of the world doesn't. Really, democracy is NOT the norm in the world, no matter how much we seem to think it is. Sometimes people just prefer the security of a dictatorship or a monarchy to the liberty and freedom of a democracy. And I don't blame them, because in these parts of the world, democracies tend to be dangerous.

Very true. I can't disagree with that at all.

 

[AtomicJoe]

Well we have a democracy in the UK and USA etc... however any idea that it represents the will of the people is somewhat fanciful, it is big business which is pulling the strings in the background.

 

[alt]

Well we have a democracy in the UK and USA etc... however any idea that it represents the will of the people is somewhat fanciful, it is big business which is pulling the strings in the background.

It always is, always has been, IMO.

We've discussed in other threads .. my opinion of the prevailing system, no matter the guise, is that it is always a plutocracy.

Plutos (wealth) equals power. Power rules.

I still prefer a plutocracy in the guise of capitalism and democracy though, as opposed to one in the guise of communism, or facism .. ism .. ism ..

 

[DevilsAvocado]

Could the mentor that deleted my last post please give me a reasonable explanation?

 

[alt]

Yes, I was going to make a few brief comments in response to yours, but I see now it has been removed by the mods - probably a good thing. I did however, get a copy of it by email. Look - you really need to put a sock in it DA. I can see how you've aggrieved others by the manner in which you just did me with the following ..

P.S. If anyone in the handwaving "Nismaratwork Fan Club" would chime in and say a few words, it would be interesting. How about you *alt*?

That is just gratuitous and presumptuous. TOTALLY unwarranted.

As I say, put a sock in it.

 

[WhoWee]

The Arab world is fed up with The United States supporting dictators, which prevents democracy in the region, and ensures that The United States keeps control over the oil.

Care to provide support?

 

[WhoWee]

http://www.voanews.com/english/news...rces-Kill-7-Protesters-in-Homs-120052389.html

"Human rights groups say more than 200 people have been killed during the government's crackdown on protests. "

 

[Evo]

No more off topic bickering please. let's return to the topic or the thread will be closed.

 

[alt]

http://www.voanews.com/english/news...rces-Kill-7-Protesters-in-Homs-120052389.html

"Human rights groups say more than 200 people have been killed during the government's crackdown on protests. "

A terrible waste of life. But what are they protesting for ? Change. Change of what ? At the end of the day, they'll end up with replacement of one regime by another.

Democracy and militant Islam don't go hand in hand. Char Limits post (1266) above, is very relevant here.

 

[Proton Soup]

A terrible waste of life. But what are they protesting for ? Change. Change of what ? At the end of the day, they'll end up with replacement of one regime by another.

Democracy and militant Islam don't go hand in hand. Char Limits post (1266) above, is very relevant here.

i don't see where the protestors were being militant.

 

[HossamCFD]

Democracy and militant Islam don't go hand in hand.

Militant Islam ?! Are you confusing Syria with Iran ? or am I missing something here ?

 

[alt]

Militant Islam ?! Are you confusing Syria with Iran ? or am I missing something here ?

OOPS ! I didn't read WW's link properly (well, at all), I didn't see it was Syria, and thought the comment was about Lybia.

My commnet about militant Islam / democracy in any case, was intended to be generic. Like one might say facism or communism and democracy.

 

[Proton Soup]

new allegations of white phosphorous use by israel against gazans

http://english.ahram.org.eg/News/10272.aspx

Ihab Keheal, head of the justice department’s medical examiner’s office in the Gaza Strip, has stated that examinations conducted by his office have unveiled evidence indicating that the Israeli army used white phosphorous and other internationally prohibited weapons in its latest operation in Gaza.

Making his comments in a press statement released Monday, Keheal said that the bodies of Palestinians killed in the latest escalations were torn apart and charred to the extent that they were barely recognizable.

 

[mugaliens]

They are fighting to gain rights and the people in Wisconsin are fighting to stop their rights from being taken away.

Rights and responsibilities go hand in hand. Problem is, most people today are all too quick to clamor for their rights without being willing to lift a finger to fulfill their responsibilities. The last time that happened on a large scale, Reagan fired all air traffic controllers who refused to show up for work, and rightfully so. Like the folks in Wisconsin, they too shoved their responsibilities onto the back burner while chanting "gimme, gimme."

