Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Zaresto
Raw
Avatar of Zaresto

Zaresto Can't Wake Up

Banned Seen 7 yrs ago

<Snipped quote by gorgenmast>

Small correction. It's not because "muh bible". It's because the US sees value in having an ally in the middle east. US don't give a shit about religion.


Technically, it's special interest groups funding congressmen in order to preserve support for Israel.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Israel_..
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Vilageidiotx
Raw
Avatar of Vilageidiotx

Vilageidiotx Jacobin of All Trades

Member Seen 2 yrs ago

The ally thing is tentative. We got really heavy into the middle east during the cold war because of the Russians, and so long as the cold-war generation of policy makers continue to govern affairs (and so long as Putin being Putin and China acting like a colonial power makes military action relevant) then we'll have to worry about the middle east.

But the day we cease needing petroleum for anything important is the day America starts turning its back on Israel. In another one hundred years, it is very possible that we'll look at the entire region in the same way we look at Africa today. Sort of a "Gee, their lives must suck, now what is the Mars Colony doing right now?"
Hidden 9 yrs ago 9 yrs ago Post by Dinh AaronMk
Raw
Avatar of Dinh AaronMk

Dinh AaronMk my beloved (french coded)

Member Seen 8 days ago

@Aragorn

Saudi-US relationship has been pretty strong and is even older than that with Isreal. They're not nearly as divergent as what you're saying, and are taking what the media has shouted in much the same way you're accusing Googer of doing. And Saudi Arabia wasn't the only supplier of Daesh, that blame goes to the other two gulf states as well: Qatar and the UAE.

What is important is the US-Saudi relationship as well as it still being considered a special relationship. Jordan is also another major ally to the US with or without Isreal and is considered to be the closest non-NATO ally of the United States in the middle east.

Egypt as well would have been a powerful and another old ally of the US if Isreal did't exist, since Egyptian antagonism to Isreal in the late 40's and into the 50's kept a wage between they and the US, despite the US keeping Britain and France from tearing shit up with them in war during that period. But if the Isreali factor was removed from the picture then both Jordan and Egypt could have been allies with the US much earlier than formal, positive-relationships were established.

Especially since in the context of modern history our allies in the middle-east were only really valuable in the political game between the US and Soviet Union in the region. The Saudis represent the oldest member of the old anti-communism alliance the US was building in the region to counter the fears of communist revolution, and then through the Cold War the expansion of Soviet influence in places like Syria.

The US doesn't necessarily need Isreal as a strategic ally in the region. In a historical absence of Isreal in the region they could easily be replaced.

IMO - I would rather Iran over Saudi Arabia since Iran at least doesn't publically crucify criminals and people convicted of witch craft. And then we can give the rest of the Sunni Arab world to the glorious modern Banu Hashim.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Vilageidiotx
Raw
Avatar of Vilageidiotx

Vilageidiotx Jacobin of All Trades

Member Seen 2 yrs ago

We had Iran. That didn't turn out so well.

The Saudi relationship has been rocky. I mean, surely you've heard your parents tell you stories about this.

Hidden 9 yrs ago 9 yrs ago Post by Dinh AaronMk
Raw
Avatar of Dinh AaronMk

Dinh AaronMk my beloved (french coded)

Member Seen 8 days ago

@Vilageidiotx

Fun-fact: the 1973 oil crisis started by the Arab states was in protest against the Yom Kippur War. And then again roughly six-years later because the Iranian Revolution.

Also around this time German, Venezuelan, and not-modern-Iranian production peaked. As well as US and Canadian production by then-conventional means*

Personally, if the US and British hadn't been Cold War dicks to Iran then perhaps the threat of Shia Islamism would have been greatly lessened. But no, we had to depose and put under house arrest their popular prime-minister because he was a socialist and put a dictator in power instead.

*I say that because now for us at least it's crawling back with the use of fracking.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Vilageidiotx
Raw
Avatar of Vilageidiotx

Vilageidiotx Jacobin of All Trades

Member Seen 2 yrs ago

Well, bloodthirsty dictators sell better. That's just capitalism.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Dinh AaronMk
Raw
Avatar of Dinh AaronMk

Dinh AaronMk my beloved (french coded)

Member Seen 8 days ago

@Vilageidiotx

"I have a juicy, fat pro-western military dictator for sale. It'll only cost you one military intervention and objectively morally questionable activity!

"We make no promises on stability."
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Vilageidiotx
Raw
Avatar of Vilageidiotx

Vilageidiotx Jacobin of All Trades

Member Seen 2 yrs ago

They are way more exciting than the peace-building, for the people democratic socialists.
Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Dinh AaronMk
Raw
Avatar of Dinh AaronMk

Dinh AaronMk my beloved (french coded)

Member Seen 8 days ago

@Vilageidiotx

Promoting red-blooded American activities since the Cold War.

Hidden 9 yrs ago Post by Dinh AaronMk
Raw
Avatar of Dinh AaronMk

Dinh AaronMk my beloved (french coded)

Member Seen 8 days ago

And sorta related:

Hidden 9 yrs ago 9 yrs ago Post by Darcs
Raw
Avatar of Darcs

Darcs Madama Witch

Member Seen 3 mos ago

Small correction. It's not because "muh bible". It's because the US sees value in having an ally in the middle east. US don't give a shit about religion.

UAE-US Security Relationship
*cough cough*

Also literally people only just this year got the right to marry because of the US's obsession w/ religion bruh.

↑ Top
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet