Forum
  Classifieds
  News
  Localband
  Shows
  Show Pics
  Polls

  OT Threads
  Other News
  Movies
  VideoGames
  Videos
  TV
  Sports
  Gear
  /r/
  Food

  New Thread
  New Poll

E-mail

New site? Maybe some day.

Username:

SPAM Filter: re-type this

(values are 0,1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,A,B,C,D,E, or F)

Message:

UBB enabled. HTML disabled Spam Filtering enabledIcons: (click image to insert) Show All - pop

b i u add: url image video(?)

:	post by ShadowSD at 2006-03-16 18:33:12

PatMeebles said:

By the way, I really have to commend your reasonable arguments. You seem like a realist more so than a peacenick.

I appreciate that, thanks, I think this has been a good debate on both sides.

PatMeebles said:

People like Hail the Leaf bring up things like allying with Saddam because we were against Iran (a realist policy, just to point that out to them), in a kind of moral equivilancy-based argument.

Was it truly a realist policy to ally ourselves with Hussein in the 80's? When Iraq attacked Iran, the West supported Saddam Hussein, seeing him as the lesser of two evils. The problem was we were not realistic enough to see the implications of supporting the aggressor in the conflict, and of supporting a military dictator that initiated the use of chemical warfare in the battle. We were not realistic enough to see that supporting Iraq would rally the Iranian people around the new theocratic government, strengthening it when it well might have fallen, and extending a war that caused the deaths of so many Iranian soldiers that people rallied around their government even more, until it was entrenched with enough power to survive even after the death of Khomeni.

Hell, if we had been realistic enough in the 50's not to allow the CIA to topple Mosaddegh (a nationalist reformer who was en route to bringing democracy to Iran) in favor of propping up the young Shah (who was a "safer" ally in terms of guaranteeing our oil supply), every scholar agrees there would have never have been any Islamic Revolution in Iran in the first place, and we would have a powerful ally in the region now when we needed it most.

PatMeebles said:

Well, Europe is just one of the places like that. And the negative stories that keep accumulating about Iraq are way outnumbered by positive developments. Those positive stories are deliberately not reported on or pushed back onto page A17. When over 60% turned out to the polls to vote (more than Americans turned out), that story was buried. When anything good happens, we barely hear about it, even on Fox News (unless you're watching an editorialist show like O'Reilly).

Negativity in the news is a universal problem in the American news media, as any mass media expert will tell you, particularly when it comes to the coverage of third world countries. If you watch enough news, you would think a country like Iran has nothing but desert, that women hide their faces and bodies, that their President (Ahmeninajad) got elected purely for being an Anti-Semite, and that Westerners get decapitated in the airpoint. Only when you go to Tehran do you see that it is one of the biggest cities in the world, that the airport is newer, cleaner, and more modern than most US airports, and that a American citizen can get through customs and security ten times as quickly and easily. Only then do you see that women wear modern clothes, never cover their faces, and only cover their hair when in public (and even then, most only cover about half their hair or less, and each day it erodes further). Only then do you hear that despite President Ahmeninajad's despicable anti-Semitic remarks (for which you learn he has been publicly and repeatedly reprimanded by Iran's largest reform party), his domestic rhetoric is actually capitalist, populist, uncorrupt, and forward-thinking in comparison to the country's current status quo (concepts such as elected officials should be servants of the people, and that Iranian money shouldn't be stashed away in Swiss banks, but rather invested in the infastructure of the country). Only then do you see that most people have cell phones and satellite dishes that get music videos and CNN, that you can buy Internet access cards at newsstands, that many young people hang out and drink and smoke pot together, listen to metal (there's at least one dude whose favorite band is Manowar), many guys have long hair, and some people even play in metal bands. Only then do you see that no one gives you shit for being an American, and some people are in fact nicer to you because of it. You would NEVER know any of that by watching the news in America, only that Iran has a repressive theocratic government made up of fundamentalist zealots (which is 100% true).

Therfore, negativity in terms of the American news media's coverage of ALL third world countries distorts our perceptions of their cultures and their peoples, which can lead to an inability for us to evaluate whether certain foreign policy decisions will lead to America's long term security or not.

The reason you can tell the problems in Iraq go beyond this phenomenon is that you hear no better from the AP Reporters of all nationalities that are on the ground there, including those journalists who are themselves Iraqi.

PatMeebles said:

And once again you keep talking about a civil war. I know you don't think it's already happened, but you're obviously expecting one to eventually break out. While that's definitely a huge concern and should be taken very seriously, the situation is much less severe than the newspapers would have you believe. If things are going so badly, then why are Iraqi's so optimistic?

I find it very hard to believe that Iraqi optimism has been on the rise since the sectarian tension began to heat up, it simply defies common sense. If you have any figures to back this up, please post them.

PatMeebles said:

If the country was falling apart, then why did the Iraqi army stay together and not fall apart (like the US army did during our civil war) and quell the violence following the mosque bombing without killing a single civilian?

According to everyone including even the Bush administration, desertions in the Iraqi army have been a problem since day one. Just a couple days ago, several Iraqi Defense Ministry officials were jailed, having almost succeeded in placing over 400 Al Qaeda operatives in key security positions surrounding the Green Zone (where all our troop bases are located). The fact that Iraqi police and security defused the plan is reason to be hopeful, the fact that any more defections would have likely made the plan successful is not.

PatMeebles said:

If the Iraqis hate us so much, then why do they want us to leave AFTER the job is completed?

They don't trust Iraqi police, security, or armed forces to protect them. Again, no reason to be hopeful.

PatMeebles said:

Right now, the only legitimate concern regarding sectarian violence is that band of shiites running around kidnapping people.

Did you read the AP stories I posted? Those aren't American newspapers, those are Iraqi journalists on the ground.

PatMeebles said:

Now, I agree with you that tensions are still very apparent in Europe and even the US. There's no denying that. However, the fact that support for terrorists dropped while support for the US rose must mean something positive. They don't hate us more. Our policies didn't make them hate us more, at least after a while.

I hope you're right.

Unfortunately, I just can't find any reason to be so optimistic; I simply don't have any figures available to support such a viewpoint.

However, to prove I am capable of some optimism in the Middle East, the following story, just posted to the AP, gave me cause for hope as far as long-term American/Iranian relations (even though I don't at all trust Iran's current theocratic regime):

"A top Iranian official said Thursday that Tehran was ready to open direct talks with the United States over Iraq, marking a major shift in Iranian foreign policy. Washington also said it was prepared to open discussions.

(This) marked the first time since the 1979 Islamic Revolution that Iran had officially called for dialogue with the United States."

[default homepage]

[print][

7:00:21pm Apr 27,2024
load time 0.01809 secs/10 queries]

[search]

[refresh page]