Arab Spring and such

[Bill Mattocks]

Couple things I do not quite understand about our semi-enthusiastic support for the various revolutions and uprisings taking place in the Middle East.

1) The uprisings are causing instability in the oil marketplace, which is causing prices to go up at the pump for gasoline (Iran is in that mix as well, but there are other factors too).
2) Many of the 'successful' uprisings seem to be resulting in 'democratic reforms' which elect Islamists to power in place of dictators. You know, the dictators who liked us replaced by the Islamists who do not.

Does that seem like the kind of thing we want to support? Especially militarily? I am trying to understand how helping the Libyans overthrow Kaddafi helped us? Now the Libyan arsenal is spread to the winds and much of it appears to be in the hands of people who hate us, and they may well end up with a government in Libya that imposes Sharia Law and exports more terrorism than Kaddafi ever did. Was that smart?

Just asking. Maybe there are reasons I'm not hip to.

 

[WC_lun]

As President Bush said, "We are spreading Democracy around the world." Sometimes that demoracy does not take the form we would like. That is the risk of true democracy.

Also, if we act to stop a massacre, that not only is the moral thing to do, but hopefully in our own self-interest. Saving a populous uprising from being murdered makes us look like the good guy in an area of the world where we have looked like the bad guy too often.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Like experts who study the Middle East said… you are never going to have a western democracy in the Middle East

 

[Bill Mattocks]

As President Bush said, "We are spreading Democracy around the world." Sometimes that demoracy does not take the form we would like. That is the risk of true democracy.

Yeah, he said that. And I wasn't sure then that it was a good idea. Not sure I do now either.

The idea behind democracy is that usually, the people who want it are the drivers. When it is 'exported', the people to whom it is 'gifted' tend to immediately vote themselves a fine slate of people who are not into democracy all that much, like Islamists.

Also, if we act to stop a massacre, that not only is the moral thing to do, but hopefully in our own self-interest. Saving a populous uprising from being murdered makes us look like the good guy in an area of the world where we have looked like the bad guy too often.

I agree it is a good thing to defend the oppressed - in general terms. I do not agree that it serves our own interests in this case. I don't believe it adds anything to our stature around the world, I'm not sure we should care anyway, and in fact, we are often criticized for it.

If we wanted to stop massacres, we could have done something to stop the massacres of the wars between the Tutsi and Hutu in Africa. Oh wait, no oil there. Nevermind, let them murder each other in the hundreds of thousands. Actually, more like 800,000.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_Genocide

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Like experts who study the Middle East said… you are nevergoing to have a western democracy in the Middle East

So it would seem as though we are shooting ourselves in the foot by trying to 'export' democracy to the Middle East, yes? Spending tax money to create a new government which will hate us. Hmmm, doesn't seem that smart to me.

 

[Xue Sheng]

So it would seem as though we are shooting ourselves in the foot by trying to 'export' democracy to the Middle East, yes?

yes

Spending tax money to create a new government which will hate us. Hmmm, doesn't seem that smart to me.

That's because it isn't

 

[Tez3]

Like experts who study the Middle East said… you are never going to have a western democracy in the Middle East

Apart from Israel that is.

 

[Xue Sheng]

Apart from Israel that is.

They were talking Muslim nations based on thier long history in the region, but I did not make that clear in my original post.

 

[Jenna]

I am trying to understand how helping the Libyans overthrow Kaddafi helped us?

Regime change is not designed to help us. Nor is it designed to help those that are being subject to that change. Regime change such as this and the attempted one taking place in Syria is designed to help those that are instigating that regime change. In this matter there is no "us".

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Regime change is not designed to help us. Nor is it designed to help those that are being subject to that change. Regime change such as this and the attempted one taking place in Syria is designed to help those that are instigating that regime change. In this matter there is no "us".

Well if it does not help us, I don't think we should be involved in it.

 

[Jenna]

Well if it does not help us, I don't think we should be involved in it.

I think it is difficult to avoid prevailing public perceptions. Our sources of information in the West generally stem from the same sources which collude to provide us with a necessarily limited view of the reality of the various situations. As you know, situations in which regime change occurs are seldom as clean and simple as our media portray. I think to that end, we never get much past the "it does not help us" stage to even consider the second clause.

 

[Xue Sheng]

I think it is difficult to avoid prevailing public perceptions. Our sources of information in the West generally stem from the same sources which collude to provide us with a necessarily limited view of the reality of the various situations. As you know, situations in which regime change occurs are seldom as clean and simple as our media portray. I think to that end, we never get much past the "it does not help us" stage to even consider the second clause.

Exactly... Watch American News... Watch the BBC.... Watch the News on CCTV and you get three very different views about the same story

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I think it is difficult to avoid prevailing public perceptions. Our sources of information in the West generally stem from the same sources which collude to provide us with a necessarily limited view of the reality of the various situations. As you know, situations in which regime change occurs are seldom as clean and simple as our media portray. I think to that end, we never get much past the "it does not help us" stage to even consider the second clause.

It's our tax dollars, and if we engage our troops, it's the blood of our sons and daughters. If we're going to spend our money and kill our children, it better do something for us. Making the world a better place is good, but not worth my money or the lives of our collective children. Show me how it benefits us, or I don't think we should be doing it.

 

[Makalakumu]

Or maybe all of this talk of "regime change" smacks of hubris. Maybe the idea that we can control these areas is flawed? Maybe the Islamic uprising is a response to our meddling in the past? Religion has been a focal point for rebellious groups in Western history. How many times did rebellious groups in Europe redouble their focus on Christianity in order to give them strength and bolster their fighting spirit so they could overturn unjust rulers?

