If widespread violence breaks out in the Middle East how much blame falls on Trump?

[cytg111]

That headline is a bit late. The USA has been on the side of Israel since the beginning. The fix was in Many Decades ago. This is nothing new at all. All the other BS is and was just lip service, just like the BS with Taiwan.

Oh stop it. Trumps idea of foreign policy is undercutting his own secretary of state with "little rocket man" tweets about a irratic nuclear foreign power.
His own cabinet is calling him moron to his face.
This is the guy you are defending and carrying water for, dialing it down, projecting the blame onto others, rationalizing the idiocy.
That is all on you, by rationalizing the moron you enable him and the entire shitshow.
Take a god damn stand, grow some balls and distance your self from the retarded pedo enabling demented shitshow that is your party.
Balls man. Balls. Get some.

 

[UNCjigga]

I honestly cannot remember a time where there was not some sort of unrest going on in the middle east, and that was decades before drumpf. So very little falls on the sagging shoulders of the dotard.

This. SSDD. I still remember that 5+ year intifada that derailed the last chance for peace--all kicked off because PM Ariel Sharon visited a holy site on the Temple Mount.

 

[pcgeek11]

Oh stop it. Trumps idea of foreign policy is undercutting his own secretary of state with "little rocket man" tweets about a irratic nuclear foreign power.
His own cabinet is calling him moron to his face.
This is the guy you are defending and carrying water for, dialing it down, projecting the blame onto others, rationalizing the idiocy.
That is all on you, by rationalizing the moron you enable him and the entire shitshow.
Take a god damn stand, grow some balls and distance your self from the retarded pedo enabling demented shitshow that is your party.
Balls man. Balls. Get some.

I am sorry that you cannot face the real truth.

Hint: The Truth stated in my post has nothing to do with Donald Trump.

 

[Ajay]

If we're going to buy friends, we should put the job out to bid. We might be able to pick up friends on the cheap.

Iran was expensive too (and worked out pretty badly), now Iraq, etc. It's just not cheap to do business in the middle east (unless the country is relatively rich like the house of Saud).

Geopolitical advantages aren't cheap, in general nor is it cheap to secure the flow of oil. We could stop being a super-power, but honestly, it's worked out well for the US - we are the richest country on earth and we have 1/5th the population of second place. It's not all been roses with Israel, but the relationship has worked better than many others (excluding our best European allies).

 

[Puffnstuff]

I am sorry that you cannot face the real truth.

Hint: The Truth stated in my post has nothing to do with Donald Trump.

I must concur with you that these people will be violent and use any excuse for it.

 

[brandonbull]

Thanks, Baghdad Bob.

What parts are false?

 

[Herr Kutz]

If? There was already widespread violence in the middle east.

 

[MajinCry]

Yeah, at this point in the US' extremely long-winded debacle in the Middle East, you can't really blame Trump for it going haywire at this point. Sure, he takes a significant amount of blame, but it pales against Obama. That being said, if Trump makes it through a whole term without dying, then yeah he'll have a hell of a lot of blood on his hands.

The Middle East has been made into a fucking disaster by the US, as well as Israel (under US sponsorship). Saudi Arabia, the exporter of Wahabbism, is a devout US ally. Israel toppled Egypt in 1967, due to Egypt being poised to spread stability, and promote secular nationalism, to other Arab countries. The US increased aid to Israel by 20x (16 billion) in the decade following, and by 35x (28 billion) the decade after that.

The US put Saddam Hussein in power, then deposed him when he invaded Kuwait (where the US oilfields are). When he was sexually enslaving the Kurdish population, he was on par with Israel in terms of amicability with the US; only two nations in the post-WWII era have not been promptly attacked when they killed US soldiers, Israel and Saddam's Iraq.

Or what about Gaddafi? He ping ponged between being the West's favoured puppet, and the new Arab Hitler of the year. The former was when he allowed western corporations to plunder Libya's resources, and the latter when he kicked them out. He relented and let the corporations back in, and now he was a reformed paragon of western virtues.

The US decided to destroy him, as he was advocating for fellow North African nations to adopt the dinar, a gold backed currency, over their current dollar-backed currencies. Arab nations are not allowed to be nationalist, as that would be disastrous for corporations and the MIC.

And there's a whole bunch of other shit. All the post-WWII Presidents have been doing evil across the world, and to pin the Middle East on Trump is far too short sighted.

 

[Ajay]

The Middle East has been made into a fucking disaster by the US, as well as Israel (under US sponsorship). Saudi Arabia, the exporter of Wahabbism, is a devout US ally. Israel toppled Egypt in 1967, due to Egypt being poised to spread stability, and promote secular nationalism, to other Arab countries. The US increased aid to Israel by 20x (16 billion) in the decade following, and by 35x (28 billion) the decade after that.

Yeah, the six day war couldn't have been about Egypt blocking Israel's shipping lanes; it must have been a conspiracy against peace

 

[pcgeek11]

Yeah, the six day war couldn't have been about Egypt blocking Israel's shipping lanes; it must have been a conspiracy against peace

Shhhhh.

He has an agenda.

 

[HomerJS]

Irony of history should not be ignored here. Trump's fluffers are excusing what he did which does not benefit the US nor did it seek any concessions from Israel.

Yet one of the mode vilified people righties love to bash brokered the longest term of mideast peace. Take a stab who that is.

Ever heard the axiom "do no harm"? The opposite has happened here.

 

[MajinCry]

Yeah, the six day war couldn't have been about Egypt blocking Israel's shipping lanes; it must have been a conspiracy against peace

And the US invaded Vietnam to bring freedom and democracy to the civillians. Right?

