| Author |
Topic:
Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
Lowbacca_1977
Title: Senate Moderator
Registered:
Jun '06
|
Date Posted:
11/12/07 2:16pm
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
Ender_Sai posted:
Hardly the same as ennobling hegemonic expansion through misty eyed prose, though, Shane.
E_S
Not the same, but I'd think its valid to mention when people try to make the claim that the current war is the first time that the U.S. has ever acted without being first directly attacked.
Its best as a reminder to people that try to generalise too much.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ender_Sai
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
11/12/07 2:30pm
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
Certainly, and nobody should be denying America was active. However, the paper talks about exporting democracy. In theory this only appeared as a raison d'etre in the post-WWII context - that is, it appeared in rhetoric rather than in practise. Yet in practise the US sought to expand hegemonic influence.
What I am contending is that the analysis in that paper is flawed because it blurs the lines between concepts and does so simply to make an emotive argument. Better editing, accuracy and exposure to alternate cultures would have enhanced this paper drastically.
E_S
-----signature-----
In this truth he knew himself to be.
From sinking sands he stepped into light's embrace.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
ShaneP
Registered:
Mar '01
|
Date Posted:
11/13/07 11:04am
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
E_S
Uh, my comment was about this topic generally and assertions that the United States "needs to return to the intent of our founders" that preceded my comment, not about that policy paper. 
-----signature-----
It was as if a million middle-aged virgins just farted with rage and were suddenly silenced.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Alpha-Red
Registered:
Apr '04
|
Date Posted:
11/13/07 12:45pm
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
Lowbacca_1977 posted:
Not the same, but I'd think its valid to mention when people try to make the claim that the current war is the first time that the U.S. has ever acted without being first directly attacked.
Its best as a reminder to people that try to generalise too much.
Except that we were directly attacked. From what I know about the war, it was the pirates that first started attacking U.S. ships, taking U.S. citizens hostage, and demanding ransom from our government.
Following World War II, we felt we had to expand influence around the world to counter Soviet influence, and we resorted to a few less than noble means to do so. Now that the Cold War is over, we shouldn't be doing that kind of thing anymore. As a country we took a number of moral and legal shortcuts on the domestic scene through the World War II years, only to put ourselves back on track after the conflict was over. The same principle should apply here.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
SaberGiiett7
Registered:
Jul '02
|
Date Posted:
11/13/07 7:18pm
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
Alpha-Red posted:
[quote=Lowbacca_1977]Except that we were directly attacked. From what I know about the war, it was the pirates that first started attacking U.S. ships, taking U.S. citizens hostage, and demanding ransom from our government.
Following World War II, we felt we had to expand influence around the world to counter Soviet influence, and we resorted to a few less than noble means to do so. Now that the Cold War is over, we shouldn't be doing that kind of thing anymore. As a country we took a number of moral and legal shortcuts on the domestic scene through the World War II years, only to put ourselves back on track after the conflict was over. The same principle should apply here.
It should apply. But the lust for blood was too strong as the Twin Towers burned. Americans went along willingly with not only retaliation, but retaliation without any restraint. 3,000 dead? We need to top that body count!
The wisest thing we could have done would to not even had asked permission from Mullah Mohammed Omar to extradite Usama bin Ladin. We should have engaged in pinpoint bombings and special operations.
Where mobilizing and meticulously going about invading and occupying Afghanistan allowed bin Ladin a window to flee, President Bush should have ordered jets scrambled from Turkey immediately to take out his camps.
If it did not kill bin Ladin or any of his lieutenants, it would have killed a concentration of foreign, 'al-Qaeda' fighters at those sites that we had mapped and were monitoring.
The problem with our revenge complex was that those who were altogether directly responsible died in the attack. They either wrestled down unruly passengers or actually piloted the planes into their targets.
Our 'justice' from the beginning was a proxy one because it was a suicide attack.
<[-]> Saber
-----signature-----
Slave to my R Complex.
"It's all right. It's OK. There's something to live for! Jesus told me so!"
"Right or wrong, the main criterion is what you do and not what you say."
The American Revolution has been betrayed.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Alpha-Red
Registered:
Apr '04
|
Date Posted:
11/18/07 2:24pm
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
|
So that was it? These past 6 years were about revenge? I had my suspicion that this was the case but I guess I still held out the remote possibility that our country's leaders knew what they were doing? I mean, it's not like we had massive hate rallies against Muslims among the general public so if the politicians just shifted attitudes a bit then things should be a whole lot different?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Mr44
Registered:
May '02
|
Date Posted:
11/18/07 4:33pm
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
The wisest thing we could have done would to not even had asked permission from Mullah Mohammed Omar to extradite Usama bin Ladin. We should have engaged in pinpoint bombings and special operations.
