|
Keep the discussion ON TOPIC. This thread is for discussing the terror attacks in Paris. |
On November 14 2015 13:21 parkufarku wrote:
How do you exactly initiate war on terrorists though? They are hiding out within their country as regular citizens. This is similar to the Vietcongs where soldiers couldn't tell the difference between the civilians and the terrorists.
I'm all for engaging in war against them but how would it be done - effectively? Unless you just nuke the entire country / wipe out the entire population, I don't think it's gonna work. (not saying they should)
Islam is just being used as a tool by people with power to achieve their goal. That's all ISIS and other terrorist groups with the same agenda are.
Find the people who are supporting and growing ISIS, get rid of them, and the terrorist go from being somewhat organized and well equipped to disorganized with no resources. The groups would collapse pretty quick after that.
The approach western nations are taking, and the apparent apathy of many nations in the affected region, indicates the terrorists are probably just proxies for local governments to achieve their own goals. No one wants to directly fight those in charge, either because they're still unknown, or because of political reasons.
Probably sounds pretty tin foil hatish, but governments supporting terrorists or rebel groups in order to push their own agenda isn't exactly unheard of.
|
Can anyone think up similar instances of attacks like this in history that were successfully ended? What tactics have been successful in the past? These may seem like novel events to us, but surely similar patterns have occurred throughout human history. I feel the answers must lie there. Looking for something constructive rather than shock, anger and grief...
|
On November 14 2015 13:35 parkufarku wrote:
^ don't think WW2 was a cake walk. Sure, these guerilla wars / terrorist acts are much harder to pinpoint, but third reich empire was one of the strongest fighting machines in the world during the time. Easily identifiable? Yes. Easily beatable? No
His entire point was that the enemy in WW2 was a clear objective and had a clear method of achieving said objective. Crush Germany and you win the war. You can do this by invading mainland Europe and then invading Germany.
Crush extremists and you win the war.... Kind of. See it's more ideological now and they are way more spread out and they don't fight conventionally. How do you end the war against Isis?
That's what he meant by cake walk. We knew what we had to do.
|
On November 14 2015 14:13 Glowsphere wrote:
Can anyone think up similar instances of attacks like this in history that were successfully ended? What tactics have been successful in the past? These may seem like novel events to us, but surely similar patterns have occurred throughout human history. I feel the answers must lie there. Looking for something constructive rather than shock, anger and grief...
do you mean of the individual attacks themselves being thwarted most effectively, or the pattern of terroristic attacks being ended?
or did you mean something else by your question? I need to understand your question better to answer it.
|
On November 14 2015 14:15 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 14:13 Glowsphere wrote:
Can anyone think up similar instances of attacks like this in history that were successfully ended? What tactics have been successful in the past? These may seem like novel events to us, but surely similar patterns have occurred throughout human history. I feel the answers must lie there. Looking for something constructive rather than shock, anger and grief... do you mean of the individual attacks themselves being thwarted most effectively, or the pattern of terroristic attacks being ended? or did you mean something else by your question? I need to understand your question better to answer it.
I mean the larger pattern... just stopping individual instances I think does little to stem the flow. I suppose the root causes of the attacks must be determined to find historical analogues, thus all the fighting in this thread. But maybe if we look broadly enough, at least to begin with...
|
On November 14 2015 12:44 Spaylz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:41 Brutaxilos wrote:
In the light of the Paris attacks, I would like to emphasize, that a violent counter-attack is exactly what the terrorists want. If this is anything like 9/11, what they are hoping to do is to encourage the government to declare war on innocent people in the Middle East. Why? This makes the people view the West as evil and aggressive and encourages them to join their cause.
I understand that it may be difficult to put aside emotions in a tragedy like this, but we must keep our decision-making clear and remember the mistakes that the US made in the last 15 years or so. Hopefully Europe does not fall into the same trap we did. François Hollande seems deterined to act though. He said as much: But I suspect this is a very emotional answer. He went on the scene to the Bataclan very soon after it all happened, and what he saw was likely very raw. I do think a violent answer will only serve to perpetuate the cycle. But we do need some sort of answer. This can't keep happening.
