|
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. |
On April 03 2017 02:32 Artisreal wrote:Show nested quote +On April 02 2017 23:13 Gorsameth wrote:On April 02 2017 19:24 Artisreal wrote:
Makes sense to solve problems instead of trying to smash em up. Though imo that's pure rethoric. What the EU and Germany have propageted in the passing months is building up a wall around Europe to keep people out (oh, hi USA, maybe there's more synergy than previously thought here), instead of actually promoting conflict free countries of origin (nothern and sub Saharan Africa or Middle East alike).
The 200 Billion is Trump's fantasy. As far as I read the commitment of 2% GDP, though from 2014, is due only in 2024. That's in 7 years' time. That makes his claim nothing more than populist leverage. How would you 'promote" a conflict free Africa and Middle-east? There are no visible diplomatic solutions to the myriad of conflict and re-colonizing the regions under 'civilized" western occupation isn't really popular. To be honest I have no fucking idea. But there are many smart people (not "Trump smart", really smart) of various groups that can help tackle the problems. From my point of view the society of the respective countries, in form of locals or expats isn't able to participate in the dialogue and we have to invest time and money for sustainable changes in the living conditions and perspectives in the respective countries. Transfering the value creation of produce like coffe and chocolate to the countries of origin as well as reducing export subsidies for foodstuff might help as well. Actually, is paramount to economic and civic progress, at least in my book.
I do wonder how much good we could do if the West spend it development aid budget on directly improving industry, housing and infrastructure in the 3e world. (~125 billion a year)
However corruption and wars would undo much of that and it is not something you an just solve from around a table. Like the current food crisis's going on which apparently were caused by rival sides purposefully destroying farming area's.
Its also a big problem in my opinion with transferring the value of goods back to them (tho by no means does this mean we shouldn't stop exploiting these regions). The more wealth the common people gather, the more warlords come around to take it away from them.
On April 03 2017 02:36 LegalLord wrote:
Many of those regional conflicts, frankly need to be resolved by the people who live there in their own ways, on their own time scale. Iraq should, at the very least, teach us that "nation building" doesn't work when you have to transform society to do it. Of course, meddling for personal gain just makes it all worse.
Iraq doesn't teach us anything about the peaceful uplifting of nations that we were discussing.
If we wanted to know how to handle violent forced nation building I would rather look towards the colonial era rather then the US's misguided attempt at copying the colonial powers that created it.
|
On April 03 2017 02:56 Gorsameth wrote:
However corruption and wars would undo much of that and it is not something you an just solve from around a table. Like the current food crisis's going on which apparently were caused by rival sides purposefully destroying farming area's.
If only there was some way in which there could be a kind of balance of power between two nations that would prevent one of those nations from just bombing the ever-loving shit out of the other. Some way that one nation didn't receive an endless supply of weapons and wasn't backed by the some of the biggest military forces of the world who let this shit happen.
Oh wait, that kind of talk is Russian propaganda and the ex-KGB thug longing for the days of the Soviet Union. Nevermind.
|
Neither Russia or the US or some geopolitical balance of power can prevent bottom - up civil wars in these regions. People have been butchering each other in tribal conflicts long before those two were around and they'll probably continue to do so.
As Gorsameth is saying, you can't just dump money and goods into some region and hope for the best.
|
On April 03 2017 03:49 a_flayer wrote:Show nested quote +On April 03 2017 02:56 Gorsameth wrote:
However corruption and wars would undo much of that and it is not something you an just solve from around a table. Like the current food crisis's going on which apparently were caused by rival sides purposefully destroying farming area's. If only there was some way in which there could be a kind of balance of power between two nations that would prevent one of those nations from just bombing the ever-loving shit out of the other. Some way that one nation didn't receive an endless supply of weapons and wasn't backed by the some of the biggest military forces of the world who let this shit happen. Oh wait, that kind of talk is Russian propaganda and the ex-KGB thug longing for the days of the Soviet Union. Nevermind.
Hate to break it to you but we did not have fewer conflicts during the Cold war. The 2nd/3e world was filled with proxy wars being wages by the super powers.
One could probably argue that many of the instabilities that still plague the regions can be traced back to these proxy conflicts.
