Protesters Storm U.S. Embassy in Cairo

[maxiep]

Sorry that it doesn't satisfy your bloodlust. Refer to my previous post about not understanding fuck-all about foreign relations.

Golly, you're so wise. Please elucidate the rest of we knuckle-draggers with your deep knowledge of international relations and diplomacy.

 

[julius]

I'm surprised it took 50-odd posts to finally get to the logical conclusion/blame for anything bad that happens during the Obama presidency.

Well, for starters, when people on the right actually fucking admit that he was responsible for a LOT of shit, then maybe people on the left won't keep politely reminding them. If you start blaming Obama for something your guy did (and don't act like "I didn't vote for him! I'm not a republican" horse shit), don't be fucking surprised when people point out your HUGE flaming hypocrisy.

on top of that, for YEARS righties were blaming Clinton for shit, so to act as though all the sudden it's not acceptable to blame a past president for shit is pretty oblivious to facts and history.

Also, when you say ignorant and knee jerk reactionary stuff, and 90% of the time you say shit just to rile up people (because i refuse to believe that anyone can be so dense on subjects), you get the response you want and then you giggle like a school girl.

Denny and i don't agree on a lot of politics. Same with Maxie, but they at least back up their shit instead of just saying shit and when called on it act like you never said anything. Ignore it and it'll go away.

I'm done with even acknowledging you post here, because I have something better to do than converse with people like you. Have fun playing the victim, and talking to yourself G.

 

[MARIS61]

Jesus. What a catastrophe. It's no surprise, however. This is what happens when you project weakness in a region that respects (and fears) the "strong horse".

Did anyone see the original statement from the Cairo Embassy? It was, in essence, an apology for that ridiculous movie offending Muslim sensibilities. If we're going to stand for our values, the First Amendment should be first among them.

Apologizing for the stupidity of others is a compassionate form of Free Speech.

 

[Denny Crane]

Denny, those embassies were American territory invaded by foreigners. It may not be a formal declaration of war, but it was a hostile act by people aligned with the governments in each country that requires a strong response.

You have to look at the two incidents separately. The only fact linking the two is the reaction to the movie.

In Egypt, thousands of people - PROTESTORS - stormed the embassy. The elected leadership of the country may be Muslim, but they've been friendly toward us. The thousands of people organized via facebook and that sort of thing. The damage they did was what? Some spray paint and replacing our flag with their own?

Nuke 'em till they glow! /sarcasm

The embassy Libya was rocket attacked by a militant terrorist group. Sure, go after those guys, but you have to recognize those terrorists aren't "the people" of the country.

 

[MARIS61]

It's not an act of war. No more than a riot in one of our cities is.

It's probably not a good idea to maintain embassies in unstable and hostile nations.

You miss the entire point of having embassies.

 

[Denny Crane]

It's not so simple. Stop the money, and you lose influence, and Egypt controls the Suez Canal. Nature abhors a vacuum, and money we don't like will fill the void (see Nasser, Gamal Abdel). Instead, you use the money as a weapon, as well as our Navy with their ability to blockade ports and our economic might to strangle trade. Get the Mukhabarat and the people running Libya to tell us who perpetrated these acts, have them arrested and tortured by their governments and let that be the message. This is an opportunity for the new governments of Egypt and Libya to show they are still friendly toward us.

Why do we want "influence?"

Me and Ron Paul see "influence" as the source of the problems.

 

[Denny Crane]

You miss the entire point of having embassies.

Uh, no. I don't miss the point of having embassies.

There's nobody in their govt. to deal with, since their govt. is barely established and obviously can't provide protection for its people or ours. And there's no point in providing services for americans travelling there since americans shouldn't travel there.

BTW, I hear the American University in Beirut is looking for a professor of English. You'd be perfect for that job.