Poor translation. He said "we will lead the fight, and it will be pitiless". He did not use the term "war".
|
On November 14 2015 14:19 Glowsphere wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 14:15 zlefin wrote:On November 14 2015 14:13 Glowsphere wrote:
Can anyone think up similar instances of attacks like this in history that were successfully ended? What tactics have been successful in the past? These may seem like novel events to us, but surely similar patterns have occurred throughout human history. I feel the answers must lie there. Looking for something constructive rather than shock, anger and grief... do you mean of the individual attacks themselves being thwarted most effectively, or the pattern of terroristic attacks being ended? or did you mean something else by your question? I need to understand your question better to answer it. I mean the larger pattern... just stopping individual instances I think does little to stem the flow. I suppose the root causes of the attacks must be determined to find historical analogues, thus all the fighting in this thread. But maybe if we look broadly enough, at least to begin with...
well, it depends what you mean by "pattern" then. The terrorism in the UK/ireland situation has been stopped, I don't know much about how that peace process went. is that what you're looking for?
|
On November 14 2015 14:13 Jayme wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 13:35 parkufarku wrote:
^ don't think WW2 was a cake walk. Sure, these guerilla wars / terrorist acts are much harder to pinpoint, but third reich empire was one of the strongest fighting machines in the world during the time. Easily identifiable? Yes. Easily beatable? No His entire point was that the enemy in WW2 was a clear objective and had a clear method of achieving said objective. Crush Germany and you win the war. You can do this by invading mainland Europe and then invading Germany. Crush extremists and you win the war.... Kind of. See it's more ideological now and they are way more spread out and they don't fight conventionally. How do you end the war against Isis? That's what he meant by cake walk. We knew what we had to do.
Yes, thank you. That is exactly correct. I don't think anyone in the world is under the impression that WW2 was an actual cake walk. The bloodshed was unfathomable, the people that went marching into that literal and proverbial meat grinder were the very definition of men.
Like I said it's "Better the devil you know than the devil you don't".
|
On November 14 2015 14:31 zlefin wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 14:19 Glowsphere wrote:On November 14 2015 14:15 zlefin wrote:On November 14 2015 14:13 Glowsphere wrote:
Can anyone think up similar instances of attacks like this in history that were successfully ended? What tactics have been successful in the past? These may seem like novel events to us, but surely similar patterns have occurred throughout human history. I feel the answers must lie there. Looking for something constructive rather than shock, anger and grief... do you mean of the individual attacks themselves being thwarted most effectively, or the pattern of terroristic attacks being ended? or did you mean something else by your question? I need to understand your question better to answer it. I mean the larger pattern... just stopping individual instances I think does little to stem the flow. I suppose the root causes of the attacks must be determined to find historical analogues, thus all the fighting in this thread. But maybe if we look broadly enough, at least to begin with... well, it depends what you mean by "pattern" then. The terrorism in the UK/ireland situation has been stopped, I don't know much about how that peace process went. is that what you're looking for?
Yes examples like that I suppose, and what strategies have failed too. I wish I were more well versed in history to provide some starting points.
|
On November 14 2015 14:19 Glowsphere wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 14:15 zlefin wrote:On November 14 2015 14:13 Glowsphere wrote:
Can anyone think up similar instances of attacks like this in history that were successfully ended? What tactics have been successful in the past? These may seem like novel events to us, but surely similar patterns have occurred throughout human history. I feel the answers must lie there. Looking for something constructive rather than shock, anger and grief... do you mean of the individual attacks themselves being thwarted most effectively, or the pattern of terroristic attacks being ended? or did you mean something else by your question? I need to understand your question better to answer it. I mean the larger pattern... just stopping individual instances I think does little to stem the flow. I suppose the root causes of the attacks must be determined to find historical analogues, thus all the fighting in this thread. But maybe if we look broadly enough, at least to begin with...
Ending a systematic bombing campaign and attacks from a designated terrorist group you mean? Northern Ireland.
People from the US always seem to forget that, long before the twin towers attack and the whole "war on terror", the UK was fighting against the IRA for the best part of 30 years.
It was eventually all stopped through the Northern Ireland peace process which was an extremely complicated and difficult series of political developments which ended most of the violence. It is NOT an easy thing to resolve and required a lot of people to overcome a lot of bad blood and agree to various legal processes which still aren't entirely resolved to this day.
It also kinda requires a decent number of people on both sides to actually want an end to the violence.
Edit: Ninjad
|
On November 14 2015 14:35 Glowsphere wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 14:31 zlefin wrote:On November 14 2015 14:19 Glowsphere wrote:On November 14 2015 14:15 zlefin wrote:On November 14 2015 14:13 Glowsphere wrote:
Can anyone think up similar instances of attacks like this in history that were successfully ended? What tactics have been successful in the past? These may seem like novel events to us, but surely similar patterns have occurred throughout human history. I feel the answers must lie there. Looking for something constructive rather than shock, anger and grief... do you mean of the individual attacks themselves being thwarted most effectively, or the pattern of terroristic attacks being ended? or did you mean something else by your question? I need to understand your question better to answer it. I mean the larger pattern... just stopping individual instances I think does little to stem the flow. I suppose the root causes of the attacks must be determined to find historical analogues, thus all the fighting in this thread. But maybe if we look broadly enough, at least to begin with... well, it depends what you mean by "pattern" then. The terrorism in the UK/ireland situation has been stopped, I don't know much about how that peace process went. is that what you're looking for? Yes examples like that I suppose, and what strategies have failed too. I wish I were more well versed in history to provide some starting points.