Times are tough. Everyone's been tightening their belts for the last couple of years, but the folks in Wisconsin act like they're the only ones who didn't get a 30% pay raise.

The Arab world is fed up with The United States supporting dictators, which prevents democracy in the region, and ensures that The United States keeps control over the oil.

And yet we've enjoyed some of the lowest gas prices in the world over the last fifty years. http://money.cnn.com/pf/features/lists/global_gasprices/" , not only because prices throughout much of the EU are above $5 a gallon, but also because there are many countries where prices are below $3 a gallon.

Twelve cents a gallon in Venezuela? What's their secret? In fact, there are five countries where the price is below $1 a gallon! Three of them are in the Middle East.

"One of the greatest material prizes in world history": U.S. State Department.

Yep.

 

[MrQuarky]

Ok let's call it a polyarchy

The United States is not a democracy - and has never been intended to be a democracy. It's what's called a polyarchy. A polyarchy is one in which a small sector of the population is in control of essential decision-making for the economy, the political system, the cultural system and so on. And the rest of the population is supposed to be passive and acquiescent. They are supposed to cede democracy to the elite elements who call themselves (rather) modestly the "responsible men". "We are the responsible men and we take care of the affairs of the world." The rest are sometimes called "the bewildered herd". I'm quoting Walter Lippman, the leading public intellectual of the 20th century. This goes right back to the constitutional system. The system was designed that way... It's not exactly what you learn in school. But if you read the debates of the Constitutional Convention, which are much more revealing than the published documents, you find that the main framer, James Madison (1751-1836), who was very lucid and intelligent, understood all this very well. He was a democrat. He wanted to have a kind of democracy in which the primary role of government - I am quoting now - "is to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."

Yes I'm a fan of Noam Chomsky and I intend to watch more Bertrand Russell and Howard Zinn.

 

[MrQuarky]

OK after that big generic post, which I'm sure most people on here already know about, but it is worth hearing it put like that from time to time, lest we forget. I would just like to add a specific point that the Arab world doesn't mean the few "freedom go to hell" muslims that you see on the western media.

however any idea that it represents the will of the people is somewhat fanciful, it is big business which is pulling the strings in the background.

I agree with this part and alt when he/she isn't talking about all muslims being fundies. I think that you and alt are spot on about "The Masters of Mankind".

 

[alt]

OK after that big generic post, which I'm sure most people on here already know about, but it is worth hearing it put like that from time to time, lest we forget. I would just like to add a specific point that the Arab world doesn't mean the few "freedom go to hell" muslims that you see on the western media.

I agree with this part and alt when he/she isn't talking about all muslims being fundies. I think that you and alt are spot on about "The Masters of Mankind".

Hi MrQ;

Yes, it's certainly worth hearing it put like that from time to time. To my mind though, polyarchy is still a layer just below plutocracy, else, whom do the polyarchs serve, if not those most wealthy (powerful).

Even Madison, as you quoted, got it;
.. to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."

As to the few "freedom go to hell" Muslims, yes, no doubt it doesn't mean all or even most Muslims. But let's be honest - most, perhaps all Muslims would choose the strictures of their faith above anything else.

PS - I don't understand the 'muslims being fundies' bit.

 

[WhoWee]

Ok let's call it a polyarchy

The United States is not a democracy - and has never been intended to be a democracy. It's what's called a polyarchy. A polyarchy is one in which a small sector of the population is in control of essential decision-making for the economy, the political system, the cultural system and so on. And the rest of the population is supposed to be passive and acquiescent. They are supposed to cede democracy to the elite elements who call themselves (rather) modestly the "responsible men". "We are the responsible men and we take care of the affairs of the world." The rest are sometimes called "the bewildered herd". I'm quoting Walter Lippman, the leading public intellectual of the 20th century. This goes right back to the constitutional system. The system was designed that way... It's not exactly what you learn in school. But if you read the debates of the Constitutional Convention, which are much more revealing than the published documents, you find that the main framer, James Madison (1751-1836), who was very lucid and intelligent, understood all this very well. He was a democrat. He wanted to have a kind of democracy in which the primary role of government - I am quoting now - "is to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."

Yes I'm a fan of Noam Chomsky and I intend to watch more Bertrand Russell and Howard Zinn.

Even fans of Chomsky need to support their posts - please do so.