The idea that you buy that as a valid excuse, for Israel toppling Egyptian democracy, is brutish and reprehensible.

 

[MajinCry]

Shhhhh.

He has an agenda.

You are obsessed.

 

[glenn1]

And the US invaded Vietnam to bring freedom and democracy to the civillians. Right?

The idea that you buy that as a valid excuse, for Israel toppling Egyptian democracy, is brutish and reprehensible.

Egypt wasn’t a democracy in any sense of the word in the 1960s. Its “elections” were one-party shams with opposition jailed, similar to how “elections” happened in Iraq during the Saddam Hussein days. You can make an argument that Israeli justifications for the 6 Day War were unjust, but don’t whitewash Egypt’s past to make it seem like they were virtuous and innocent like the Canada of Africa or some bullshit like that.

 

[MajinCry]

Egypt wasn’t a democracy in any sense of the word in the 1960s. Its “elections” were one-party shams with opposition jailed, similar to how “elections” happened in Iraq during the Saddam Hussein days. You can make an argument that Israeli justifications for the 6 Day War were unjust, but don’t whitewash Egypt’s past to make it seem like they were virtuous and innocent like the Canada of Africa or some bullshit like that.

Nasser overthrew the brutal Egyptian monarchy, brought stability to the country by nationalizing the country's resources (rather than have US corporations rape unabated), and brought the living standards of the poorest up by many times through socialist policies.

I specifically referenced Nasser's administration. If you want to bring up evil acts done by previous and subsequent administrations, that's a completely different discussion.

 

[glenn1]

Nasser overthrew the brutal Egyptian monarchy, brought stability to the country by nationalizing the country's resources (rather than have US corporations rape unabated), and brought the living standards of the poorest up by many times through socialist policies.

I specifically referenced Nasser's administration. If you want to bring up evil acts done by previous and subsequent administrations, that's a completely different discussion.

Nasser's administration wasn't a "democracy" either. Democracies don't do things like bring your beloved Nasser to power via coup, outlaw opposition parties, strip away civil liberties, happily execute political opponents like the Muslim Brotherhood, and engage in mass arrests. If you want to favorably compare the light authoritarianism of Nasser to the previous monarchy or British protectorate and occupation or sing the praises of nationalization then be my guest, but let's not mis-characterize it as something it wasn't like "democracy."

 

[MajinCry]

Nasser's administration wasn't a "democracy" either. Democracies don't do things like bring your beloved Nasser to power via coup, outlaw opposition parties, strip away civil liberties, happily execute political opponents like the Muslim Brotherhood, and engage in mass arrests. If you want to favorably compare the light authoritarianism of Nasser to the previous monarchy or British protectorate and occupation or sing the praises of nationalization then be my guest, but let's not mis-characterize it as something it wasn't like "democracy."

I admit that my use of the term democracy is misplaced. But keep in mind that the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist faction. The last thing needed in a state trying to rid itself of religious fanaticism, is religious fanaticism.

Name me these civil liberties he removed. And when it comes to mass arrests, he was ridding the country of corruption and the like; removing those that actively work against the progression of society, from society, is a positive thing.

 

[glenn1]

I admit that my use of the term democracy is misplaced. But keep in mind that the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist faction. The last thing needed in a state trying to rid itself of religious fanaticism, is religious fanaticism.

Name me these civil liberties he removed. And when it comes to mass arrests, he was ridding the country of corruption and the like; removing those that actively work against the progression of society, from society, is a positive thing.

Free speech, habeas corpus, trial by jury, freedom of the press, censorship, outlawing of opposing political parties, implementation of a large "security" state apparatus to squash dissent, etc. Again you seem to be admiring of his socialistic impulses to help the poor and such (not really related to civil liberties though) and thus unable to see his very real flaws. Even presumably sympathetic sources like Al Jazeera agree Nasser curtailed civil liberties along with basically every historian, I'm unsure why this is difficult for you to agree with. As you pointed out he had some positive characteristics and he definitely helped bridge the transition to a more modern Egypt, but you should look at his entire body of work so to speak.

 

[Ajay]

And the US invaded Vietnam to bring freedom and democracy to the civillians. Right?

The idea that you buy that as a valid excuse, for Israel toppling Egyptian democracy, is brutish and reprehensible.

Whataboutism. Outstanding

 

[MajinCry]

Whataboutism. Outstanding

That's not a whataboutism. It's a parallel.

A whataboutism is used to detract an argument by highlighting supposed hypocrisy. E.g, Britain cannot comment on the US' history of slavery, as the British empire also engaged in slavery.

That's not what I stated. I drew a parallel between the supposed reason for Israel invading Egypt, to the US' propaganda justifying it's invasion of Vietnam.

 

[Ajay]

That's not what I stated. I drew a parallel between the supposed reason for Israel invading Egypt, to the US' propaganda justifying it's invasion of Vietnam.

Fair enough. Still, I fail to see how the rise of secular nationalism (not that it would have had broad success) was a threat to Israel.

 

[MajinCry]

Fair enough. Still, I fail to see how the rise of secular nationalism (not that it would have had broad success) was a threat to Israel.

There are a couple reasons that I can think of. The first, is that Israel wants to crush the Palestinians. They're the ones trying to remove the Palestinians from Gaza, as well as having concentration camps within Israel.

The second, is that if the Arab nations were able to actually stabilize and progress as a society, they would inevitably aid the plight of the Palestinians, endangering the state of Israel.

Yet another is that Israel gets a substantial sum every decade from the US, in exchange for purchasing advanced weaponry. If there were to somehow be peace (as a result of mass stabilization of neighbouring countries), the US would not have much to gain from having Israel as an ally; if they don't buy weaponry, it's time to abandon them.