he doesn't despise us as much as he is aware that he has no guarantee of support from us. that's what comes from having an American president who is inexperienced and stupid enough to put out a formal withdrawal date for an ongoing conflict. Karzai would be a fool not to be hedging the new government's bets - which is precisely what he's doing.In Afghanistan, we have a brutal dictatorship which is among the most corrupt regimes in the world, led by a thug who despises us
As for corruption; I don't know what to tell you excep that as far as bribery, etc. goes, that's just the culture. It's expected and that's why government positions are sought after and how position holders are expected to support themselves. Which isn't to say it isn't a significant problem - just that it's not as big of a problem as the metrics indicate. Much like popular support for religious law, simply because their governing assumptions are different does not make them less stable as a representative government. Which they are. I'm not really sure where you are getting dictatorship from. The Afghan people seem to disagree, given that as of the last polling data (about a year and some change ago) 70% say that their country is going in the right direction, and that overall living conditions had improved since 2001. They also express confidence that their situation will continue to improve in the coming year. Nearly two-thirds believe their children will have a better life.
Afghans note positively the performance of the police and army and express confidence in their ability to provide security and stability in their area, with three-quarters believing that Afghan National Security Forces will be able to take over security in Afghanistan starting in 18 months. Afghan support for NATO troops increased to 62%, with nearly the same number supporting the recently-announced troop uplift. Three-quarters believe attacks against NATO forces cannot be justified.
Only 6% of those polled said they favour a Taliban government, reflecting the fact that the Taliban have no widespread constituency, have a history of failure in power and lack a positive vision...
to the extent that Pakistan isn't representative of the people, we don't want it to be. That being said, the Parliament has the real power there now, now the President, and has since the Supreme Court decision last year. Mr 10% isn't a puppet, but he's a severely weakned executive (but hey, that's the deal he made to stay out of jail). To pretend it's not a representative govenment is ridiculous.In Pakistan, we have an incompetent pseudo-democracy pseudo-junta which is more interested in fighting India than fighting the Taliban. None of these regimes are democracies, or even representative of the people.
that is correct. we sometimes have people at the top who don't have a "bad" strategic approach so much as they have "no" strategic approach. that is the current situation, for example. other times, we let the I/P narrative dominate our entire approach, completely exagerating the impact of that conflict on the region.Nah. Our interests in the Middle East are not always what we think they are
really. I would love to hear you explain how the I/P conflict is the US fault. Given that the US is responsible for the fact that we haven't had a major war between Israel and the Arab states since the 1970's.And in many cases, some of the problems in the region (e.g. political extremism and Israeli-Palestinian violence) are partially our own doing.
and don't give me the "oh the us supports israel so whatever they do is our fault' canard - without US support, Israel would be more aggressive, not less.
you're going to have to repeat this to someone who hasn't been there as part of that force, and who isn't in constant contact with those who are currently.Furthermore, we are perceived as occupiers by the people who actually live there.
: we have to explain to Afghani villagers that we aren't Soviets, and you think they're watching drone strikes in Yemen on television?They aren't interested in what form of government WE have at home, or whether we "intended" to kill civilians with the invasion of Iraq or the drone strikes in Yemen.
yeah, in the cities, you're going to find that kind of communication. go check out worldfactbook and get back to us on what percent of Afghani's live in cities.
then you have no idea what goes into CDEThey take our actions at face value and see a foreign power that is indiscriminately killing civilians in order to pursue its own interests. Which, the more I think about it, is a pretty accurate description.
most Iranians' don't. however, Twelver Shiism is dominant and intensely powerful. I would like to see your figures on "the leadership", especially given that the "political leadership" aren't the ones in charge. The IRGC, however, are the dominant 'in charge' branch of that government, and they absolutely do. So it matters slightly less than a piece of whale poop what the Green Movement thinks.Most Iranians, including most of the political leadership, do not have such apocalyptic beliefs.
fascinating. tell me more about the evolution of civil institutions and public support.Except the Arab states are not China. China has had political leadership that has allowed for the evolution of civil institutions... governs more or less with the consent of its population,
China cracks down on call for Jasmine Revolution
China Cracks Down on Human Rights Lawyers
China’s crackdown on human-rights lawyers, activists, and online dissidents goes from bad to worse.
Laogai: the Chinese Gulag System
China forces mass abortions on women - kidnapping them strapping them to stretchers as they struggle, and performing the operation in vans
China uses Falun Gong prisoners in prison camps as human organ farms
the last regime to try to create an alternate to the Nobel Prize to cover up for the fact that they wouldn't let a dissident travel to collect it? not to Godwin a thread.... but......
they have done that. to pretend that it has been matched by any kind of introduction of human rights or representative government, however, is ridiculous.while pursuing economic liberalization
yeah, okay. China is democratic because it will allow it's people at the local level to select between members of the one ruling party before 'disappearing' dissidents. But Afghanistan is a tyranny because the Karzai's brother takes bribes.and is even (slowly) pursuing democratization by holding multi-candidate elections at the local level.
(generally) agreed. Jordan is an exception, as is now Iraq.The Arab states, in contrast, have few civil institutions, have been propped up for decades by foreign regimes despite being despised by their own people, are balls-deep in oil funds which their leaders spread around to buy political/military support, and are corroded from the inside out.
you are quite the expert on what "Arabs" believe. I find this fascinating, given the diversity of opinions in the Arab world.Most Arabs were not fans of Saddam Hussein, but they are able to perceive our removal of him for what it was: a self-serving effort to remove a dictator we didn't like
you do realize that you are saying roughly the equivalent of "Americans believe that we were right to remove Saddam" ?