Man it up!
As previously previewed like a billion times - realpolitikers, retreatists (often nom d'guerr'd as Offshore Balancingers) and their fanboy posse often freak the freak out about the precision guided 500lb you know what in the room
Indulging in risible, yet boring asset'd inappropopriate handwringing inner ethical rasslin' matches about forsaking one of Great Satan's most awesomest weapons in her hot weaponry dispensary - seriously - these ppl spend most of their day in a climate controlled environment surrounded by smart ppl? They would do way more better to hang at Hooters all day instead.
It's the full meal deal in any serious consideration of diplopolititary concerns future, historic or au courant - the delightfully daemoneoconically delish menage a trois:
Democrazy Promotion, Projection and Protection.
One thing is clear from the "Tunisian Squeeze":
"...People in the Middle East have given up any hope that the United States can be a force for democratic change. As the uprising spread in Tunisia, the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama stayed largely silent until the day Ben Ali fled.
That's when 44 issued yet another viagra free "By Stander in Chief" statement condemning the use of violence against peaceful protesters and applauding "the courage and dignity" of Tunisians.
"...By then, it was too late: The U.S.-backed dictator was gone, and the Arab world chalked up another example of how Washington favors stability over democracy.
"...44 inherited a decades-old policy of supporting autocratic regimes - such as Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Jordan - in exchange for political acquiescence. Most governments in the Middle East rely on vast secret police agencies to keep them in power, using the "war on terror" as a cover to silence any opposition. Like Tunisia's Ben Ali, these regimes put on a veneer of stability for the West, but in reality their political systems are weak, corrupt and calcified.
Oh, it is so mein schatzen. Hoping for stability over democrazy is a sure fire recipe for heartache. Forsaking democrazy - has never brought stability - it has brought metric tonnes of instability, genocide, energy weaponry, terrorism and got a lot of ppl killed.
And for what? Yet another unstiff exercise in weirdly unAmerican theories to propagate the amoral Cult of Stability?
Man it up!
Every threat to internat’l order after the Cold War involved a government that fell short of Western and economic standards. Every security problem that the American government felt called upon to address would be alleviated, if not solved altogether, if the regimes responsible for them could be sweetly remade to American specs:
Tolerant, egalitarian societies with a penchant for periodic, transparent elections, a free, uncensored press, a nat’l treasury under public scrutiny, a military under civie control, an independent judiciary under elected Gov oversight
Man it up! This is where democrazy protection comes into play. Once a nation state has overthrown, or regime changed illegit leaders for life at the point of the world famous M16 that deliver zero services for their own ppl, (either way is fine) Great Satan may step in with a few fun, friendly teachable moments
The most literate Arabs ever on the face of the earth freely voting in the world's very first suicide regime in the Strip (then instantly nulling and voiding democrazy with R2P Clause violations like state sanctioned terrorism and launching a war of aggression against Little Satan - herself a democratic member of UN) certainly comes to mind
Man it up! It's Great Satan's innate strength - she offers what unfree, unfun and nigh unhinged regimes cannot ever offer.
It's Great Satan's natural function, for she is the one truly revolutionary country in the world for more than 2 centuries. She does it automatically, and that is precisely why the tyrants hate her guts, and are driven to attack her. An enormous advantage, tyrants fear her, and their oppressed peoples want what she offers: freedom.
Man it up!
Pic - "If leaders don't offer a positive vision and give young people meaningful ways to contribute, others will fill the vacuum."
4 comments:
As I remember it Tunisia is where the PLO stayed in exile before being allowed to return to the West Bank and Gaza.
Democracy is a fickle mistress, check out the terror and the French Revolution. If only all revolutions were as successful as the American. I agree that 44 waited to long to endorse the Tunisian uprising. It Tarnishes the United States to support despots, the next big test will be Egypt I think. That will be very dangerous if we have to choose between a popular uprising and a Mubarak wanna be.
"Forsaking democrazy - has never brought stability." One word to that: Iraq. As a result of forced installation of democracy there are a hundred thousand dead, and millions of refugees.
Hi Michal - thanks for making my case!
Consider -Total casualties are at or around 109K - and the stats are as follows: 66,081 “civilians,” 23,984 “enemy” insurgents, 15,196 host Iraqi truppen, and 3,771 “friendly” (coalition) forces. 60% of the total are dead innocents
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
Who was responsible for the majority of the casualties in Iraq? America or her enemies?
WikiLeaks documents show that Iran was, and remains, a principal sponsor of Shia extremist groups in Iraq. These same groups helped bring Iraq to the brink of chaos -- along with al Qaeda, which was also happy to fuel the sectarian violence. It's been known this for years and it should not be surprising.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2010/1023/WikiLeaks-defends-its-release-of-classified-documents-on-Iraq-War
And please note where much of the manpower came from all to try and keep Iraq in the 7th century - Syria, Iran along with Saudi rejects and othertime traveling control freaks from unhappy lands - that ARE all unfree.
When all opposition is suppressed, the forces of change go underground -- and that is where radicalism thrives. Since going to Iraq or the Stan for the Haj is now considered stupid in the Middle East - look ppl are immolating themselves in frustration because their weak despotic police states offer no hope, no future and no chance.
Democrazy has to be protected and it's a lot like COIN - slow, grinding, hot and nasty.
Man it up!
Wow I didn't expect an answer, let alone such an erudite and detailed one! Thanks for that!
It's some food for thought. I wonder though, whether it wouldn't have been better to, for once, let it slide, let Saddam live, and avoid giving all these nasty folks like the Iranian regime a chance to wreck havoc. Life under his regime wasn't anything great but...they did have stability. Several million people fled rather than endured what they have now, and for another hundred thousand people - well, they had life at least.
I'm not saying it's all America's fault, nor that America is responsible for the deaths mentioned, but I also can't help but feel that the price Iraq is paying is not really worth what they're getting.
This all is not even taking into account regional implications.
So to sum up all the pondering: I think it was a mistake. There's definitely no going back now, but perhaps we should seriously consider, whether in this case democracy really created stability; whether upsetting the status quo was worth the costs.
Post a Comment