4 ms·

You seem "forking clueless" about geopolitics. The middle east has been ruled by authoritarianism since the beginning of civilization. America, after the fall o

You seem "forking clueless" about geopolitics. The middle east has been ruled by authoritarianism since the beginning of civilization. America, after the fall of the USSR, at the height of its power, with more relative global influence than any country in history, went on to spend decades and many trillions of dollars trying to create democracy in the middle east only to utterly fail. I think you need to come to terms with the fact that in some places, realistically, no amount of external influence will cause democracy to exist.

jprete 3y ago
I don't think the parent comment is suggesting anything about trying to make the Middle East democratic.
dralley 3y ago
There is still no need to prop up their oil dictatorships with billions in chip investments.
- mightyham 3y ago
  It's one sense it's not good for American interests to massively outsource manufacturing like this. But we live in a world order where Russia and China have created a pole of power accepting to any countries being treated poorly by the US. Economically sanctioning every dictatorship is not going to be a winning long term strategy.
  - dralley 3y ago
    Again, there is a difference between sanctions, and actively investing billions of dollars into critical industries there.
    - mightyham 3y ago
      Are we talking billions are trillions? I'll agree that it's not good to be spending trillions in the UAE, making it the future central manufacturing place of silicon. Though, saying that we shouldn't be making billion dollar deals with certain counties is tantamount to ececomic santions.
      - dralley 3y ago
        Any kind of semiconductor investment is at the very least on the order of tens of billions - fab infrastructure doesn't come cheaper than that. That's too much, to say nothing of trillions.
Hrun0 3y ago
> went on to spend decades and many trillions of dollars trying to create democracy You can't be this gullible?
- mightyham 3y ago
  Yes I understand that democracy building was only our nominal reason for being in the middle east. But when it come to Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan we did, as a matter of fact, both directly and covertly, try to systematically eradicate authoriarian regimes and general extremism. We have attempted social engineering in hostile countries like what I mentioned previously, or through movenments like the Arab spring, or through economic sanctioning (i.e. Iran, Russia, North Korea) and have achieved nothing. While the genuinness of America's intentions are debatable, I don't think it's debatable that America carried out the largest, most expansive democracy building efforts in the middle east that has been or will likely ever be attempted.
mitthrowaway2 3y ago
The above comment would be more complete if it would mention the history of US-backed coups of middle east (and other) governments throughout the 20th century any time a democratically-elected leader began leaning towards the Soviet sphere of influence. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Syria#Operation_Straggle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Syria#Operat...
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
toss1 3y ago
>> I think you need to come to terms with the fact that in some places, realistically, no amount of external influence will cause democracy to exist. I have long ago come to terms with that. That conclusion does NOT mean that we need to support those authoritarian regimes (except possibly for tactical advantage when necessary). This is especially true when the major authoritarian regimes are already waging war against the democracies because international rule of law threatens their kleptocracies. In case you doubt it, Putin's own Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov specifically use the word "war" in describing Russia's actions against the West. Specifically: “A special military operation began against Ukraine. Over time, it took the form of a war against the collective West. This is a war when the countries of the collective West, led by the United States, are directly involved in the conflict." [via Google Translate] Of course Russia is allied strongly with Iran and North Korea, and being aided by China and others. Just because any particular authoritarian state does not join the alliance any particular week, does not mean we should be supporting them. Plus, as someone else pointed out, if he's going to spend $7 TRILLION, the initial conditions of the location hardly matter. There are plenty of countries which would better benefit and be more cooperative. But obviously doing synergistic or even incidental good for others does not figure into these wannabe-tycoons' plans. [0] https://tass.ru/politika/19988073 https://tass.ru/politika/19988073

jprete 3y ago

I don't think the parent comment is suggesting anything about trying to make the Middle East democratic.

dralley 3y ago

There is still no need to prop up their oil dictatorships with billions in chip investments.

mightyham 3y ago
It's one sense it's not good for American interests to massively outsource manufacturing like this. But we live in a world order where Russia and China have created a pole of power accepting to any countries being treated poorly by the US. Economically sanctioning every dictatorship is not going to be a winning long term strategy.
- dralley 3y ago
  Again, there is a difference between sanctions, and actively investing billions of dollars into critical industries there.
  - mightyham 3y ago
    Are we talking billions are trillions? I'll agree that it's not good to be spending trillions in the UAE, making it the future central manufacturing place of silicon. Though, saying that we shouldn't be making billion dollar deals with certain counties is tantamount to ececomic santions.
    - dralley 3y ago
      Any kind of semiconductor investment is at the very least on the order of tens of billions - fab infrastructure doesn't come cheaper than that. That's too much, to say nothing of trillions.

Hrun0 3y ago

> went on to spend decades and many trillions of dollars trying to create democracy You can't be this gullible?

mightyham 3y ago
Yes I understand that democracy building was only our nominal reason for being in the middle east. But when it come to Syria, Iraq, and Afghanistan we did, as a matter of fact, both directly and covertly, try to systematically eradicate authoriarian regimes and general extremism. We have attempted social engineering in hostile countries like what I mentioned previously, or through movenments like the Arab spring, or through economic sanctioning (i.e. Iran, Russia, North Korea) and have achieved nothing. While the genuinness of America's intentions are debatable, I don't think it's debatable that America carried out the largest, most expansive democracy building efforts in the middle east that has been or will likely ever be attempted.

mitthrowaway2 3y ago

The above comment would be more complete if it would mention the history of US-backed coups of middle east (and other) governments throughout the 20th century any time a democratically-elected leader began leaning towards the Soviet sphere of influence. For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9ta... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Syria#Operation_Straggle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Syria#Operat...

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

toss1 3y ago

>> I think you need to come to terms with the fact that in some places, realistically, no amount of external influence will cause democracy to exist. I have long ago come to terms with that. That conclusion does NOT mean that we need to support those authoritarian regimes (except possibly for tactical advantage when necessary). This is especially true when the major authoritarian regimes are already waging war against the democracies because international rule of law threatens their kleptocracies. In case you doubt it, Putin's own Presidential Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov specifically use the word "war" in describing Russia's actions against the West. Specifically: “A special military operation began against Ukraine. Over time, it took the form of a war against the collective West. This is a war when the countries of the collective West, led by the United States, are directly involved in the conflict." [via Google Translate] Of course Russia is allied strongly with Iran and North Korea, and being aided by China and others. Just because any particular authoritarian state does not join the alliance any particular week, does not mean we should be supporting them. Plus, as someone else pointed out, if he's going to spend $7 TRILLION, the initial conditions of the location hardly matter. There are plenty of countries which would better benefit and be more cooperative. But obviously doing synergistic or even incidental good for others does not figure into these wannabe-tycoons' plans. [0] https://tass.ru/politika/19988073 https://tass.ru/politika/19988073