It's pretty much all in recent history because it's not viable until automatic weapons.
|
United States43620 Posts
Terrorism in Northern Ireland took 30 years of stubbornness and then a lot of swallowing pride and working with terrorists when they decided to become legitimate politicians. Something tells me that kind of ending is very far away tonight. Hopefully compromise with the terrorists isn't necessary in this case and they can identified and stamped out.
|
If you want some other reading glow, I did a bit of searching and this rand report looks like it may have some useful stuff:
http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG741-1.pdf
here's a quote from a subsection of it:
The results of the data analysis were stark. Terrorist groups end for two
major reasons: Members decide to adopt nonviolent tactics and join the
political process (43 percent), or local law-enforcement agencies arrest
or kill key members of the group (40 percent). Military force has rarely
been the primary reason for the end of terrorist groups (7 percent), and
few groups since 1968 have achieved victory (10 percent).
|
On November 14 2015 14:22 kwizach wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 12:44 Spaylz wrote:On November 14 2015 12:41 Brutaxilos wrote:
In the light of the Paris attacks, I would like to emphasize, that a violent counter-attack is exactly what the terrorists want. If this is anything like 9/11, what they are hoping to do is to encourage the government to declare war on innocent people in the Middle East. Why? This makes the people view the West as evil and aggressive and encourages them to join their cause.
I understand that it may be difficult to put aside emotions in a tragedy like this, but we must keep our decision-making clear and remember the mistakes that the US made in the last 15 years or so. Hopefully Europe does not fall into the same trap we did. François Hollande seems deterined to act though. He said as much: https://twitter.com/washingtonpost/status/665348285620723712But I suspect this is a very emotional answer. He went on the scene to the Bataclan very soon after it all happened, and what he saw was likely very raw. I do think a violent answer will only serve to perpetuate the cycle. But we do need some sort of answer. This can't keep happening. Poor translation. He said "we will lead the fight, and it will be pitiless". He did not use the term "war".
Very true. I should have seeked the original speech and picked up on that. Thanks for pointing it out.
Regardless, I do hope Hollande manages to come up with a solid answer. Though I don't like him much as a president or politician, I think he has handled this well. As well as it could be anyway.
He showed up on scene very early, made the right statements, and had an overall strong presence throughout the whole ordeal. I think he deserves some praise.
|
On November 14 2015 14:53 zlefin wrote:If you want some other reading glow, I did a bit of searching and this rand report looks like it may have some useful stuff: http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG741-1.pdfhere's a quote from a subsection of it: The results of the data analysis were stark. Terrorist groups end for two major reasons: Members decide to adopt nonviolent tactics and join the political process (43 percent), or local law-enforcement agencies arrest or kill key members of the group (40 percent). Military force has rarely been the primary reason for the end of terrorist groups (7 percent), and few groups since 1968 have achieved victory (10 percent).
Thanks (and Celestial too for your post). I will read that, and have to read up on Northern Ireland as well.
|
What's worked in the past has been completely overwhelming the guerrilla force which usually takes a while and involves killing lots of people (most of whom had nothing to do with the guerrillas), like the Soviets in the Ukraine in the 1920s (and again after WW2), or getting the locals on your side so they inform on the guerrillas to you and don't give them supplies or shelter. The guerrillas show up and want food and to stay the night and the village people tell them to screw off and start shooting or come running for you. They give up (or you give up) and a political accommodation is reached.
It's a global guerrilla force that is attacking the West and just about everybody else. The locals supporting them could be anything, from a youtube channel with radical videos turning young men nutso, to a mosque controlled by radicals turning young men nutso, to a Saudi noble pumping millions into radical schools or giving loads of cash to a contact knowing it will be used for terrorism, to a Pakistani intelligence agent running money and guns to a Taliban faction, to an entire government like Iran with Hezbollah, to a Western-"friendly" government that dumps huge amounts of anti-semitic and anti-western propaganda into the national media and political and popular and religious culture to keep people distracted from how crappy their government is (which happens to varying degrees in almost all Islamic countries).
