katching!
I’m not going to bother to write too much about this as it happens again and again and they never learn, or maybe they actually do and it is the price they have to pay in order to keep their seats. Proof really that the US President and his whole government enchilada are simply the best salesmen and women the world has ever known.
We give them oil at preferred rates, they allow us to buy their weapons which we can’t use but are very adept at obsoleting before we even learn they are actually in our stores and someone (or more) keeps a fat commission – which is a wholly legitimate business practice of course.
This sales cycle this time has been aided and abetted by our dear beloved big neighbour to the East with dickheads like Shariatmadari fanning the flames and the pipers shriek and point their fingers across the swamp dancing frantically about like lunatics: “see they want to take us over, we have to protect ourselves from those Safawi turbaned mad men!” Completely forgetting that the best way to solve perceived problems with neighbours is discussion and engagement, not buying more useless weapons which will undoubtedly escalate mistrust and lead to an arms race the only winners of which are the arms manufacturers.
“Yeah,” they say, “look they are supporting Hamas, Hizbollah, Nahr Al-Bared, Al-Qaeda, and more that we don’t know about. They want to topple our governments, we have to prepare for them attacking us!”
You fools! They don’t have to attack us. They are not the danger. The real danger is your geriatric autocratic non-participatory and exclusionary rule!
What “they” might to do is just egg our people on by simply (and ironically) pointing out that we should demand that our regimes be made more democratic. Come on admit it, the prospect makes you shake in your Jesus boots, doesn’t it? Well, get used to it guys because inclusion and sharing power are the only factors that will allow your tenuous rule to last.
So what are we to do? Beg the Americans to arm us to the teeth, completely and docilely acquiescing to their requests, or should we think for a change and apply logic to our relationships, or should just plonk down our and future generations much needed funds to buy weapons of no use? That’s always the easiest well trusted option isn’t it? Throw money at a problem and hope that it will go away; if it doesn’t, just throw more money at it.
Shouldn’t that money be used for infrastructural projects, for education and health, save it for the future generations who will not enjoy the benefits of the oil dollar?
Nah, throw it at Mr. Bush and Co. and beg like dogs with tongues lolling about, paws up, waiting for that absent minded scratch on the head and the occasional pat with the soothing growl: “good boy, down, stay!”
Why is it so difficult for grown men – those we choose to call “our leaders” – to engage, sit around a table with a genuine will to solve problems rather than exacerbate them? Is it too difficult to comprehend that discussing regional problems sincerely provides lasting peace much more than whatever weapons could provide?
Didn’t we have enough of wars in this God forsaken region?
Thanks, Mahmood.
Steve The Confederate,
You imply a foolish parallel between ordinary neural fluctuations of intention in a person’s brain signifying nothing but raw emotional wants and temporal lust, with a meeting and vetting out of an invasion plan among the highest levels of a nation-state’s government, involving said country’s 2 million or so of its armed forces, based on geo-political and strategic interests. A plan to do harm. A plan to invade and occupy.
And to put the final damning nail on it – it wasnt even a retaliatory plan – it was a plan to occupy and rob, should a seller refuse to sell you his own goods.
How does a freedom-loving country sanction the creation of such contingency plans to begin with, pray tell, Steve?
For the plan to be transformed into full-blown action, it must have been met with specific requirements. The first of those requirements would be an indefinate and continous boycott of selling oil to the US by the Arab nations in response to its monstrous carte-blanche support of Israel.
This was not so. The boycott effectively ended no more than 5 months later at the Washington Oil Summit of 1974. Furthermore, even if the US did intend to invade the very next day of the start of the boycott, it would have been impossible, as it would have taken more than 5 months to mobilize, prepare, justify, ship, invade and occupy a vast region’s many oil fields.
