Anti-Americanism flares in Egypt as protests rage over Morsi's ouster

DDD · Jul 8, 2013

The sooner they get off religious dictatorship the better.

iliveonramen · Jul 8, 2013

Maybe we shouldn't be dictating US foreign policy on what some random individual says.

I seem to remember a single source from Iraq telling us the citizens would be welcoming us there with open arms as liberators.

That turned out to be untrue.

PeteEU · Jul 8, 2013

humbolt said:
Got a minute here. We are all dependent on fossil fuels for the immediate future. The US has enough energy to be net exporters in a little over a decade if we had a rational, comprehensive national energy program. We don't.

As you said.. you dont have a rational and comprehensive national energy program, and even if you had, 10 years is a long long time and quite optimistic. What will you do in the mean time, and what about after the domestic oil is gone?

We have lip service to the energy du jour. The energy market is global, and we have an interest in global market stability - everybody does.

No not everyone. For one oil companies dont. The exporting countries dont since higher price means higher income. And then there are the speculators in the market, which now accounts for 65+% of all oil buys and sales.

Instability in the ME affects everybody as a result.

Exactly.. hence why rock the boat constantly? Why invade Iraq and make Iran more powerful? Why not fix the Israel-Palestine problem? and so on and so on.

You reach your conclusions with the prominent idea that the US will operate with the "gloves on" attitude we have employed for some decades now.

I reach my conclusions based on the fact that the people in charge of the GOP today (and the Dems for that matter) are the same type and in some cases the exact same people who pushed for the "hands on" attitude in the first place. The "hands on" attitude has been US attitude since before the US Civil War, and I doubt it will change soon. Even when you were isolationist, then you were quite "hands on" around the world,.... only difference was that the British Empire was in your way.

You should consider that if the Soviet Union had won the cold war, the world would not be nearly as pleasant as it is - even now with all the turmoil.

That is another debate.. to be honest for many peoples around the world there aint much difference if the US or Soviets had won.. both wanted to dominate others.

Yes, we have made mistakes. Yes, we will make more. No, the world's problems cannot be laid at our doorstep, and no, we are not responsible for terror or terrorists.

All terror and terrorists.. nope not by a long shot, but denying that you have at least quite a bit of complicity in the whole mess is pathetic. Take Iran.. yes you are at fault for Iran and the mullahs hating the US and wanting to do terror against the US. OBL? In part yes, since one of the trigger points was US boots on the ground in Saudi Arabia for the Gulf War 1... not that I am critical of the US on this fact

Screw OBL and his outdated beliefs.

That's tantamount to blaming rape on the attractive victim. Yes, we have had a hand in some less than pretty results, but when one considers the actions of the thugs in the region, I would not be looking for the better actor to shoulder the blame for some ugly results.

You do realize that there are "thugs" all around the world right? In Africa, South America and Asia.. but the dont have oil under their feet.. And in the few cases that they do have oil, you have used lesser than democratic methods to keep puppet regimes in power.... yes I am talking about Venezuela. Why did the US not invade random African country to kick out a random dictator there who was threatening his population? Why not depose Ida Amin back in the day.. he ate people for **** sake!.. oh yea no oil in Uganda.

Grant · Jul 8, 2013

humbolt said:
Got a minute here. We are all dependent on fossil fuels for the immediate future. The US has enough energy to be net exporters in a little over a decade if we had a rational, comprehensive national energy program. We don't. We have lip service to the energy du jour. The energy market is global, and we have an interest in global market stability - everybody does. Instability in the ME affects everybody as a result. You reach your conclusions with the prominent idea that the US will operate with the "gloves on" attitude we have employed for some decades now. You should consider that if the Soviet Union had won the cold war, the world would not be nearly as pleasant as it is - even now with all the turmoil. Yes, we have made mistakes. Yes, we will make more. No, the world's problems cannot be laid at our doorstep, and no, we are not responsible for terror or terrorists. That's tantamount to blaming rape on the attractive victim. Yes, we have had a hand in some less than pretty results, but when one considers the actions of the thugs in the region, I would not be looking for the better actor to shoulder the blame for some ugly results.

Yes, the US had made some mistakes whereas .....others have not?

It is my contention that the US has made fewer mistakes than all other nations (with any degree of power), which is why they have lasted so long. Others have had to reinvent themselves many times over, often with changes in their national borders.

As well, Romney had a plan where North America might become energy efficient. That idea should be revisited.

humbolt · Jul 8, 2013

PeteEU said:
Good question actually and not an easy one to answer. You have one major problem and that is your dependence on oil. It means you need the oil from the middle east, either to stabilize the price of oil, or actually to consume. This has lead to almost 100 years of petro companies (the 7 sisters.. google it) basically defining American foreign policy in the region. Get off oil, and you can say "**** you" to the middle east and leave.