Any strategy against this kind of ideology - basically, they say that there was a glory age wherein "true" Islam was practiced that has been strayed from and the situation is so bad we have to kill the Westerners and Jews and traitors that made it that way, or that those people are preventing "true" Islam from spreading its glorious bounty over Muslim countries/the world - has to defeat a lot of misinformation that people believe that makes them receptive to the guy who says kill all these people and things will be better in the first place. The common people in a lot of Muslim countries have been subjected to decades of indoctrination intended to make them suspicious and hateful of foreigners and heretics and alleged threats to their religion. It wasn't Nasser's or Egypt's or anybody Arab or Muslim's fault that Israel kicked his butt twice in 1956 or 1967, it was those sneaky Jews and their American backers and it wasn't a fair fight. The West has no morals and wants to destroy the morals of our Islamic culture to make money because they're controlled by greedy Jews and are quite greedy and lacking in morals themselves anyway. Not all Arab or Muslim countries have that kind of stuff occupying a large part of their culture but a lot do and have for a long time. Kind of makes it easy to recruit for terrorism which the dictators were too short-sighted to see, or to see that the terrorists would aim at them too.
It's going to take a lot of effort and a long time to reverse the attitudes about foreigners and particularly Westerners that have been reinforced by widespread and prolonged circulation of anti-Western stereotypes, stories, myths, rumors, etc. And when the West does do something dumb or bad it's just confirmation of all the accusations that really are crazy to the type of people who wind up becoming terrorists.
|
On November 14 2015 15:02 DeepElemBlues wrote:
What's worked in the past has been completely overwhelming the guerrilla force which usually takes a while and involves killing lots of people (most of whom had nothing to do with the guerrillas), like the Soviets in the Ukraine in the 1920s (and again after WW2), or getting the locals on your side so they inform on the guerrillas to you and don't give them supplies or shelter. The guerrillas show up and want food and to stay the night and the village people tell them to screw off and start shooting or come running for you. They give up (or you give up) and a political accommodation is reached.
It's a global guerrilla force that is attacking the West and just about everybody else. The locals supporting them could be anything, from a youtube channel with radical videos turning young men nutso, to a mosque controlled by radicals turning young men nutso, to a Saudi noble pumping millions into radical schools or giving loads of cash to a contact knowing it will be used for terrorism, to a Pakistani intelligence agent running money and guns to a Taliban faction, to an entire government like Iran with Hezbollah, to a Western-"friendly" government that dumps huge amounts of anti-semitic and anti-western propaganda into the national media and political and popular and religious culture to keep people distracted from how crappy their government is (which happens to varying degrees in almost all Islamic countries).
Any strategy against this kind of ideology - basically, they say that there was a glory age wherein "true" Islam was practiced that has been strayed from and the situation is so bad we have to kill the Westerners and Jews and traitors that made it that way, or that those people are preventing "true" Islam from spreading its glorious bounty over Muslim countries/the world - has to defeat a lot of misinformation that people believe that makes them receptive to the guy who says kill all these people and things will be better in the first place. The common people in a lot of Muslim countries have been subjected to decades of indoctrination intended to make them suspicious and hateful of foreigners and heretics and alleged threats to their religion. It wasn't Nasser's or Egypt's or anybody Arab or Muslim's fault that Israel kicked his butt twice in 1956 or 1967, it was those sneaky Jews and their American backers and it wasn't a fair fight. The West has no morals and wants to destroy the morals of our Islamic culture to make money because they're controlled by greedy Jews and are quite greedy and lacking in morals themselves anyway. Not all Arab or Muslim countries have that kind of stuff occupying a large part of their culture but a lot do and have for a long time. Kind of makes it easy to recruit for terrorism which the dictators were too short-sighted to see, or to see that the terrorists would aim at them too.
It's going to take a lot of effort and a long time to reverse the attitudes about foreigners and particularly Westerners that have been reinforced by widespread and prolonged circulation of anti-Western stereotypes, stories, myths, rumors, etc. And when the West does do something dumb or bad it's just confirmation of all the accusations that really are crazy to the type of people who wind up becoming terrorists.
The dictators/military did quite well surprising the Islamist's until the US/the West decides that supporting islamic rebels would be a great solution to make these countries love the West.
|
On November 14 2015 14:35 Glowsphere wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 14:31 zlefin wrote:On November 14 2015 14:19 Glowsphere wrote:On November 14 2015 14:15 zlefin wrote:On November 14 2015 14:13 Glowsphere wrote:
Can anyone think up similar instances of attacks like this in history that were successfully ended? What tactics have been successful in the past? These may seem like novel events to us, but surely similar patterns have occurred throughout human history. I feel the answers must lie there. Looking for something constructive rather than shock, anger and grief... do you mean of the individual attacks themselves being thwarted most effectively, or the pattern of terroristic attacks being ended? or did you mean something else by your question? I need to understand your question better to answer it. I mean the larger pattern... just stopping individual instances I think does little to stem the flow. I suppose the root causes of the attacks must be determined to find historical analogues, thus all the fighting in this thread. But maybe if we look broadly enough, at least to begin with... well, it depends what you mean by "pattern" then. The terrorism in the UK/ireland situation has been stopped, I don't know much about how that peace process went. is that what you're looking for? Yes examples like that I suppose, and what strategies have failed too. I wish I were more well versed in history to provide some starting points.