 

[MARIS61]

Fucking armchair quarterbacks, all of you. Foreign relations is a more complex game than any of you have any idea, yet you all throw out simplistic observations and solutions to massively complicated issues. Of course, the ignorant reactionaries in this country will beat war drums because it's easy. Real solutions to issues like this are neither easy, quick, or inexpensive. That's why America refuses to do it. I also find it ironic that most people who are the most outraged by attacks like this wish to turn the United States into the religious equivalent without reservation.

repped.

 

[MARIS61]

An act of terrorism is an act of war under the Bush Doctrine....I'd just turn most of those worthless countries into glass, and let them live in the stone age that they long for.

You are a mirror image of the rioters you condemn.

 

[maxiep]

Why do we want "influence?"

Me and Ron Paul see "influence" as the source of the problems.

You are making some very dangerous assumptions:

1) That other governments all have the same motivations we do, that they just want peace and to be left alone within their borders.

2) The assumption is that one can retreat within our borders and the economic trading system which we protect will remain the same.

3) No one else will fill the void.

I think all three assumptions are not only dangerous , but also naive.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

Golly, you're so wise. Please elucidate the rest of we knuckle-draggers with your deep knowledge of international relations and diplomacy.

It's impossible to educate those who don't wish to learn.

 

[crandc]

Pictures now on Twitter showing Ambassador Stevens' dead body being dragged out shirtless and beaten by mobs post-mortem.

Animals...

Didn't happen, though.

But don't let a mere fact stop you.

As Chris said, it's so easy to be a 101st fighting keyboardist condemning what people under siege didn't even actually say. Nothing like an armchair warrior.

I saw your boy Romney with a big smirk.

 

[MARIS61]

Didn't happen, though.

But don't let a mere fact stop you.

As Chris said, it's so easy to be a 101st fighting keyboardist condemning what people under siege didn't even actually say. Nothing like an armchair warrior.

I saw your boy Romney with a big smirk.

PapaG and Romney both served in the same branch of our military, and I'm sure still carry the scars of those dark days.

 

[Denny Crane]

You are making some very dangerous assumptions:

1) That other governments all have the same motivations we do, that they just want peace and to be left alone within their borders.

2) The assumption is that one can retreat within our borders and the economic trading system which we protect will remain the same.

3) No one else will fill the void.

I think all three assumptions are not only dangerous , but also naive.

I don't think other governments have the same motivations we do. The one thing they have in common is their conservative nature - they want to protect the status quo. This is true of nations ruled by tyrants as well as social democracies.

The economic system must work if nations want to deal with us. If, due to cultural differences, some other nation demands your first born son in exchange for a barrel of oil, do you: 1) refuse to deal, 2) bomb the shit of them and take the oil, 3) get the oil from somewhere else, and so on.

And who cares who fills the void? Filling the void has been nothing but an expensive and futile hassle for us.

 

[Denny Crane]

Didn't happen, though.

But don't let a mere fact stop you.

It didn't happen. You're right.

 

[oldmangrouch]

It amuses me that people think the US government could have somehow prevented the "Arab Spring".

Change what you can, accept what you can't, and learn to tell the freaking difference!

 

[Denny Crane]

It amuses me that people think the US government could have somehow prevented the "Arab Spring".

Change what you can, accept what you can't, and learn to tell the freaking difference!

We could have, but the cost would have been ridiculous.

Boots on the ground, a massive draft, and so on.

 

[Eastoff]

We could have, but the cost would have been ridiculous.

Boots on the ground, a massive draft, and so on.

Agreed. Even with expensive costs, I think you would raise more problems from insurgents as well.

 

[oldmangrouch]

We could have, but the cost would have been ridiculous.

Boots on the ground, a massive draft, and so on.

And here's the irony: if we succeeded, we would have been saving a Libyan government that prior admins labeled a terrorist state and took military action against.

Oh yeah....I'm sure people would have praised Obama for that!

 

[Denny Crane]

And here's the irony: if we succeeded, we would have been saving a Libyan government that prior admins labeled a terrorist state and took military action against.