 

[oftheherd1]

Or maybe all of this talk of "regime change" smacks of hubris. Maybe the idea that we can control these areas is flawed? Maybe the Islamic uprising is a response to our meddling in the past? Religion has been a focal point for rebellious groups in Western history. How many times did rebellious groups in Europe redouble their focus on Christianity in order to give them strength and bolster their fighting spirit so they could overturn unjust rulers?

A fascinating thought that. And I must admit I'm not good enough in history to know that. How many times did rebellious groubs in Europe reduoble their focus on Christianity in order to give the strength?

 

[Jenna]

It's our tax dollars, and if we engage our troops, it's the blood of our sons and daughters. If we're going to spend our money and kill our children, it better do something for us. Making the world a better place is good, but not worth my money or the lives of our collective children. Show me how it benefits us, or I don't think we should be doing it.

Does it matter that there is potentially no benefit to you personally or the great "us"? In terms of foreign "diplomacy" / warmongering I wonder if the only important factor is the perception of benefit. That is the fundamental role of our information providers, each of whom will reassure you that the benefit to "us" overwhelms the collateral damage suffered as a result of any aggression.

Perception of benefit is fortunately simplest for us. We do not even need to actively buy into such propaganda for such is the weight of "evidence" that to rail against it is to castigate oneself as a tinfoil helmet job. Likewise to wade through http://www.aljazeera.com, http://rt.com, http://www.presstv.ir to name a few other non-West sources of perspective for alternative realities of the various situations requires not only understanding and but the will to do so. Most of us are too busy for that. It is much simpler to suck in Fox, BBC et al.

Can I ask please, when you say "there are reasons I'm not hip to", how do you mean that? Thank you.

 

[Makalakumu]

A fascinating thought that. And I must admit I'm not good enough in history to know that. How many times did rebellious groups in Europe reduoble their focus on Christianity in order to give the strength?

The short answer is that this idea underlies the history of the Reformation. Martin Luther was rebelling against an autocratic power who was trying to run everyone's life.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Does it matter that there is potentially no benefit to you personally or the great "us"? In terms of foreign "diplomacy" / warmongering I wonder if the only important factor is the perception of benefit. That is the fundamental role of our information providers, each of whom will reassure you that the benefit to "us" overwhelms the collateral damage suffered as a result of any aggression.

You make a good point. Perception sometimes is reality. However, dead soldiers are dead soldiers for real. I don't think I want to commit our troops to yet another war supporting Syria, Libya, or Absurdistan unless I see a real benefit for our nation, not just a perceived one. You want our kids to die so that Al-Jazeera says nice things about us? Not me.

And we've spend enough money, too much money, trying to make the world in our image, trying to make the world a better place, or doing things we think will make people like us. Time for that to stop.

Perception of benefit is fortunately simplest for us. We do not even need to actively buy into such propaganda for such is the weight of "evidence" that to rail against it is to castigate oneself as a tinfoil helmet job. Likewise to wade through http://www.aljazeera.com, http://rt.com, http://www.presstv.ir to name a few other non-West sources of perspective for alternative realities of the various situations requires not only understanding and but the will to do so. Most of us are too busy for that. It is much simpler to suck in Fox, BBC et al.

I don't tune in to much of it at all, which is why I'm just barely paying attention with this Syria thing. I understand they are on the tail end of this Arab Uprising thing, and their own government is shooting the hell out of them and blowing them up, and now people think *we* (the US) should do something about it. Well, as far as I can tell, if we help them, they'll finish overthrowing the government, hold elections, elect Islamists, and then declare their eternal hatred towards us and start raising up an army of monster to kill us. Isn't that about it? So, uh, no.

Can I ask please, when you say "there are reasons I'm not hip to", how do you mean that? Thank you.

Well, just what I said. I don't watch much TV, and certainly not the major news shows. I don't listen to talk radio. I seldom pay attention to the various right-wing or left-wing blogs unless someone posts something here. But I have noted that so far, the governments in the Middle East that have had 'democracy' have been electing terrorists as leaders, which doesn't strike me as in our best interests. If there's more information I'm not hip to, feel free to clue me in.

And I know it sounds awful, but when Syria bombs their own people? I don't really care. I mean I care, it's terrible, but I don't think that means we should do something about it. Not unless there is some benefit for us in it, which I'm not seeing.

We let the Rwanda Genocide kill 800,000 people, with machetes, for God's sake. We did nothing, not one thing. And this is different how? If Syria wants to overthrow their government, that's on them.

 

[Xue Sheng]

ok this will probably get me in trouble but....

To sum up, we go in, our people die, little changes there, even over time.

We create a power vacuum and the next guy shows up to fill it and it is likely he will not be a whole lot different than the last guy... maybe a little better....maybe a little worse.

Which basically comes down to the more things change the more the stay the same and the only real difference is a lot of young men and women die for what will likely end up exactly the same as it was before they even got there. And their family and friends get to grieve and miss them for the rest of their lives.

The history of the region and its government is that the biggest, meanest strongest guy ends up in charge and stays there by being the biggest, strongest meanest guy. Now it may be changing now, maybe that is what the whole Arab spring will turn out to be... but history says otherwise and at this point I see no reason why we are there...and you want to know something and lot of people in the Middle east don't know why either and from what I can get on all this there are a whole lot of other countries that don't get it either.

Nothing against the troops that are there, they are there because they chose to be in the military and it goes to their honor and since of duty and for that they should be commended. But why they are there and who sent them there is just not working for me anymore.

 

[Makalakumu]

Or maybe we need to face the fact that democracy is not freedom. Democracy is two wolves and one sheep voting on who is dinner.