But do you really see yourself getting off oil any time soon with the political right and oil companies fighting against alternative energy sources all in the while say "Drill drill drill baby"?

And then there is the Israel issue.. which is easily solve-able as well. Remove the unconditional support and watch Israel behave and suddenly want real peace for security.

To be frank.. as long as they are doing it to themselves and not Americans or anyone outside the region.. then yea who cares. People have been abusing other people and innocents since the dawn of time. Even today it is happening in the US on a daily basis, but no one is doing much to deal with it. Where are the mass arrests of company owners using illegal aliens and abusing these aliens? Or the arrests of religious groups that use children in the sex games?

As for declaring war on the rest of the world....no one has that. If any war has been declared it has been from the US and its allies against so called terror, which in many cases (but not all) was the direct result in abuses by the very same US and its allies, either in the present or the past. It does not justify the terror in any way, but does explain why some of it has happened, which is one of the first steps in trying to prevent similar acts in the future. When people are abused and downtrodden, then in many cases they will react violently to free themselves from the oppressors.. or should they not do that according to you?

Who said it was? It is their own fault and traditions and backward ways and religion.

All "you" have done as a nation is become a lighting rod for every crackpot who wants power and uses the above mention crap to take power and keep power. It is no difference than Hitler using the Jews and Socialists as blame for all the problems of Germany after WW1. It is no difference than Amin of Uganda blaming the Asian population for problems in Uganda and deporting them all.. crashing the economy as a result btw.

Lets give an example. The Beirut barracks bombings.

The US and others entered Lebanon to stop a civil war. That alone was stupid, but that is another discussion. The reaction of this action and actions on the ground saw the US barracks being attacked and a lot of people killed. As a reaction to this, the US and France bombed many areas of Lebanon and the USS New Jersey lobbed 300 shells into the Bekaa Valley.

Now people in the Bekaa Valley, where many radicals have come from became radicalized because of the shelling by the USS New Jersey. They could care less that it was a reaction to the car bombing of the US barracks and to this day, many in Lebanon, especially in the areas hit by the US and French forces, see these attacks as a reason to hate the US and France.

The goal of the terrorists was to get the US and its allies out of Lebanon so they could continue the war, and that as accomplished. But the attack also brought a lot of new recruits to the side of the terrorists.. not because of the attacks, but the reaction to the attacks by the US and France... where they targeted civilian areas pretty indiscriminately.

You cant, that is the problem! You dont have the financial means nor the military means. You would have to do what you did to Nazi Germany to even remotely get close to fixing the problem, and even then the odds are against you simply because of geographics and logistics. And at least the Germans were a highly educated peoples... these people are not and that is a massive problem.

Take Bosnia.. in no way could you prevent nor stop that war and mass murder. Sure you could have sent troops in, that would have been slaughtered wholesale, something that the average American would never stomach. Or Syria.. sure send troops in.. but it wont solve the problem, and will only cause many more problems. Who do you defend or attack? Want to put islamist in power? Keep Assad in power? Protect his tribes from the rest of the country? And how about the Kurds who will revolt as well.. talk about a cluster**** of epic proportions.

And finally Iraq. Sure you sent troops in, got rid of Saddam based on lies. But what has that gotten you? A country split in 3, and dominated by Tehran and even more corrupt and violent than under Saddam. As a bonus Iran has become far more powerful and now has a direct link to its allies in Syria and Hamas/Hezbollah, something that US governments time and time tried to prevent. You also managed to train thousands and thousands of arabs in how to attack the US and refined terror on a grand scale. Did it make Iraqis love the US? Nope, quite the opposite. The mass murder of Iraqis kinda changes the hearts and minds of people ..

You cant police the world.. the Spanish tried it and failed costing them an empire in the process, and then the British who also ultimately failed and cost them their empire. You are now in the same situation and it is time to cut your losses or end up as irrelevant as the UK and Spain or even going back further.. the Turks (Ottoman Empire) and Italians (Romans and later Christian empires).

Forming alliances based on security and trade is the way forward.... not war and blackmail.

Has nothing about being universally loved. Thanks to the information age, people have started to understand how the US has operated the last 60-100+ years. Out of total self interest, while claiming some sort of higher moral ground, when in fact at home they were no better than the countries and people they were looking down on and attacking.

You also have to remember, the top dog politically world wide, has always been hated by those nations and peoples that it has "kept down or abused" either directly or indirectly.. hell even true or falsely. You do realize that the British Empire got the same treatment as the US is getting now... from among others.. the US itself! You do know that the US had plans to invade the British Empire right? That they saw the British as their main foe on the world stage for almost 100 years before they became allies in WW2.

The Anti-Americanism in Egypt is not unusual, since they are being shot by American bullets and American guns and American tear gas.

But on top of that, they have been fed a diet of anti-Americanism by the Soviets first (Soviets supported Egypt during the cold war), and later on religious nutjobs based on the US support for Israel. It wont go away any time soon but it can be levitated over time by good deeds and political actions that create a future for the people in the region and yes fixing the freaking Israeli-Palestinian problem.

