3 ms·

You're missing the central issue that the enemy gets a vote. We all want to go home.

jessaustin 7y ago
(Thanks for moderating the earlier statement, Major.) I have a great deal more sympathy for this argument than for those upthread. This man [0] certainly wanted to go home. If we're moving the goalpost to this location, however, the debate is over. If "going home" is the aim, why not stay home in the first place? Nothing that USA military has done in the Middle East in my parents' lifetimes has made life better or safer for Americans or for humans in general. The only reason "the enemy" has "a vote" is that we're in their countries destroying their governments and killing their families. When we leave their countries, they'll lose any ability to affect us in any way. We should do that. Many proud people have publicly claimed otherwise, so they'll be disappointed that we've finally rejected their bullshit. Still, the lives, health, and fortunes of Americans and other human beings is more important than the feelings of politicians and newsreaders. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i5ZUfpxnV0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i5ZUfpxnV0
- killjoywashere 7y ago
  > When we leave their countries, they'll lose any ability to affect us in any way That's not consistent with Sharia law, 9/11, and fairly specific directives in the Quran.(1) That's not consistent with the core principle of a proletariat uprising under Communism. That's not consistent with observed Chinese espionage. That's not consistent with Russian interference in elections. That's inconsistent with the entire human history of empires. Someone ends up at the top of a particular heap. They end up with the unenviable task of finding some way of maintaining a Pax, which inevitably leads to managing a contested frontier. (Pax Romana, Pax Sinica, Pax Britannica, Pax Americana) Other segments of history can be interpreted as transitions from one world order to the next, and usually involve quite a bit more bloodshed than occurred before or after the Pax. Thus the term is Pax and not Bellum. (1) I'll grant you the origin story of the modern Israel is not a moral high point of Western civilization, but neither is the conquest of old Israel a moral high point of Arab civilization.
  - jessaustin 7y ago
    I'll try to go in order... My Muslim friends, coworkers, and drinking buddies don't recognize this facile caricature of Islam and the Koran. Bush the Lesser, Obama, and Trump have all repeatedly rejected this specific description and claimed that we're not at war with Islam; why do you disagree? The Middle East isn't the only place we find Muslims anyway; why aren't we invading Indonesia? Saddam didn't cause 9/11. Taliban didn't cause 9/11. Daesh didn't cause 9/11. The war in Afghanistan will soon be old enough that it could be sent to fight a war. We've commemorated 9/11 for long enough, with enough blood and destruction. What Middle Eastern "proletariat" is "uprising"? They occasionally elect someone who has some socialist sympathies, only for that leader to be deposed like we did in Iran, Afghanistan, Egypt, and basically every nation in Central America. (Just think how much money the military-industrial complex has stolen from the taxpayer over how many decades, made possible by destroying the liberal modernizing government that Iran had in the 1950s. Ike and the Dulles brothers didn't get paid near enough for that...) Who are we to complain about political changes in other nations, anyway? Our nation was born in revolution. Our own current election cycle seems likely to introduce some socialist reforms. (Please don't suggest that we invade Vermont.) What does Russian or Chinese espionage or "interference" have to do with anything we've done in the Middle East? Do we have no spies? Did we not get Yeltsin elected? Are we not underwriting the protests in Hong Kong right now? Wes Clark told us about the 7 Muslim nations on the "to invade" list; when are the invasions scheduled for Russia and China? Are we likely to win those wars? It's as if every single natural action of a modern nation can be mutilated into a pretext for more disastrous war. 1A actually protects every single action of which Russia has been accused (without evidence) of taking with respect to the 2016 elections. As for this "pax" mythos, I don't know just what to say. I try not to disparage anyone's religious belief. Let's just say that even for the tiny portion of the vast sweep of human history that might fruitfully be understood through a lens of "empire and pax", most humans living at the time hadn't heard of the relevant empire much less had paid it fealty. Even if we restrict our attention to such periods of empire, it's not easy to shoehorn USA's actions in modern times into that analytical framework. Wars without states are small. Wars among normal states end, eventually. Wars that USA fights are permanent plagues upon humanity, with no purpose other than to enrich armaments manufacturers. (Yeah, I know, we've withdrawn from Libya, so it's no longer contributing to the bottom line. Still, with the slave markets etc. I think it can still be considered a plague upon humanity. It's hard to be sure; reporters don't dare go to Libya and keep track of the carnage by counting the bodies washing ashore in southern Europe.)

