The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

[Priceless]

Right, but at the same time, we shouldn't just pretend the situation isn't a powder keg ready to go off at the slightest touch at any time. This (the current effort) is a process that has been in the works since the middle of the 1990s in a conflict that has been going on since the, well, probably "0090s".

If you're not continually working at it, eventually someone will assassinate an archduke and we're all in trouble then.

The problem has existed since Isaac and Ishmael and won't end until one side is completely wiped out. Such a bother that all our oil was buried in the sand underneath them.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

The problem has existed since Isaac and Ishmael and won't end until one side is completely wiped out. Such a bother that all our oil was buried in the sand underneath them.

Yup. Really, I don't expect peace talks will ever sort out the situation, as there are some pretty mutually exclusive demands on both sides that aren't likely to be given up. But I'm ok with trying talks if there in an opportune time.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Yes, a slightest touch like poorly timed and thought out peace talks.

As some wild-eyed idealist liberal once said, "jaw, jaw is always better than war, war."

Ethnic war like Israel/Palestine pretty much always leads to genocide. That's why the Old Testament God seems so cray cray. Tribalism is an elimination game.

I suppose if the primary concern was simply to save lives, we could deport every person living between Aleppo and Mecca to Greenland, nuke the desert, and say "Neither of you can have it for the next 10,000 years. Fixed."

The oil running out won't hurt, though.

[Slap Shot]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

If Obama had done nothing to try and bring peace he'd be crucified. If he saved a baby from a burning building he's fail if he didn't also put out the fire.

The list of legitimate criticisms for Obama is substantial and real, yet the draggers can't stop falling over themselves making up reasons to ***** thereby distracting the public from the real reasons to complain.

The boy hasn't cried wolf, he's devoured him.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

If Obama had done nothing to try and bring peace he'd be crucified. If he saved a baby from a burning building he's fail if he didn't also put out the fire.

The list of legitimate criticisms for Obama is substantial and real, yet the draggers can't stop falling over themselves making up reasons to ***** thereby distracting the public from the real reasons to complain.

The boy hasn't cried wolf, he's devoured him.

Yeah, but Obama wasn't even born here. Impeach!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (c. Sarah Palin)

[Handyman]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

The problem has existed since Isaac and Ishmael and won't end until one side is completely wiped out. Such a bother that all our oil was buried in the sand underneath them.

That is not true...in fact throughout history Muslims have treated Jews better than Christians/Catholics have.

This is a complicated issue but the biblical parts of it are overblown.

[FreshFish]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

This is a complicated issue but the biblical parts of it are overblown.

No kidding! The Bible was written well before Islam was even invented / discovered when the angel gabriel supposedly visited Muhammed in a dream in AD 610 (according to wikipedia).

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

That is not true...in fact throughout history Muslims have treated Jews better than Christians/Catholics have

While you are right, this doesn't really speak to what's unsolvable in the region. Religious wars are vicious and stupid but they can be ended -- the Spanish and Dutch haven't done much killing one one another the last 400 years. In tribalism, faith is just another proxy for "your great uncle killed my great uncle." A tiny part of the population is full-on nutbar and wants you to die if you aren't bowing to the correct invisible friend, but those guys exist everywhere from Tehran to Tupelo. The aspect that spreads the violence from the 700 Club psychos out to people with otherwise functioning brain cells is tribal identity.

And then once bombs start going off, it's a never-ending Sicilian vendetta cycle.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

As some wild-eyed idealist liberal once said, "jaw, jaw is always better than war, war."

Ethnic war like Israel/Palestine pretty much always leads to genocide. That's why the Old Testament God seems so cray cray. Tribalism is an elimination game.

I suppose if the primary concern was simply to save lives, we could deport every person living between Aleppo and Mecca to Greenland, nuke the desert, and say "Neither of you can have it for the next 10,000 years. Fixed."

The oil running out won't hurt, though.

That's a false choice. It's not like people sit around and say, I will either talk to my enemy or fight him in a war, which should I do. Talking can help solve problems, or can exacerbate problems. In this case I argue the false hope of peace talks exacerbated the situation.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

That's a false choice. It's not like people sit around and say, I will either talk to my enemy or fight him in a war, which should I do. Talking can help solve problems, or can exacerbate problems. In this case I argue the false hope of peace talks exacerbated the situation.

I don't get it. I'm sure what you're saying makes sense, but honestly I'm just not following what you're saying.

And anyway, it's not my quote -- blame YOUR guy.