You might not like it but its pretty undeniable that the US hegemony has brought an unequalled period of (relative) peace.
|
The west could maybe not prop up Saudi Arabia as an 'ally' and not sell them an endless supply of weaponry though. The lack of support alone might make them somewhat less eager to flatten a neighbouring country and look for better ways to resolve any conflicts they have.
|
the SA relationship is really complicated though. They're pretty reliable as far as fighting ISIS and Al-Qaeda offshoots are concerned because pretty much every terrorist organisation hates the SA regime. They've got a terrible human rights record but militarily they're a pretty important partner. Also importantly they're at least on okay-ish grounds with Israel at this point.
|
On April 02 2017 22:40 Philoctetes wrote:
The whole NATO thing is just US asking for a handout. The NATO exists, or existed, so that in case of a nuclear WWIII with the Soviet Union, which hasn't existed for over two decades, the battleground, and the area where all the nukes fall, is Europe. Not the US.
The US just wants a handout from the EU. Increase defense budget is just means 'buy more of our arms'.
More arms means more wars. If US drops defense spending, then so can the Russia. Then so can China, Turkey, Saudi Arabia. Then so can Iran. Pakistan, India. And every other country will follow, including the EU. And we can spend money on education, elderly care, expensive science experiments, energy transition, climate change, preventing 600 million people in Africa from having to move because their ancestral grounds literally have become uninhabitable, etc etc.
Trump has 0 credibility. Merkel is just waiting for the right moment to hand him back his absurdly stupid billing request. Only reason why US allies are swallowing Trump's blundering is because they are worried about the US. The US is so weak and so fucked up right now. We do want to win our diplomatic struggles against the US. But we also don't want the US to implode.
It's funny you believe that Merkel thing. Germany became the second biggest NATO country to arm Syrian rebellion after the US. Friends in Iraqi airlines tell me German arm-drops to Kurdish forces constantly rising upon US demand for years. She's just another US affiliate.
I agree your previous point though, Turkish defense budget is expanding due to Kurdish threat on Syrian border. And you can't question TR logic while those militia gets the most deadly weapons like milans, javelins. On the other hand you can't question Kurds as well, since they're targets both for Turks and Assad. We need a better project, but it's too late.
On April 03 2017 04:26 Nyxisto wrote:
the SA relationship is really complicated though. They're pretty reliable as far as fighting ISIS and Al-Qaeda offshoots are concerned because pretty much every terrorist organisation hates the SA regime. They've got a terrible human rights record but militarily they're a pretty important partner. Also importantly they're at least on okay-ish grounds with Israel at this point.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/syrian-army-creates-womens-unit-fighting-isis-islamic-state-bashar-al-assad-regime-terror-group-a7558896.html
Doesn't look that reliable. And how do you think they're okay'ish with Israel since they threatened each other last week.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4353586/Syria-threatens-use-SCUD-missiles-Israel.html
Current SA is combination of Shia/jihadist militia from Iran + Afghan mercs + Russians
|
|
|
he uses SA for Syrian Army, I believe. Not for Saudi Arabia.
|
yes, that would make sense. I was confused
|
Looks like I was confused too.
|
|
|
“You cannot arrest or repress people who just don’t exist.”
Some people in this world are just out of this world.
|
somewhat unrelated but I guess there's at least some good things comming out of Trump presidency, at least in Germany:
AfD has lost lots of supporters in the last weeks. And not just in one stray poll or anything like that. They're down to somewhere between 7% and 11% according to what I'm seeing for example here: http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/
Reuters says that puts them at where they were around 2015, prior to the refugee crisis
the wikipedia picture shows it quite nicely as well:
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/dKArYU2.png)
AfD is light blue
|
|
|
Not really any independent confirmation. The Russian LGBT community is asking for an investigation into the validity of the report.
On April 03 2017 21:38 Silvanel wrote:Looks like terroist attack in Russia. At least ten dead in St. Peteresburg when bomb exploded in metro. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39481770If it really is terrorist attack is it Caucasus or Syria related?
Probably Caucasus considering that this follows the pattern of previous attacks.
|
|
|
Polands politicians seem to be much impressed by Erdogan. Allegations without proof are his specialty.
|
So is that allegation essentially the same conspiracy bullshit as 9/11/chemtrail conspiracies are in America, or is there something to it?
|
On April 03 2017 23:28 LightSpectra wrote:
So is that allegation essentially the same conspiracy bullshit as 9/11/chemtrail conspiracies are in America, or is there something to it?
Depends if you ask a PiS supporter or pretty much anyone else.
Poles do complain that the investigation wasn't as good as they would like but this is definitely more along the lines of conspiratorial populist hoopla.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
