Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 4 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
WHY?
#12
(06-09-2014, 01:17 AM)Mohammed Wrote: America does not bring everybody democracy! America does not care about democracy being equally spread across the countries of our planet! No, America is somewhat selective in whom it will bring the golden gift of democracy, or else Saudi Arabia would be in real trouble.

I think I talked about the Pirates of Somalia before.

Well, Mo, we wouldn't want to bring anybody anything they didn't really want, right? That would be pushy!

And, not everybody's qualified for our brand of democracy anyway.

I know I posted this video somewhere a couple of years back -- it fits here (plus, it makes me smile and I loved the Team America movie).



Sometimes it's very clear to me why the US is involved in matters outside of our borders. Other times, there's so much going on behind the scenes -- often involving several countries and/or organizations -- that I know I'm being fed rhetoric rather than the real deal/goal.

I don't think there's only one or two reasons why America (and the British, and NATO, and our other allies) get involved or intervene in how other people live (and die); I think there are some consistent factors and many case-specific ones, too. But, there is one reason that has historically always been foremost no matter what, IMO. The United States wants (and usually its allies want, as well) to bring something from the intervened's land home, or the United States fears something from the intervened's land being brought here. Historically, intervention has rarely been a case of national altruism or humanitarianism at play. But, that's hardly an America-unique characteristic.

Sometimes our intervention is regrettable and selfish -- effing up things for a lot of other people (and ultimately ourselves). But, sometimes our intervention, selfishly-motivated as it may be or seem, does promote greater future safety at home and for our allies, IMO.

Anyway, I think the tides of intervention-rationale are changing as a result of the new perceived #1 enemy, terrorist networks, being spread out across regions. Foreign relations and State/Defense Department focus is less country-to-country defensive/offensive oriented with clear cut lines, allies and boundaries than has been the case historically -- there's now also a good deal of focus centered on hotbeds where these somewhat nomadic or splintered networks of enemies thrive and reside.

Also, the internet providing much more rapid and expansive global news coverage is resulting in a stronger public cry for intervention, even when there is nothing immediately recognizable to gain at home. For example, the team of US, British, French, and Chinese specialists in Nigeria trying to help Johnathan and the military get the Boko Haram network under control and save the abducted schoolgirls. So far, that reluctantly-welcomed international intervention doesn't seemed to have helped Nigeria -- the girls are still missing and Boko Haram has murdered hundreds of people since the international specialists arrived on the scene -- but, at least the effort is underway.

Also, the efforts of US Senators to bring Miriam Ibrahim to the US under asylum, rather than have her face a death sentence in Sudan for marrying her Christian husband (a US-citizen originally from Sudan).

One thing that can always be counted on, then and now: when the US does get actively involved in a situation going down in another country, there are always a lot of loud voices around the world screaming heavy-handedness on the part of the brutish Americans (I'm one of those voices sometimes). When the US doesn't get actively involved in such a situation, there are always equally loud voices screaming that the US should be leading the global charge and we're showing weakness by holding off (I'm less often one of those voices).

Anyway...speaking of global relations. You told me a couple of years back that you and your family would come to San Francisco some day and do a road trip along the California coast. More recently, you posted that you wouldn't bring your family outta Yemen to such a dangerous country as the US. Well, I hope you were serious about the first and not the second. We have no drone attacks here, after all (yet)! If Six volunteered to be your traveling body guard (and let you wear the long Elvis robe on the bitch seat of his Harley for a while), I'm thinking maybe you can still be lured? Awink
Reply


Messages In This Thread
WHY? - by Duchess - 06-08-2014, 07:06 AM
RE: WHY? - by ramseycat - 06-08-2014, 09:12 AM
RE: WHY? - by SIXFOOTERsez - 06-08-2014, 02:04 PM
RE: WHY? - by Cutz - 06-08-2014, 02:44 PM
RE: WHY? - by SIXFOOTERsez - 06-08-2014, 07:57 PM
RE: WHY? - by Cutz - 06-09-2014, 10:58 AM
RE: WHY? - by Blindgreed1 - 06-09-2014, 04:55 PM
RE: WHY? - by SIXFOOTERsez - 06-08-2014, 07:58 PM
RE: WHY? - by Mohammed - 06-09-2014, 01:17 AM
RE: WHY? - by HairOfTheDog - 06-09-2014, 06:18 PM
RE: WHY? - by crash - 06-09-2014, 05:05 PM
RE: WHY? - by Blindgreed1 - 06-09-2014, 05:51 PM
RE: WHY? - by Mohammed - 06-10-2014, 04:37 AM
RE: WHY? - by HairOfTheDog - 06-10-2014, 10:54 AM
RE: WHY? - by Mohammed - 06-10-2014, 01:56 PM
RE: WHY? - by HairOfTheDog - 06-11-2014, 12:26 PM
RE: WHY? - by Mohammed - 06-11-2014, 12:59 PM
RE: WHY? - by Maggot - 06-11-2014, 01:31 PM
RE: WHY? - by HairOfTheDog - 06-11-2014, 01:38 PM
RE: WHY? - by Maggot - 06-11-2014, 02:01 PM
RE: WHY? - by HairOfTheDog - 06-12-2014, 06:52 PM
RE: WHY? - by Mohammed - 06-14-2014, 09:59 AM
RE: WHY? - by HairOfTheDog - 06-14-2014, 10:51 AM
RE: WHY? - by crash - 06-14-2014, 10:02 AM
RE: WHY? - by ramseycat - 06-14-2014, 10:17 AM
RE: WHY? - by Duchess - 06-14-2014, 10:23 AM
RE: WHY? - by Mohammed - 06-14-2014, 04:08 PM
RE: WHY? - by HairOfTheDog - 06-15-2014, 09:11 PM
RE: WHY? - by Cutz - 06-14-2014, 09:06 PM
RE: WHY? - by Duchess - 06-14-2014, 09:37 PM