[Slap Shot]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I'm sure we'll read tangible reasons why his attempts at reconciliation instead made it worse.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I don't get it. I'm sure what you're saying makes sense, but honestly I'm just not following what you're saying.

And anyway, it's not my quote -- blame YOUR guy.

When you've got a volatile situation, like this, you can make things worse by holding out the possibility that a peace deal is going to happen, when everything on the ground tells you that the parties are miles apart and not willing to move and the leaders in place aren't that interested or don't even necessarily have the authority to sign a peace deal and make it stick (in the Palestinian Authority's case). Peoples' hopes get built up, then inevitably dashed. Which can lead to further anger and frustration than if the false hope of a peace deal handn't been dangled in front of their face to begin with. But, I don't expect most libs to agree with this obvious observation, as they're too busy defending Obama.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

When you've got a volatile situation, like this, you can make things worse by holding out the possibility that a peace deal is going to happen, when everything on the ground tells you that the parties are miles apart and not willing to move and the leaders in place aren't that interested or don't even necessarily have the authority to sign a peace deal and make it stick (in the Palestinian Authority's case). Peoples' hopes get built up, then inevitably dashed. Which can lead to further anger and frustration than if the false hope of a peace deal handn't been dangled in front of their face to begin with. But, I don't expect most libs to agree with this obvious observation, as they're too busy defending Obama.

Your last sentence is frankly bizarre -- the obsessive hatred on the right for all things Obama and the projection of a mythic equally strong obsessive allegiance to Obama is like a psych experiment. We've been over him for years, Bob. He's just another disappointing president. The only people keeping his supposed exceptionalism alive are his opponents.

But more important are the facts: Obama is following what is an unbroken tradition since Nixon of getting involved (and failing) in the peace talks. I can't think of a more non-partisan stance that US presidents have taken. There is nothing new here (nor could there be, since we matter so little to the participants).

But I do understand the gist of the rest of what you're saying. I'm not sure I agree in the abstract, but in the concrete instance I do not agree at all, and it seems like a 19th century British argument, as if we are responsible for framing the goals and prospects in that part of the world. Those people quite literally could not care less about what we think and the reasons we put forward for our involvement, unless we are actually having one of our fits or moral superiority and bombing their schools for, ya know, peace. Everybody since at the very least Edward Said wrote Orientalism 40 years ago, and probably long before that, has understood that western involvement in the Middle East is driven strictly by national self-interest. The idea that we are somehow holding out false hope doesn't make any sense -- those dudes are gonna do what they're gonna do; they know it, and everybody over here but Brian Williams and the evening news knows it.

[Handyman]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

While you are right, this doesn't really speak to what's unsolvable in the region. Religious wars are vicious and stupid but they can be ended -- the Spanish and Dutch haven't done much killing one one another the last 400 years. In tribalism, faith is just another proxy for "your great uncle killed my great uncle." A tiny part of the population is full-on nutbar and wants you to die if you aren't bowing to the correct invisible friend, but those guys exist everywhere from Tehran to Tupelo. The aspect that spreads the violence from the 700 Club psychos out to people with otherwise functioning brain cells is tribal identity.

And then once bombs start going off, it's a never-ending Sicilian vendetta cycle.

You can choose to believe that is what it is about but I am sorry that is a misrepresentation of what is truly going on. The problem is what The UK and The US did in the region and what was decided in 1948. The Muslims werent going out of their way to kill all the Jews until the Jews were forced into their back yard.

I know The West likes to pretend it is way more than that but ultimately if Israel had ended up in Uganda (like it was originally planned to) you wouldnt see Syria and Lebanon (along with other groups) lobbing bombs their way.

This is a territorial battle first and foremost NOT a religious war. The religion is just ginned up as an excuse and as a way to get the people all a buzzing.

Note: I am not saying The Allies were wrong to create Israel but this is the consequence of unilaterally making that decision.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

You can choose to believe that is what it is about but I am sorry that is a misrepresentation of what is truly going on. The problem is what The UK and The US did in the region and what was decided in 1948. The Muslims werent going out of their way to kill all the Jews until the Jews were forced into their back yard.

I know The West likes to pretend it is way more than that but ultimately if Israel had ended up in Uganda (like it was originally planned to) you wouldnt see Syria and Lebanon (along with other groups) lobbing bombs their way.

This is a territorial battle first and foremost NOT a religious war. The religion is just ginned up as an excuse and as a way to get the people all a buzzing.

Note: I am not saying The Allies were wrong to create Israel but this is the consequence of unilaterally making that decision.

I'm pretty sure you just wrote "I don't agree with you" followed by three paragraphs agreeing with me.