US Foreign Policy

Discussion of current events
Jim the Moron
Posts: 752
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Jim the Moron » Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:47 am

Sertorio wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:14 am
Milo wrote:
Sun Feb 18, 2018 8:22 pm
Sertorio wrote:
Sun Feb 18, 2018 4:17 pm

Why would Russia leave Syria where it is winning? The US left Vietnam because it lost there. Having also lost in Syria and Iraq, one would expect the US to leave soon, probably in a less embarrassing manner than it did in Vietnam... Americans may be crass warmongers, but they aren't completely blind or stupid...
Why would the US leave Syria where it is winning? Russia left Afghanistan because it lost there. Having also lost in Syria and Iraq, one would expect Russia to leave soon, probably in a less embarrassing manner than it did in Afghanistan... Russians may be crass warmongers, but they aren't completely blind or stupid...
Wrong premises: the US is NOT winning in Syria; Russia has NOT lost in Syria.

You know this very well, why do you waste time making statements you know are false? Do you expect to win an argument based on falsehoods? Is that how you function in court?...
May I interject? In the 21st century, there is no such thing as victory for non-Muslims engaged in conflicts in Islamic lands. Attempting to stop Muslims from killing Muslims is a fool's errand. The only winners here are Muslim honchos using the blood and treasure of non-Muslim interests to further their savage objectives.

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1262
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Sertorio » Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:41 am

Jim the Moron wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:47 am

May I interject? In the 21st century, there is no such thing as victory for non-Muslims engaged in conflicts in Islamic lands. Attempting to stop Muslims from killing Muslims is a fool's errand. The only winners here are Muslim honchos using the blood and treasure of non-Muslim interests to further their savage objectives.
In Syria, victory for Russia means saving the secular character of the political system, means depriving the US of any control over Syria, means containing US imperialism. It doesn't mean preventing Muslims from ever killing other Muslims or establishing a more democratic system. In that context, Russia is winning in Syria and the US is losing. Which is good for all of us who have been the victims of American hegemonic impulses.

Jim the Moron
Posts: 752
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Jim the Moron » Mon Feb 19, 2018 5:55 am

Sertorio wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:41 am
Jim the Moron wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:47 am

May I interject? In the 21st century, there is no such thing as victory for non-Muslims engaged in conflicts in Islamic lands. Attempting to stop Muslims from killing Muslims is a fool's errand. The only winners here are Muslim honchos using the blood and treasure of non-Muslim interests to further their savage objectives.
In Syria, victory for Russia means saving the secular character of the political system, means depriving the US of any control over Syria, means containing US imperialism. It doesn't mean preventing Muslims from ever killing other Muslims or establishing a more democratic system. In that context, Russia is winning in Syria and the US is losing. Which is good for all of us who have been the victims of American hegemonic impulses.
Precisely what "secular character of the political system" in Syria is Russia saving?

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1262
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Sertorio » Mon Feb 19, 2018 6:41 am

Jim the Moron wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 5:55 am
Sertorio wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:41 am
Jim the Moron wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 3:47 am

May I interject? In the 21st century, there is no such thing as victory for non-Muslims engaged in conflicts in Islamic lands. Attempting to stop Muslims from killing Muslims is a fool's errand. The only winners here are Muslim honchos using the blood and treasure of non-Muslim interests to further their savage objectives.
In Syria, victory for Russia means saving the secular character of the political system, means depriving the US of any control over Syria, means containing US imperialism. It doesn't mean preventing Muslims from ever killing other Muslims or establishing a more democratic system. In that context, Russia is winning in Syria and the US is losing. Which is good for all of us who have been the victims of American hegemonic impulses.
Precisely what "secular character of the political system" in Syria is Russia saving?
No discrimination based on faith or religion. Syrians of all faiths have access to any positions in the Syrian society. As long as they support Bashar al-Assad... :D

neverfail
Posts: 1751
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2016 3:47 am

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by neverfail » Mon Feb 19, 2018 5:19 pm

Sertorio wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 6:41 am
Jim the Moron wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 5:55 am


Precisely what "secular character of the political system" in Syria is Russia saving?
No discrimination based on faith or religion. Syrians of all faiths have access to any positions in the Syrian society. As long as they support Bashar al-Assad... :D
Sertorio may well be right on this point.

