5 ms·

This almost sounds like something that someone would make up. Why the hell would the US Govt. want so much unrest all over the world? Haven't they learned from

This almost sounds like something that someone would make up. Why the hell would the US Govt. want so much unrest all over the world? Haven't they learned from their screw ups in the past [0]? US supported Egyptian army is doing god knows what in Egypt; the US has been involved in the two biggest wars in recent memory (Iraq, Afghanistan), and in not-so-covert operations in countries like Pakistan, Syria and the like. Seriously what is this obsession with unrest and wars. [0] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'%C3%A9tat#U.S._role http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d'%C3%A9tat#U...

jdimov 13y ago
This is a direct result of their (continued) fuck-ups. No one will ever be able to look favourably upon the USG again. This is quickly leading to the country's demise as a perceived 'world power'. Unfortunately, military might is next to useless in restoring reputation.
- happyscrappy 13y ago
  >This is quickly leading to the country's demise as a perceived 'world power'. Oh really, is there even a single metric supporting your wishful thinking. Those hoping for the demise of the US are going to be in for a few disappointing decades, probably more.
jere 13y ago
Enemy? Spy on them. Ally? Spy on them. Communist regime? Overthrow it. Democratic government? Overthrow it. So proud to be an American.
myth_drannon 13y ago
Strong governments are an obstacle to corporate ambitions of taking over the resources of the country.
- choonkeymoonkey 13y ago
  Because those strong governments surely don't mean to exploit the resources of the country to buy themselves gold plated private jets...
- crusso 13y ago
  That's an unfortunately popular belief, but not the way things happen in the real world. In the real world, corporations use and corrupt the facilities of governments to undermine restrictions on the behaviors they want while supporting restrictions on newcomers to their markets or against their customers. Blindly strengthening government without dealing unambiguously with corruption only strengthens the weapon that these crony capitalists have to use against their competitors and customers.
missing_cipher 13y ago
Maybe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_arms_exporters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_defense_budgets http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#Major_arms_industry_corporations_by_nation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#Major_arms_indust...
acuozzo 13y ago
It would have been more relevant if [0] were OPERATION MONGOOSE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project
prawn 13y ago
Unrest supports the war machine. Also, pushing capitalist powers expands markets for the industries lobbying government.
- afsina 13y ago
  I think "Mercantilist" suits better than "Capitalist" here.
gadders 13y ago
I think you typed "unrest" when you meant "democracy". The Egyptian army is not perfect, but the Muslim Brotherhood was worse. Iraq and Afghanistan are also better off then they were under Saddam and the Taliban.
- not_paul_graham 13y ago
  Muslim Brotherhood was a democratically elected party in power. The past year has been the most violent in Iraq in terms of civilian deaths and targeted attacks. A lot of my Iraqi friends mention that Iraq was more peaceful under Saddam (despite the fact that they didn't like him as the ruler). A lot of tribal leaders that supported Saddam switched alliances when the was was eminent and so a lot of these individuals are still in power. In certain parts of Afghanistan, the Taliban is already clawing back to power, and it is very likely that they will come to rule major parts of the country again (without continued intervention).
  - gadders 13y ago
    The Muslim Brotherhood was democratically elected, I grant you, but behaved appallingly in power. Your Iraqi friends weren't Kurds, were they? Even if Iraq was more peaceful under Saddam, I expect crime is pretty low in North Korea as well. The Taliban may well be clawing back to power, and that is a truly terrible prospect for the people of Afghanistan, but their fate is in their own hands now.
    - camus2 13y ago
      > but their fate is in their own hands now. You mean US wasted all these people for nothing along with all these american soldiers, while still giving Saudis and Pakistanis tons of money, these folks being the one that helped Al Qaida attack USA (9/11 has been financed by Pakistani's secret services,and it's a well known fact that Saudis finance the most radical islam,the one that calls USA "Satan"...).
- pjc50 13y ago
  The Egyption progression was military dictatorship -> revolution, elections -> elected Islamists -> everyone realising how awful Islamists are even if elected -> military dictatorship. Turkey has been struggling with a lighter and less violent version of the same issue for a while; you can have a democratic country only until you elect a religious party determined to violate minority rights, at which point military secularism starts to look good.