Former Defense Secretary James R. Schlesinger, and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger would disagree with you Steve. If you had actually read the article and done some basic research, you would learn (god forbid) of the following:
The document, titled “Middle East — Possible Use of Force by the United States,” says that if there were deteriorating conditions such as a breakdown of the cease-fire between Arab and Israeli forces following the October 1973 Middle East war or an intensification of the embargo, “we believe the American preference would be for a rapid operation conducted by themselves” to seize the oil fields.
It cites a warning from Defense Secretary James R. Schlesinger to the British ambassador in Washington, Lord Cromer, that the United States would not tolerate threats from “under-developed, under-populated” countries and that “it was no longer obvious to him that the United States could not use force.”
The US would ‘not tolerate’ threats from those primitive dirty Arabs Steve. This from your own former members of government.
Seizure of the oil fields, the memo says, was “the possibility uppermost in American thinking [and] has been reflected, we believe, in their contingency planning.”
A plan drawn up at the ‘uppermost of American thinking’ hardly seems to be equivalent to lusting after a stripper as you implied earlier Stevo.
U.S. officials at the time hinted that retaliation was possible but did not describe the form it might take. At a news conference on Nov. 21, 1973, Secretary of State Henry A. Kissinger declared: “It is clear that if pressures continue unreasonably and indefinitely, then the United States will have to consider what countermeasures it may have to take.”
Countermeasures, hmmm… what could they possibly be.. Oh I know! The US would refuse to import Arab dates! That’ll teach ‘em! hahaha!
As usual, a subtle yet vile lie that you have inserted into the heart of an otherwise good analogy: The US didn’t ‘pony up’ more money for his neighbour’s goods – instead, the neighbour simply ended his boycott – in reality, having occured as mentioned earlier in the Washington Oil Summit of March 1974.
Should the neighbour have simply refused to maintain oil flow to the US indefinately as is certainly his right to do so however, then the US would have invaded and occupied, as Henry Kissinger himself tells us.
Its from the horse’s mouth Stevo. You cant possibly get any more legit than that.
People who have a choice in the shoes they wear but not their country’s own foreign policy? Umm… let me think about that… umm, Yes, thats the bitch camp.
Of course you cant impose your religion on us. That requires a culture of spirituality not glutony.
And what am I exxagurating about? The Arab-Muslim-laden hate speech on just about every conservative comments section in the US from LGF to Foxnews? If it were the reverse and from the Middle-East its considered ‘jihadi’. But when Americans say it, its patriotic. Go ahead. Defend them and prove my point. Come on. I know you’re itching for it.
HAhahahaha!! Yes Steve Yes! I, Ibn, think the US is out to Christianize the Middle East! hahahahahah! Come on Steve – who do you think I am? Ann Coulter? hahahaha
The British promised the Jews a national homeland in Palestine, and even they abstained from the UN vote of partition. What did the US do? And who has supported them since day one, and which president declared Israel to be a permanent friend of the US? A Soviet one? You fool Steve – at least learn to pick your battles so that you dont make as easy a mockery of yourself!
This probably has to be the most ridiculous comment you have made Steve, second only to your previous brainfart of ‘All Muslims are responsible for Sep11th’ which as I recall got you pretty well pigeon-holed. Please show that I have stone-age religious hatreds.
… and that is why I call you a Confederate.
Happy Hatin’!
-Ibn
Ibn,
Your argument is so silly I don’t need to rebut it. I don’t think it even convinces the ordinary Abdullah on the street. If you want to beat up on America for all the things it didn’t do, go dig up some of those US military plans for defending against a space alien invasion. That oughta keep you busy.
MDC: “Since pain meds are a wonderful thing, this won’t be very long. Mahmood is right. Everything is not about America which is and always has been your initial reaction to everything. Think about it.”
MDC, who else is the Great Satan to Muslims other than America? What other countries are wished death on the pillars of Mina? What other countries are castigated in mosques around the world? When countries mismanage themselves, who do they blame for their mess?
Since foolish slander of America is so common, I’m happy to be the only one to make a defense of my country if nobody else steps up.
