3 ms·

Pretty much the basis for the DHS was 9/11 and terrorism, but terrorism exists in the first place due to US support for Israel and unnecessary interference in t

Pretty much the basis for the DHS was 9/11 and terrorism, but terrorism exists in the first place due to US support for Israel and unnecessary interference in the Middle East. I don't particularly like the Islamic nations one bit, but even I see the connection of pointless US foreign policies to terrorism. Moreover, Israel is in large part militarily capable of defending itself. As such, the argument for DHS was all very circular. If you take away the circles, there's nothing left. A country that so hates its own constitutional democracy cannot possibly support the democracy of other nations.

ethin 1y ago
This. I will continue maintaining the opinion that the US needs to just stop supporting Israel. Seriously. Israel can fight it's own religious wars and I see no reason for us to be backing that when our very constitution says "Hey, no endorsing any religion!" If I remember right, Israel has only been able to do half the things it's done with respect to wars because we've just kept giving them weapons and supplies in the first place.
potato3732842 1y ago
> terrorism exists in the first place due to US support for Israel and unnecessary interference in the Middle East. I'm no fan of being Israel's sugar daddy but that's a gross mis-characterization of the situation. The terrorism landscape of the 80s through 2010s has to do with the cold war, the post-colonial governments of the middle east, etc, etc. It's not a simple problem. But yeah we should def stop supporting Israel. Not our sandbox, not our problem.
- neom 1y ago
  From my memory of our history class in Canadian high school: Russia invaded Afghanistan -> U.S. armed Islamic fighters -> radical networks formed seemed to be the genesis?
  - OutOfHere 1y ago
    That's half of the picture. The radical networks didn't target the US just randomly or for nothing. It is specifically because of the US interference in the Middle East and its avid and persistent support for Israel that the US was targeted by Al-Qaeda.
    - neom 1y ago
      I think that's true although I'm not an expert, my point was kinda just the straight line to Osama bin Laden who was a fighter during that earlier period and 9/11 but your additional context is appreciated. :)
  - potato3732842 1y ago
    You don't get to the "radical islamists wage jihad on US dime" step without the "corrupt post-colonial governments leave citizens dissatisfied, citizens turn to religion" step.
    - text0404 1y ago
      Who installed the corrupt post-colonial governments? Who destabilized middle eastern countries to create an opening for those governments to take power? Who funded the groups who ended up taking power? It's the same folks who invented the word for the phenomenon we're currently discussing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_(intelligence) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_(intelligence)
      - potato3732842 1y ago
        >Who installed the corrupt post-colonial governments? Ugh, mostly the British and the French though I supposed Ike got conned into helping the Brits with one of them. >Who destabilized middle eastern countries to create an opening for those governments to take power? rofl, everyone, but mostly their neighbors >Who funded the groups who ended up taking power? Same answer as above. But I get it, reality is complex and "murka bad" is simple. If you want that narrative stick to latin america.
lenerdenator 1y ago
> A country that so hates its own constitutional democracy cannot possibly support the democracy of other nations. The whole "support democracy" thing has been a ruse for a while now. Democracy has become a synonym for "human rights", and that's always been for sale. Not just in the US, either. The last 35 years have been characterized by exporting economic infrastructure from the US (and West at large) to a place that specifically does not support democracy because, hey, it's cheaper to make stuff there, and line need go up. Hell, touching on the Middle East, the only reason the region has a seat at the international table at all is because we're willing to look past the abysmal human rights record so long as the oil stays cheap. Otherwise it's a bunch of arid land with very strict rules. Not exactly the kind of place progress and development flock to. This isn't just an American thing, but it's certainly applicable here.
- bongodongobob 1y ago
  You've got to be kidding me. If anything, the synonym would be "allows US business interests to pillage their resources." Every time a foreign nation attempts to nationalize a resource, we come in and destabilize their government, install a western friendly autocrat, and install our global businesses to extract their resources.
  - lenerdenator 1y ago
    If we were as venomous as you seem to charge, China wouldn't look anything like it does today, but otherwise, you're saying much the same thing as I am.
    - bongodongobob 1y ago
      I couldn't tell if you meant human rights sarcastically or not. It's hard to tell these days.

ethin 1y ago

This. I will continue maintaining the opinion that the US needs to just stop supporting Israel. Seriously. Israel can fight it's own religious wars and I see no reason for us to be backing that when our very constitution says "Hey, no endorsing any religion!" If I remember right, Israel has only been able to do half the things it's done with respect to wars because we've just kept giving them weapons and supplies in the first place.

potato3732842 1y ago

> terrorism exists in the first place due to US support for Israel and unnecessary interference in the Middle East. I'm no fan of being Israel's sugar daddy but that's a gross mis-characterization of the situation. The terrorism landscape of the 80s through 2010s has to do with the cold war, the post-colonial governments of the middle east, etc, etc. It's not a simple problem. But yeah we should def stop supporting Israel. Not our sandbox, not our problem.

neom 1y ago
From my memory of our history class in Canadian high school: Russia invaded Afghanistan -> U.S. armed Islamic fighters -> radical networks formed seemed to be the genesis?
- OutOfHere 1y ago
  That's half of the picture. The radical networks didn't target the US just randomly or for nothing. It is specifically because of the US interference in the Middle East and its avid and persistent support for Israel that the US was targeted by Al-Qaeda.
  - neom 1y ago
    I think that's true although I'm not an expert, my point was kinda just the straight line to Osama bin Laden who was a fighter during that earlier period and 9/11 but your additional context is appreciated. :)
- potato3732842 1y ago
  You don't get to the "radical islamists wage jihad on US dime" step without the "corrupt post-colonial governments leave citizens dissatisfied, citizens turn to religion" step.
  - text0404 1y ago
    Who installed the corrupt post-colonial governments? Who destabilized middle eastern countries to create an opening for those governments to take power? Who funded the groups who ended up taking power? It's the same folks who invented the word for the phenomenon we're currently discussing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_(intelligence) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blowback_(intelligence)
    - potato3732842 1y ago
      >Who installed the corrupt post-colonial governments? Ugh, mostly the British and the French though I supposed Ike got conned into helping the Brits with one of them. >Who destabilized middle eastern countries to create an opening for those governments to take power? rofl, everyone, but mostly their neighbors >Who funded the groups who ended up taking power? Same answer as above. But I get it, reality is complex and "murka bad" is simple. If you want that narrative stick to latin america.

lenerdenator 1y ago

> A country that so hates its own constitutional democracy cannot possibly support the democracy of other nations. The whole "support democracy" thing has been a ruse for a while now. Democracy has become a synonym for "human rights", and that's always been for sale. Not just in the US, either. The last 35 years have been characterized by exporting economic infrastructure from the US (and West at large) to a place that specifically does not support democracy because, hey, it's cheaper to make stuff there, and line need go up. Hell, touching on the Middle East, the only reason the region has a seat at the international table at all is because we're willing to look past the abysmal human rights record so long as the oil stays cheap. Otherwise it's a bunch of arid land with very strict rules. Not exactly the kind of place progress and development flock to. This isn't just an American thing, but it's certainly applicable here.

bongodongobob 1y ago
You've got to be kidding me. If anything, the synonym would be "allows US business interests to pillage their resources." Every time a foreign nation attempts to nationalize a resource, we come in and destabilize their government, install a western friendly autocrat, and install our global businesses to extract their resources.
- lenerdenator 1y ago
  If we were as venomous as you seem to charge, China wouldn't look anything like it does today, but otherwise, you're saying much the same thing as I am.
  - bongodongobob 1y ago
    I couldn't tell if you meant human rights sarcastically or not. It's hard to tell these days.