jdimov 13y ago

This is a direct result of their (continued) fuck-ups. No one will ever be able to look favourably upon the USG again. This is quickly leading to the country's demise as a perceived 'world power'. Unfortunately, military might is next to useless in restoring reputation.

happyscrappy 13y ago
>This is quickly leading to the country's demise as a perceived 'world power'. Oh really, is there even a single metric supporting your wishful thinking. Those hoping for the demise of the US are going to be in for a few disappointing decades, probably more.

jere 13y ago

Enemy? Spy on them. Ally? Spy on them. Communist regime? Overthrow it. Democratic government? Overthrow it. So proud to be an American.

myth_drannon 13y ago

Strong governments are an obstacle to corporate ambitions of taking over the resources of the country.

choonkeymoonkey 13y ago
Because those strong governments surely don't mean to exploit the resources of the country to buy themselves gold plated private jets...
crusso 13y ago
That's an unfortunately popular belief, but not the way things happen in the real world. In the real world, corporations use and corrupt the facilities of governments to undermine restrictions on the behaviors they want while supporting restrictions on newcomers to their markets or against their customers. Blindly strengthening government without dealing unambiguously with corruption only strengthens the weapon that these crony capitalists have to use against their competitors and customers.

missing_cipher 13y ago

Maybe: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_arms_exporters http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest_defense_budgets http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#World.27s_largest... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#Major_arms_industry_corporations_by_nation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arms_industry#Major_arms_indust...

acuozzo 13y ago

It would have been more relevant if [0] were OPERATION MONGOOSE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Project

prawn 13y ago

Unrest supports the war machine. Also, pushing capitalist powers expands markets for the industries lobbying government.

afsina 13y ago
I think "Mercantilist" suits better than "Capitalist" here.

gadders 13y ago

I think you typed "unrest" when you meant "democracy". The Egyptian army is not perfect, but the Muslim Brotherhood was worse. Iraq and Afghanistan are also better off then they were under Saddam and the Taliban.

not_paul_graham 13y ago
Muslim Brotherhood was a democratically elected party in power. The past year has been the most violent in Iraq in terms of civilian deaths and targeted attacks. A lot of my Iraqi friends mention that Iraq was more peaceful under Saddam (despite the fact that they didn't like him as the ruler). A lot of tribal leaders that supported Saddam switched alliances when the was was eminent and so a lot of these individuals are still in power. In certain parts of Afghanistan, the Taliban is already clawing back to power, and it is very likely that they will come to rule major parts of the country again (without continued intervention).
- gadders 13y ago
  The Muslim Brotherhood was democratically elected, I grant you, but behaved appallingly in power. Your Iraqi friends weren't Kurds, were they? Even if Iraq was more peaceful under Saddam, I expect crime is pretty low in North Korea as well. The Taliban may well be clawing back to power, and that is a truly terrible prospect for the people of Afghanistan, but their fate is in their own hands now.
  - camus2 13y ago
    > but their fate is in their own hands now. You mean US wasted all these people for nothing along with all these american soldiers, while still giving Saudis and Pakistanis tons of money, these folks being the one that helped Al Qaida attack USA (9/11 has been financed by Pakistani's secret services,and it's a well known fact that Saudis finance the most radical islam,the one that calls USA "Satan"...).
pjc50 13y ago
The Egyption progression was military dictatorship -> revolution, elections -> elected Islamists -> everyone realising how awful Islamists are even if elected -> military dictatorship. Turkey has been struggling with a lighter and less violent version of the same issue for a while; you can have a democratic country only until you elect a religious party determined to violate minority rights, at which point military secularism starts to look good.