Glad to hear you are recovering though not happy to hear you need pain meds. I’m hoping they scoped you on your appendectomy so that you’re on your feet quick. Don’t rush it, though.
Steve_The_Confederate,
‘Cant’ and ‘Wont’ are different words.
Oh? …and am I alone Steven?
Afterall, wasnt it you who chastized and held all Muslims responsible for acts they didnt commit (Sep11th) and for protests they didnt take part in condemning that which they did not do to begin with?
The almighty Steve holds Muslims responsible for acts they didnt commit – not even knew or planned about – yet we cannot hold the US accountable for plans it created but also never excecuted?
*chuckle* How easily you show yourself to be a hypocrite Steve. In plain sight, open and naked for all to see. Are you not ashamed?
We only expect to hear this type of hypocrisy on:
1) Comedy Central
2) History of the 50s and 60s.
3) You.
Lets face it Steve. Your thinking is old. Obselete. Last year’s model. You’re part of the Old Guard. No one pays attention to you on your own blogs, so you come here, even in defiance of Mahmood’s banning you just to argue with me, a kid really. Im flattered. No really, honestly, I really am.
You cant even tell the difference between freedom of association on ones own private property (Mahmood banning you from his privately owned blog), and freedom of speech as a right in relation to government censorship. Because of this you chastize Mahmood for banning you and dare yell that he ‘is not respecting freedom of speech’.
America is a great country, You however, are a horrible person.
Seeing as how you are wrong on so many things in the past, one is not particularly inclined to agree with any future analysis you make. But dont stop yourself. Everyone needs a good laugh.
-Ibn
Steve,
Unfortunately no scope, but thanks for the concern and kind thoughts.
I have to admit I have been surprised and pleased at Americans perceptions and comments about their country on this blog over the last few years; it seems much more based in reality which is a good thing. Told you before, I love that you defend America. I just think you have to be careful in the way you do it because you tend to generalize a lot and you turn every conversation into an America issue just like Ibn does. It gets old and not necessary. Ibn’s debating style is predictable, and unfortunately I read his comments for amusement content only; I don’t take them seriously anymore. Like you, I think he does his side of the argument more harm than good and only further widens the gap between issues and people.
Nap time.
Ibn;
I challenge you again to provide counter evidence in support of your hypothesis that the Arab/Muslim state of mind in this respect is based on an unsubstantiated and hysterical ‘culture complex’, and not on decades worth of learnt experience, suspicion, and betrayal
For counter evidence, simply re-read my post. Pay close attention to quotes copy/pasted from people earlier on this thread – posters who blame America for everything from too many crows to ‘getting a kick out of watching Arabs fight.’ That’s a world-view informed by paranoia, not empirical reality.
This sort of hysterical scape-goating does not exist in Latin America, people whose countries have been most f**ked-over by the United States. They don’t hold Washington responsible for every burnt out light bulb and clogged up sink. They know when the US is to blame and when it is not. A lot of folks in the mid-east need to ditch the silliness and do the same.
Ibn,
Call Islamic Rage Boy and tell him you want his job.
Crumbling already Steve?
Mahmood,
I want to make a longer response to you but I’ve been travelling a lot this week and can only manage short answers at the moment. I just don’t have time to waste on Ibn. Even if I wasn’t occupied with trains, planes, and automobiles as I am now, I’d rather spend the hour spent replying to Ibn’s nonsense on learning WordPress.
Aliandra,
I also asked you to remove the wheat from the chaff Aliandra.
I cannot defend the words of loons. Just as I do not ask you to defend the words of mental patients, so too, do not expect me to defend the words of some loon who believes, the butterfly effect aside, that America maliciously breeds crop-eating-crows.
Think over this if you wish to understand please:
What is the Arab-American dynamic at its heart? At its heart, its a relationship. And like all relationships, whether they are personal, romantic, professional and the like, there is always a universal common denominator: Trust. (I will get back to this).