Oh yeah....I'm sure people would have praised Obama for that!

I don't know what the objective would have been, beyond "stopping the arab spring."

I don't think Obama had any such objective in mind.

 

[maxiep]

It's impossible to educate those who don't wish to learn.

I accept your surrender. We'll be waiting for you on the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay.

 

[maxiep]

Didn't happen, though.

But don't let a mere fact stop you.

As Chris said, it's so easy to be a 101st fighting keyboardist condemning what people under siege didn't even actually say. Nothing like an armchair warrior.

I saw your boy Romney with a big smirk.

That photo was disturbing and sad. It's hard to tell from it what was happening to the Ambassador.

As for Romney's countenance, do you really think he was smirking and happy about these developments? If so, I think we'll agree to disagree. I watched his press conference and he didn't seem happy at all.

 

[oldmangrouch]

BTW, if we can (and should) crush the "Arab Spring" - shouldn't we be sending aid to the Syrian government? Just asking....

 

[maxiep]

I don't think other governments have the same motivations we do. The one thing they have in common is their conservative nature - they want to protect the status quo. This is true of nations ruled by tyrants as well as social democracies.

Iran does not wish to protect the status quo. Pakistan does not wish to protect the status quo. Russia does not wish to protect the status quo. Hamas does not wish to protect the status quo. Sudan does not wish to protect the status quo. Venezuela does not wish to protect the status quo. I could go on and on and on and on. International relations are about expansion being resisted by other forces. It's dynamic.

The economic system must work if nations want to deal with us. If, due to cultural differences, some other nation demands your first born son in exchange for a barrel of oil, do you: 1) refuse to deal, 2) bomb the shit of them and take the oil, 3) get the oil from somewhere else, and so on.

Nations don't have to deal with us. There are plenty of other customers.

And who cares who fills the void? Filling the void has been nothing but an expensive and futile hassle for us.

I care. Do you wish to live under a Fascist- (Germanic/Italian/Japanese), Soviet- or Chinese-dominated world order? Our wars haven't been futile. We're enriched by them because free trade makes everyone weathier.

Denny, I think we're just going to have to agree to disagree. That isolationist foreign policy is what separates me from the Libertarians the most. I could get past the drug issue, but the naivete on international affairs to me is just too much.

 

[maxiep]

And here's the irony: if we succeeded, we would have been saving a Libyan government that prior admins labeled a terrorist state and took military action against.

Oh yeah....I'm sure people would have praised Obama for that!

International relations are about dealing with devil all the time. Do you really think we supported Iraq in the 80s because we liked them? We offered them support because we saw the Iranians as the larger threat. It's the same with the Soviet Union during WWII.

 

[maxiep]

It amuses me that people think the US government could have somehow prevented the "Arab Spring".

Change what you can, accept what you can't, and learn to tell the freaking difference!

It wasn't about stopping the Arab Spring, it was about helping to shape it. Part of foreign relations is working with revolutionary groups to ensure if they come to power that you have friends and supporters among them. We let Mubarak go without thinking about what would replace him.

 

[MARIS61]

Our wars haven't been futile. We're enriched by them because free trade makes the 1% weathier.

FIFY.

 

[chris_in_pdx]

I accept your surrender. We'll be waiting for you on the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay.

LOL what a fucking ignorant cop-out. I expect nothing less from you. Fox News has taught you well.

 

[BrianFromWA]

BTW, if we can (and should) crush the "Arab Spring" - shouldn't we be sending aid to the Syrian government? Just asking....

Chris' philosophy on international affairs applies here. There's a lot going on that doesn't make it to the news.

 

[oldmangrouch]

It wasn't about stopping the Arab Spring, it was about helping to shape it. Part of foreign relations is working with revolutionary groups to ensure if they come to power that you have friends and supporters among them. We let Mubarak go without thinking about what would replace him.

Fair enough. Sems like another middle-east intel failure.