(Thanks for moderating the earlier statement, Major.) I have a great deal more sympathy for this argument than for those upthread. This man [0] certainly wanted to go home. If we're moving the goalpost to this location, however, the debate is over. If "going home" is the aim, why not stay home in the first place? Nothing that USA military has done in the Middle East in my parents' lifetimes has made life better or safer for Americans or for humans in general. The only reason "the enemy" has "a vote" is that we're in their countries destroying their governments and killing their families. When we leave their countries, they'll lose any ability to affect us in any way. We should do that. Many proud people have publicly claimed otherwise, so they'll be disappointed that we've finally rejected their bullshit. Still, the lives, health, and fortunes of Americans and other human beings is more important than the feelings of politicians and newsreaders. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i5ZUfpxnV0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4i5ZUfpxnV0

killjoywashere 7y ago
> When we leave their countries, they'll lose any ability to affect us in any way That's not consistent with Sharia law, 9/11, and fairly specific directives in the Quran.(1) That's not consistent with the core principle of a proletariat uprising under Communism. That's not consistent with observed Chinese espionage. That's not consistent with Russian interference in elections. That's inconsistent with the entire human history of empires. Someone ends up at the top of a particular heap. They end up with the unenviable task of finding some way of maintaining a Pax, which inevitably leads to managing a contested frontier. (Pax Romana, Pax Sinica, Pax Britannica, Pax Americana) Other segments of history can be interpreted as transitions from one world order to the next, and usually involve quite a bit more bloodshed than occurred before or after the Pax. Thus the term is Pax and not Bellum. (1) I'll grant you the origin story of the modern Israel is not a moral high point of Western civilization, but neither is the conquest of old Israel a moral high point of Arab civilization.
- jessaustin 7y ago
  I'll try to go in order... My Muslim friends, coworkers, and drinking buddies don't recognize this facile caricature of Islam and the Koran. Bush the Lesser, Obama, and Trump have all repeatedly rejected this specific description and claimed that we're not at war with Islam; why do you disagree? The Middle East isn't the only place we find Muslims anyway; why aren't we invading Indonesia? Saddam didn't cause 9/11. Taliban didn't cause 9/11. Daesh didn't cause 9/11. The war in Afghanistan will soon be old enough that it could be sent to fight a war. We've commemorated 9/11 for long enough, with enough blood and destruction. What Middle Eastern "proletariat" is "uprising"? They occasionally elect someone who has some socialist sympathies, only for that leader to be deposed like we did in Iran, Afghanistan, Egypt, and basically every nation in Central America. (Just think how much money the military-industrial complex has stolen from the taxpayer over how many decades, made possible by destroying the liberal modernizing government that Iran had in the 1950s. Ike and the Dulles brothers didn't get paid near enough for that...) Who are we to complain about political changes in other nations, anyway? Our nation was born in revolution. Our own current election cycle seems likely to introduce some socialist reforms. (Please don't suggest that we invade Vermont.) What does Russian or Chinese espionage or "interference" have to do with anything we've done in the Middle East? Do we have no spies? Did we not get Yeltsin elected? Are we not underwriting the protests in Hong Kong right now? Wes Clark told us about the 7 Muslim nations on the "to invade" list; when are the invasions scheduled for Russia and China? Are we likely to win those wars? It's as if every single natural action of a modern nation can be mutilated into a pretext for more disastrous war. 1A actually protects every single action of which Russia has been accused (without evidence) of taking with respect to the 2016 elections. As for this "pax" mythos, I don't know just what to say. I try not to disparage anyone's religious belief. Let's just say that even for the tiny portion of the vast sweep of human history that might fruitfully be understood through a lens of "empire and pax", most humans living at the time hadn't heard of the relevant empire much less had paid it fealty. Even if we restrict our attention to such periods of empire, it's not easy to shoehorn USA's actions in modern times into that analytical framework. Wars without states are small. Wars among normal states end, eventually. Wars that USA fights are permanent plagues upon humanity, with no purpose other than to enrich armaments manufacturers. (Yeah, I know, we've withdrawn from Libya, so it's no longer contributing to the bottom line. Still, with the slave markets etc. I think it can still be considered a plague upon humanity. It's hard to be sure; reporters don't dare go to Libya and keep track of the carnage by counting the bodies washing ashore in southern Europe.)