The Assad dynasty of dictators in Syria is a Baath regime. Baathism, originally inspired by Gamal Abdul Nasser's apparently successful experiment in Egypt back in the 1950's and 1960's means Arab socialism: but the term is misleading because Nasser never tried to nationalise his country's entire economy - merely strike up what he thought of as the right balance between state involvement and private enterprise. Likewise with the Assads in Syria.

Arab secularism would probably be a more appropriate description of it than Arab socialism.

It represents a game attempt in a region of the world where Islam has an almost irresistible tendency to become political to keep the mosque from assuming power; playing its rightful function as solely a place of prayer and worship for the faithful.

Baathism seems to mean that you are not discriminated against because of your religious allegiance as long as you remember who is boss.

For the sake of sparing the ancient Christian communities in Syria complete and final extinction it will be better if Bashar al Assad wins this civil war.

User avatar
SteveFoerster
Posts: 1220
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 7:17 pm
Location: Northern Virginia, USA and Dominica, West Indies
Contact:

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by SteveFoerster » Tue Feb 20, 2018 8:47 am

Sertorio wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:41 am
Which is good for all of us who have been the victims of American hegemonic impulses.
"Us"? Please, the only hegemony the Portuguese have experienced in your lifetime is self-imposed.
Writer, technologist, educator, gadfly.
President of New World University: http://newworld.ac

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1262
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Sertorio » Tue Feb 20, 2018 10:08 am

SteveFoerster wrote:
Tue Feb 20, 2018 8:47 am
Sertorio wrote:
Mon Feb 19, 2018 4:41 am
Which is good for all of us who have been the victims of American hegemonic impulses.
"Us"? Please, the only hegemony the Portuguese have experienced in your lifetime is self-imposed.
We do not experience that hegemony in an isolated manner, we feel it through NATO and Europe's submission to American whims... And we would feel it in a more forcefull manner if we tried to rent harbour and landing facilities in the Azores to Russia or China...

Jim the Moron
Posts: 752
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Jim the Moron » Thu May 03, 2018 9:58 am

It's beginning to look like there's a good possibility that North Korea will release 3 Americans held in NK prisons. It will be interesting to see what NK wants in exchange for their release.

Which gives us pause . . . recall a few years back - when the previous US administration saw fit to release 5 Muslim terrorists in exchange for the traitorous Bergdahl. Can this administration rise above the low-life foreign policy types of recent experience in its forthcoming palaver with NK?

User avatar
Sertorio
Posts: 1262
Joined: Fri Dec 16, 2016 3:12 am

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Sertorio » Sat May 05, 2018 3:29 am

I know most of you don't like The Saker and his opinions, but you will find it worthwhile reading the following analysis which he has just published:
The Warmakers
THE SAKER • MAY 5, 2018

http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-warmakers/

Jim the Moron
Posts: 752
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 9:51 pm

Re: US Foreign Policy

Post by Jim the Moron » Sat May 05, 2018 9:26 am

Sertorio wrote:
Sat May 05, 2018 3:29 am
I know most of you don't like The Saker and his opinions, but you will find it worthwhile reading the following analysis which he has just published:
The Warmakers
THE SAKER • MAY 5, 2018

http://www.unz.com/tsaker/the-warmakers/
Yes, the usual hyperbolic anti "AngloZionist Empire" discourse from The Saker. It's (as usual for him) to first attribute motives ("plans") by the "Empire," and then document the perceived failure of these plans to date. He holds everything together by including a few facts here and there.

Post Reply