3 ms·

> using violence to impose their... Isn't the US using violence (bombs, drones, etc.) to impose its version of things on the region too? I'm not sure how the

> using violence to impose their... Isn't the US using violence (bombs, drones, etc.) to impose its version of things on the region too? I'm not sure how the two are different, other than that the US has a LOT more resources and can spend money on things like "smart bombs" that help convince Americans that we are carefully avoiding civilian casualties -- when in fact the goal is to scare the civilians shitless so they push back against local leaders, etc.

tim333 10y ago
>not sure how the two are different It's good guys with bombs vs bad guys with bombs. If you feel the Islamic State governance is as good as US governance feel free to go hang out with them in Syria and enjoy the wonderful society they are creating. Only be prepared to be machine gunned or similar if you try to leave.
- grandalf 10y ago
  That is beside the point. The point is why do we need to be involved in fighting ISIS? The US botched a Trillion dollar nation building project in Iraq and created the beginnings of ISIS, and now thanks to ISIS videos and our own government's promoting them we get tons of propaganda telling us to fear them. All governments start out looking like mafias and slowly gain legitimacy as they become powerful enough to start retelling history in a way that makes them look legitimate. The best way for the US to help the people of the middle east would be to incentivize ISIS to undertake humanitarian projects and to build much-needed physical and government infrastructure. Instead, we decide to make them villains and to help them destroy the region, while also using them as an excuse to continue meddling in the region. The only reason to try to prevent ISIS taking larger control over the middle east is for the US to keep it for itself. This is only part of the national interest because of the oil resources there. It's amazing how low we are willing to sink to protect our ability to extract oil. Let ISIS create a new government and horde the oil. We should be spending the Trillions of dollars on alternative energy research and education, etc. Oil is the past. The US has such a large stake in the middle east that it has forced us to terrorize the region for decades and to layer on such a thick layer of propaganda that most Americans hate and fear it almost instinctively. This is a failed strategy and it is also nearly obsolete. It's odd to watch us keep doubling down on it with every new president.
  - tim333 10y ago
    Well, each to their own. Personally I don't like rape slavery and genocide and am just fine with killing the fuckers.
    - grandalf 10y ago
      The irony is that a typical American 100 years ago would condone rape, slavery and genocide as they are currently defined. We don't consider our leaders and luminaries rapists and slavemasters, or our past military conflicts genocides, precisely because we killed all the people who viewed them that way. We have the luxury of moralistically judging ISIS because it is not our homeland that we are fighting to preserve. We get to participate in a rather silly exercise in smugness in which we pretend our nation lives by a consistent and principled moral code. This is not an argument for relativism. My point is that our view of ISIS is through the lens of quite a bit of propaganda, which is very hard to filter out. Many of the regimes of our allies do equally horrible things. I'm not arguing that we should love ISIS, just that we should be consistent in our approach and not let our leaders propagandize us.
pbhjpbhj 10y ago
>Isn't the US using violence (bombs, drones, etc.) to impose its version of things on the region too? // So that makes it right for ISIS? It's such a feeble argument which IMO when unwrapped is pretty disingenuous wrt to this situation too.

tim333 10y ago

>not sure how the two are different It's good guys with bombs vs bad guys with bombs. If you feel the Islamic State governance is as good as US governance feel free to go hang out with them in Syria and enjoy the wonderful society they are creating. Only be prepared to be machine gunned or similar if you try to leave.

grandalf 10y ago
That is beside the point. The point is why do we need to be involved in fighting ISIS? The US botched a Trillion dollar nation building project in Iraq and created the beginnings of ISIS, and now thanks to ISIS videos and our own government's promoting them we get tons of propaganda telling us to fear them. All governments start out looking like mafias and slowly gain legitimacy as they become powerful enough to start retelling history in a way that makes them look legitimate. The best way for the US to help the people of the middle east would be to incentivize ISIS to undertake humanitarian projects and to build much-needed physical and government infrastructure. Instead, we decide to make them villains and to help them destroy the region, while also using them as an excuse to continue meddling in the region. The only reason to try to prevent ISIS taking larger control over the middle east is for the US to keep it for itself. This is only part of the national interest because of the oil resources there. It's amazing how low we are willing to sink to protect our ability to extract oil. Let ISIS create a new government and horde the oil. We should be spending the Trillions of dollars on alternative energy research and education, etc. Oil is the past. The US has such a large stake in the middle east that it has forced us to terrorize the region for decades and to layer on such a thick layer of propaganda that most Americans hate and fear it almost instinctively. This is a failed strategy and it is also nearly obsolete. It's odd to watch us keep doubling down on it with every new president.
- tim333 10y ago
  Well, each to their own. Personally I don't like rape slavery and genocide and am just fine with killing the fuckers.
  - grandalf 10y ago
    The irony is that a typical American 100 years ago would condone rape, slavery and genocide as they are currently defined. We don't consider our leaders and luminaries rapists and slavemasters, or our past military conflicts genocides, precisely because we killed all the people who viewed them that way. We have the luxury of moralistically judging ISIS because it is not our homeland that we are fighting to preserve. We get to participate in a rather silly exercise in smugness in which we pretend our nation lives by a consistent and principled moral code. This is not an argument for relativism. My point is that our view of ISIS is through the lens of quite a bit of propaganda, which is very hard to filter out. Many of the regimes of our allies do equally horrible things. I'm not arguing that we should love ISIS, just that we should be consistent in our approach and not let our leaders propagandize us.

pbhjpbhj 10y ago

>Isn't the US using violence (bombs, drones, etc.) to impose its version of things on the region too? // So that makes it right for ISIS? It's such a feeble argument which IMO when unwrapped is pretty disingenuous wrt to this situation too.