Put very simply, the Arab world does not trust the West in general, and the US in particular. The next question becomes why is this so?
The answer spans many events, many centuries, and many issues. Unlike your Latin-American example where US influence was quick, discrete and short-lived, the US influence and involvement in the middle east has been much longer, continuous, and prevalent. This is one primary reason. Also unlike your Latin-American example, the US supported and continues to support a nation-state that the Arab world found dumped in its door-step – a catastrophe that shook the core of the Arab-Muslim world on so many levels, that such a parallel in magnitude is simply not to be found anywhere in Latin America. Within the context of the Arab world, it probably parallels the Crusades themselves. (Another Arab-Western conflict further showing the age of this contentious relationship).
Furthermore, I beleive that you need to be clear as to what you mean when you state “You blame us for everything.” What constitutes everything? A flat tire on the streets of Cairo, or the geo-political situation in the Middle-East? Like it or not, your country is heavily vested in this region, so it is only natural that in 95% of political discussions the US name will show up. And as to the nature of the discussion, it is probably safe to say that 95% of Arabs are unhappy with their leaders. I think you see the connection.
The best analogy I can offer is that of a personal/romantic relationship: Here you have a couple, where the man has been caught cheating. The woman never saw it coming.
Now, in light of this knowledge, events that would otherwise seem innocent before, suddenly seem conspiratorial to her. Whether or not the husband has cleaned up his act is irrelevant – if he really is staying at work late, the wife simply cant help but to suspect that he is seeing someone else. In her head, she will begin to make otherwise silly correlations – the hubby is taking her out more simply to lower her guard so that she will not suspect anything … or she might see the hubby’s new purchase of a cologne as something to mask the perfume of his mistress – even though the husband just so happens to like Calvin Klein’s latest men’s line.
Now are her thoughts on this subject entirely loony? Well thats a loaded question. You can see where they are coming from, whereas you might not necessarily agree with them. Often times, the former insight is enough to label the action – her suspicion – as justified.
In effect, the price the husband has to pay for cheating is not simply putting up with his wife’s complaints against that action – but now, he has to accept that she will assume he is guilty until proven innocent, by virtue of lost trust – a trust that he himself destroyed.
That is the price to pay for the betrayal of someone’s trust. In this vein, you cannot ask that you be given the benefit of the doubt anymore. The husband has to now work doubly hard to build that trust.
Is the wife right in her kooky correlations and conspiracy theories? Maybe, maybe not. But is she justified in assuming them? 100%, yes.
That is the parallel that you must understand, Aliandra.
A fair question you might put forward is “What are those events that the Arab world saw as betrayal by the West?”. Summarily, there are many, starting from European Imperialism, to the French Colonization attempt of Algeria, to Israel, to the Sykes-Picot agreement, etc. I urge you to research them if you are indeed interested, in order to get a continuous picture of where this mistrust stems from.
-Ibn
Steve_The_Confederate,
This reminds me of a Simpson’s episode Stevo.
In this one episode, Bart was trying to intricately explain something to his pet dog, but the dog just stood there starring, and oblivious.
They quickly zoom in towards the wide-eyed dog’s head as if going into his brain, and then provide a black-and-white view from the dog’s eyes of the world, where although Bart’s words were very rational and consistent to human ears, all the dog could hear from Bart’s moving mouth was “Blah blah blah … blah blah… blah blah blah! Blah!”