Where mobilizing and meticulously going about invading and occupying Afghanistan allowed bin Ladin a window to flee, President Bush should have ordered jets scrambled from Turkey immediately to take out his camps.
Except you're totally discounting the value, and necessity of, a combined arms doctrine here.
Afghanistan comprises 252,000 square miles. For comparison, take the entire areas of both California and Oregon, join them together, and then search for a single human being. Now, add in mountains and other variations in terrain, and a larger picture begins to develop. "Needle in a haystack" certainly has meaning here.
Tactical airstrikes are excellent for destroying known, fixed targets or confirmed targets of opportunity. Airstrikes can't create something out of nothing.
Without a ground force that can both occupy and then begin to close off areas of movement, there would be no way to whittle down the probable target areas for the airstrikes.
-----signature-----
Don’t confuse enthusiasm with capability.
..............................................................
Peter Shoomaker
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Ender_Sai
Title: Manager Emeritus
Registered:
Feb '01
|
Date Posted:
11/18/07 7:11pm
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
Agreed. Whatever the shortcomings in American foreign policy - and being in regional capacity building I can tell you first hand there are many - the decision to build a coalition that could augment, compliment and ultimately relieve the burden on US forces makes exceptional sense.
E_S
-----signature-----
In this truth he knew himself to be.
From sinking sands he stepped into light's embrace.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
DarthBoba
Registered:
Jun '00
|
Date Posted:
11/26/07 9:15am
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
- Date Edited:
11/26/07 9:23am (1 edits total)
Edited By:
DarthBoba
|
The wisest thing we could have done would to not even had asked permission from Mullah Mohammed Omar to extradite Usama bin Ladin. We should have engaged in pinpoint bombings and special operations.
Where mobilizing and meticulously going about invading and occupying Afghanistan allowed bin Ladin a window to flee, President Bush should have ordered jets scrambled from Turkey immediately to take out his camps.
Considering the first special forces teams were inside Afghanistan within 2 days of 9/11, I'd like to suggest you don't know what you're talking about. 
-----signature-----
Upstate NY: First-World Country,
Third-World Infrastructure.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth-Ghost
Registered:
Oct '03
|
Date Posted:
11/26/07 10:36am
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
|
Yeah, my dad's friend was still in the airforce then. He was doing surveillance of the Afghan mountains the night of 9/11.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Darth-Ghost
Registered:
Oct '03
|
Date Posted:
1/10 11:19am
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
Bush is calling for painful concessions on both sides, and the end of Israeli "occupation" since 1967.
Will this work, or even affect anything?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Alpha-Red
Registered:
Apr '04
|
Date Posted:
3/13 12:49am
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
|
I was just thinking about the whole business of U.S. military forces being stationed in Saudi Arabia and how Arabs don't like this. If the whole idea of pan-Arabism and Islamic unity extols their faith to be their first and foremost allegiance while considering arbitrary geopolitical entities to be irrelevant....then why the heck would they care if we're in Saudi Arabia as long as we aren't parking our M1 Abrams's in their holy city?
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Mr44
Registered:
May '02
|
Date Posted:
3/13 12:55am
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
What capacity are you referring to?
US forces were relocated out of Saudi Arabia 5 years ago, and the only forces that remain are a small contingent of non-visible command and support staff.
-----signature-----
Don’t confuse enthusiasm with capability.
..............................................................
Peter Shoomaker
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Alpha-Red
Registered:
Apr '04
|
Date Posted:
3/13 8:02pm
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
|
Oh....didn't know about the relocation. But yeah, I guess I'll just roll back the time frame a bit to when they were still there in the 1990's following the Gulf War.
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
Mr44
Registered:
May '02
|
Date Posted:
3/13 8:36pm
Subject:
RE: Iran, Iraq, the Middle East, and America's Role in the World
|
Well, there's been 2 reasons given.
The rather simplistic rationale given for the Khobar Towers bombing in 1996 was that it was inexcusable to have foreign troops based so closely to the most revered sites in Islam.
William Perry, who was SecDef at the time of the bombing, indicated that al Qaeda provided the means for the attack, although evidence also indicates that Iran financed the mission.
An Iranian backed operation leads into the second point, which is related to Saudi Arabia's specific position as leader of the Arab world. The Saudi royal family represents the Sunni belief of Islam, and as an Arab power, is in the middle of a struggle with Iran for the "soul" of the region. Iran is Persian, from an ethnic standpoint, but also represents the Shiite sect in the region.
From an Iranian standpoint, anything that can diminish the standing of Saudi Arabia works in its favor.
-----signature-----
Don’t confuse enthusiasm with capability.
..............................................................
Peter Shoomaker
|
|
|
Quote Reply |
Active Topic Notification |
Private Message |
Post History
|