 

[Al68]

Hi MrQ;

Yes, it's certainly worth hearing it put like that from time to time. To my mind though, polyarchy is still a layer just below plutocracy, else, whom do the polyarchs serve, if not those most wealthy (powerful).

Even Madison, as you quoted, got it;
.. to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority."

I think Madison's words may be grossly misunderstood here. He was referring to the "opulent", as well as others, being protected from oppression by a majority, not being given the power to rule others.

Chomsky and others seem to be very confused about the difference between people (including the rich) maintaining control of their own (honestly obtained) resources and the rich ruling others by force. The former is just natural liberty as understood by students of The Enlightenment like Madison, while the latter is polyarchy (or oligarchy).

There is no reason for intelligent people to pretend they are oblivious to the difference, or to fraudulently equate the two.

 

[WhoWee]

What Exactly IS HAPPENING?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110425/ap_on_re_as/as_afghanistan

"Taliban tunnel more than 480 out of Afghan prison"

 

[alt]

I think Madison's words may be grossly misunderstood here. He was referring to the "opulent", as well as others, being protected from oppression by a majority, not being given the power to rule others.

Chomsky and others seem to be very confused about the difference between people (including the rich) maintaining control of their own (honestly obtained) resources and the rich ruling others by force. The former is just natural liberty as understood by students of The Enlightenment like Madison, while the latter is polyarchy (or oligarchy).

There is no reason for intelligent people to pretend they are oblivious to the difference, or to fraudulently equate the two.

Thanks for the clarification - and edification. I relied on the OP content when commenting on the Madison quote. Your explanation puts rather a different light on it.

 

[MrQuarky]

To my mind though, polyarchy is still a layer just below plutocracy, else, whom do the polyarchs serve, if not those most wealthy (powerful).

Yeah that polyarchy bit was a response to AtomicJoe who said we had democracy in the UK and US. To be honest I just call them the puppet masters and the puppets most of the time. But its nice to have some fancy words sometimes. ;)

But let's be honest - most, perhaps all Muslims would choose the strictures of their faith above anything else. PS - I don't understand the 'muslims being fundies' bit.

Hmmm I don't know. A few years ago I might have agreed with you, but now I'm not so sure. As for the 'muslim fundies' that was just short for muslim fundamentalists.

Care to provide support?

I would love to be able to post one link or one book that explains everything. But that's not how these things work. It takes a huge amount of time, thinking, learning, reading, studying etc., and no one is going to do it for you. Of course there are barriers set up, but it just takes time and effort to get past them. You live in a free society and because of the rights that others have won, you can view declassified documents, Wikileaks cables, the debates of the Constitutional Convention etc., all kinds of things. But to be honest, from reading some of your posts, I think you might be happier just reading some anti-union propaganda instead. I hope you prove me wrong though.

 

[WhoWee]

I would love to be able to post one link or one book that explains everything. But that's not how these things work. It takes a huge amount of time, thinking, learning, reading, studying etc., and no one is going to do it for you. Of course there are barriers set up, but it just takes time and effort to get past them. You live in a free society and because of the rights that others have won, you can view declassified documents, Wikileaks cables, the debates of the Constitutional Convention etc., all kinds of things. But to be honest, from reading some of your posts, I think you might be happier just reading some anti-union propaganda instead. I hope you prove me wrong though.

I understand it might be inconvenient for you to support your post as per my request - but we do have rules that everyone must follow.

 

[rootX]

http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/pubs/display.cfm?PubID=105

Written in 2003, it points to the things that led to the Middle East unrest (I have not read all)

 

[Evo]

I would love to be able to post one link or one book that explains everything. But that's not how these things work. It takes a huge amount of time, thinking, learning, reading, studying etc., and no one is going to do it for you. Of course there are barriers set up, but it just takes time and effort to get past them. You live in a free society and because of the rights that others have won, you can view declassified documents, Wikileaks cables, the debates of the Constitutional Convention etc., all kinds of things. But to be honest, from reading some of your posts, I think you might be happier just reading some anti-union propaganda instead. I hope you prove me wrong though.

If you make a statement as truth, you must back it up with an aceptable, reputable, well known source. I suggest you read the guidelines for posting in this forum, the thread is stickied at the top of the P&WA forum.

 

[russ_watters]

Closed pending moderation.