Funny how some animals confuse logical discourse with that of random raging ramblings eh Stevo? lol
-Ibn
Ibn;
the US supported and continues to support a nation-state that the Arab world found dumped in its door-step – a catastrophe that shook the core of the Arab-Muslim world on so many levels, that such a parallel in magnitude is simply not to be found anywhere in Latin America… it probably parallels the Crusades themselves
Too bad the Arab-Muslim world isn’t made of sterner stuff. During all the conflicts of the last century, many countries got absorbed, redrawn, moved about, etc, usually without their peoples consent. Pakistan broke off from India, the Turks were stripped of their empire, Germany lost one third of its land to Poland and millions of Germans were forced to move west. Everyone has gotten on with their lives. Modern Germans don’t commemorate a ‘Nakba’, nor are they obsessed with driving the Poles to the sea. The Arabs are hardly the only ones so offended but they seem to be the only ones still stuck on past losses. Grow up and get over it like everyone else.
The Mongols did more damage to the medieval Muslim kingdoms than the failed Crusades. But if those cantankerous crusaders are still keeping you up at night, take Steve’s advice. Send Mr Bhat a resume (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shakeel_Bhat). Remind him of the fall of Granada too.
Aliandra,
Aliandra, it would seem that its the US itself who is the emotional knee-jerk reactionary force here: Kill 3000 of their civilians on a Tuesday morning, and they go ape-shit scared and blow their wad half way across the middle east.
And before that when the US lost 2500 military personel it didnt hesitate to kill ten times that figure in a double nuclear holocaust.
So to reverse your own argument: Why cant the US be more like Germany? Or Poland? Afterall, they lost millions of people over a decade to say the least, but you dont see them parading across the 7 oceans do you? Hmm? Come on – cant the US take a punch or two like the rest of the world without ‘losing it’ and going ballistic? Cant the US be made of sterner stuff?
Gosh you’re funny.
Whats that saying from the Bible – ‘Let he who is without sin cast the first stone’.
Call me when you get over Sep11th.
…You… you have a milk bowl with your name on it too? … Nooooo!! hahaha
-Ibn
Aliandra, was it right or wrong that Israel “was dumped” on our doorstep? Just answer the moral question here without any sideway distractions.
Mahmood;
It was a bad and wrong idea, absolutely. But history is full of those. Others have suffered the same or worse as a result of the wars of the 20th century, losing more territory or seeing it taken by foreigners. They’ve moved on, not kept a 60 year old territorial loss still stuck in their peoples’ throats.
Ibn;
All hysterics aside, you need to differentiate between old wrongs and recent ones.
That’s the crux of the matter I think Aliandra, if it’s taken in historical context, the take-over of Palestine only happened a few minutes ago! Okay, let me not be so facetious; there are still people living who remember that day and some who have been chased out of their homes and country. So the wound is still fresh and raw, that generation is still amongst us, you can’t expect them to just forget about it and move on.
Even without that, a wrong is a wrong even after a million years and the only way for reparation is to correct it.
I understand that the situation is quite complex, but when you boil it down, there is a complete absence of justice as far as the Palestinian people are concerned. Until justice is restored, this problem is not going to go away, be that in 10 or 1000 years.
Just put yourself in the following situation: someone comes and forcibly evicts you from your home. How long are you prepared to fight until you call it quits and move on with your life?
Mahmood;
How far back do we go to correct wrongs? Everyone’s ancestors were doing bad things to everyone else’s ancestors for thousands of years. It would be a logistical nightmare!
I agree that current injustices in the Israeli-Palestinin conflict needs to be addressed – this is essential. But if I may point out, the majority of Palestinian ‘refugees’ alive today have not been evicted from anywhere. They are the children or grandchildren of the original evictees. They are hardly the only descendants of people forced out as a result of 1940s turmoil – and these number in the millions indeed.
All those other refugees have been resettled and they and their children given citizenship and new lives in new places. None were kept in squalid camps for decades to be used for propaganda. Lebanon must give their Palestinians citizenship. The rest must realize that any ‘return’ will be to a future Palestinian state, not Israel, and to work toward that state as a realistic goal instead of drowning the Jews in the drink. Arab societies (and Ibn especially) need to stop belaboring the 1940s and focus on improving the present. I know some already are.
me too! like Ramesses II said….dang if you can’t whip their a!! join their class!