But saying that... anti-Americanism benefits the US as well, especially certain industries... never forget that. High oil prices means big profits for oil companies. Conflict means more weapons and bloated military budgets.. .. never forget that.

PeteEU said:
As you said.. you dont have a rational and comprehensive national energy program, and even if you had, 10 years is a long long time and quite optimistic. What will you do in the mean time, and what about after the domestic oil is gone?

No not everyone. For one oil companies dont. The exporting countries dont since higher price means higher income. And then there are the speculators in the market, which now accounts for 65+% of all oil buys and sales.

Exactly.. hence why rock the boat constantly? Why invade Iraq and make Iran more powerful? Why not fix the Israel-Palestine problem? and so on and so on.

I reach my conclusions based on the fact that the people in charge of the GOP today (and the Dems for that matter) are the same type and in some cases the exact same people who pushed for the "hands on" attitude in the first place. The "hands on" attitude has been US attitude since before the US Civil War, and I doubt it will change soon. Even when you were isolationist, then you were quite "hands on" around the world,.... only difference was that the British Empire was in your way.

That is another debate.. to be honest for many peoples around the world there aint much difference if the US or Soviets had won.. both wanted to dominate others.

All terror and terrorists.. nope not by a long shot, but denying that you have at least quite a bit of complicity in the whole mess is pathetic. Take Iran.. yes you are at fault for Iran and the mullahs hating the US and wanting to do terror against the US. OBL? In part yes, since one of the trigger points was US boots on the ground in Saudi Arabia for the Gulf War 1... not that I am critical of the US on this fact Screw OBL and his outdated beliefs.

You do realize that there are "thugs" all around the world right? In Africa, South America and Asia.. but the dont have oil under their feet.. And in the few cases that they do have oil, you have used lesser than democratic methods to keep puppet regimes in power.... yes I am talking about Venezuela. Why did the US not invade random African country to kick out a random dictator there who was threatening his population? Why not depose Ida Amin back in the day.. he ate people for **** sake!.. oh yea no oil in Uganda.

Sorry. I'd respond, but the quote function isn't working right now for me. This is in response to your last post, but all I can seem to get is the response to your first post. I'm sorry. I would like to respond to your most recent one, but without the quote function, it's difficult.

zimmer · Jul 16, 2013

PeteEU said:
How on earth are we deflecting? Do you even know what the word means?

Well, let's see... I used it correctly to describe your dog's dick style (meaning you go where ever your lack of mental gravity leads you at that moment); a form of slithering away from the topic at hand hoping the other side hasn't realized you've pissed yourself.

And so what? He has said a lot of things, and hope for a lot of things, but not everything is possible.. that is politics.

He said some abslute moronic things related to HID being elected and how the WORLD and Muslims in this world would react to Obama's Amerika der Beautiful.

Again total denial of your own hero's complicity in the whole situation... classic conservative denial...

Another feeble attempt at deflection.

This is about The Almighty Miss Amerika Werld View of Obama. Nobody put thems werdz in his yap.

He put 'em out there for the world to enjoy... now enjoy the stupidity as I and others are.

Live, love... learn it.

cpwill · Jul 16, 2013

PeteEU said:
Good question actually and not an easy one to answer. You have one major problem and that is your dependence on oil. It means you need the oil from the middle east, either to stabilize the price of oil, or actually to consume. This has lead to almost 100 years of petro companies (the 7 sisters.. google it) basically defining American foreign policy in the region. Get off oil, and you can say "**** you" to the middle east and leave.

We're not going to get off oil. It is far too ubiquitous, and the alternatives range from the implausible to the impracticable. What we can do is reduce the importance of Middle Eastern oil by exploring alternate sources.

And then there is the Israel issue.. which is easily solve-able as well. Remove the unconditional support and watch Israel behave and suddenly want real peace for security.

I agree. Which is why the most likely response on the part of Israel in that scenario is to ensure herself a buffer zone for security, and clear the Arabs out of it, in order to secure real peace.

Right now, Israel is an (understandably) paranoid nation surrounded by an entire region of folks who would be willing to commit genocide against it. The one thing that keeps them out of a Hobbesian security dilemma is the U.S. security guarantee. Remove that guarantee, and you put her back in the security dilemma, where peace can only be secured through aggression.

To be frank.. as long as they are doing it to themselves and not Americans or anyone outside the region.. then yea who cares.

Well, some of us do. Perhaps it's one of those "American" things, but I doubt it. I notice that even Europeans on occasion support peacekeeping forces, for example, whose job it is, after all, to stop those things, even at the potential risk to their own lives.

Anti-Americanism flares in Egypt as protests rage over Morsi's ouster

DDD

iliveonramen

Pontificator

PeteEU

Grant

humbolt

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant

cpwill