I'm a bit late but look up the FLQ in Canada. I don't like Trudeau (the father) but he lead the country very well under that crisis.
|
On November 14 2015 15:30 Yuljan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 15:02 DeepElemBlues wrote:
What's worked in the past has been completely overwhelming the guerrilla force which usually takes a while and involves killing lots of people (most of whom had nothing to do with the guerrillas), like the Soviets in the Ukraine in the 1920s (and again after WW2), or getting the locals on your side so they inform on the guerrillas to you and don't give them supplies or shelter. The guerrillas show up and want food and to stay the night and the village people tell them to screw off and start shooting or come running for you. They give up (or you give up) and a political accommodation is reached.
It's a global guerrilla force that is attacking the West and just about everybody else. The locals supporting them could be anything, from a youtube channel with radical videos turning young men nutso, to a mosque controlled by radicals turning young men nutso, to a Saudi noble pumping millions into radical schools or giving loads of cash to a contact knowing it will be used for terrorism, to a Pakistani intelligence agent running money and guns to a Taliban faction, to an entire government like Iran with Hezbollah, to a Western-"friendly" government that dumps huge amounts of anti-semitic and anti-western propaganda into the national media and political and popular and religious culture to keep people distracted from how crappy their government is (which happens to varying degrees in almost all Islamic countries).
Any strategy against this kind of ideology - basically, they say that there was a glory age wherein "true" Islam was practiced that has been strayed from and the situation is so bad we have to kill the Westerners and Jews and traitors that made it that way, or that those people are preventing "true" Islam from spreading its glorious bounty over Muslim countries/the world - has to defeat a lot of misinformation that people believe that makes them receptive to the guy who says kill all these people and things will be better in the first place. The common people in a lot of Muslim countries have been subjected to decades of indoctrination intended to make them suspicious and hateful of foreigners and heretics and alleged threats to their religion. It wasn't Nasser's or Egypt's or anybody Arab or Muslim's fault that Israel kicked his butt twice in 1956 or 1967, it was those sneaky Jews and their American backers and it wasn't a fair fight. The West has no morals and wants to destroy the morals of our Islamic culture to make money because they're controlled by greedy Jews and are quite greedy and lacking in morals themselves anyway. Not all Arab or Muslim countries have that kind of stuff occupying a large part of their culture but a lot do and have for a long time. Kind of makes it easy to recruit for terrorism which the dictators were too short-sighted to see, or to see that the terrorists would aim at them too.
It's going to take a lot of effort and a long time to reverse the attitudes about foreigners and particularly Westerners that have been reinforced by widespread and prolonged circulation of anti-Western stereotypes, stories, myths, rumors, etc. And when the West does do something dumb or bad it's just confirmation of all the accusations that really are crazy to the type of people who wind up becoming terrorists. The dictators/military did quite well surpressing the Islamists until the US/the West decides that supporting islamic rebels would be a great solution to make these countries love the West.
|
United States43620 Posts
On November 14 2015 15:30 Yuljan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2015 15:02 DeepElemBlues wrote:
What's worked in the past has been completely overwhelming the guerrilla force which usually takes a while and involves killing lots of people (most of whom had nothing to do with the guerrillas), like the Soviets in the Ukraine in the 1920s (and again after WW2), or getting the locals on your side so they inform on the guerrillas to you and don't give them supplies or shelter. The guerrillas show up and want food and to stay the night and the village people tell them to screw off and start shooting or come running for you. They give up (or you give up) and a political accommodation is reached.
It's a global guerrilla force that is attacking the West and just about everybody else. The locals supporting them could be anything, from a youtube channel with radical videos turning young men nutso, to a mosque controlled by radicals turning young men nutso, to a Saudi noble pumping millions into radical schools or giving loads of cash to a contact knowing it will be used for terrorism, to a Pakistani intelligence agent running money and guns to a Taliban faction, to an entire government like Iran with Hezbollah, to a Western-"friendly" government that dumps huge amounts of anti-semitic and anti-western propaganda into the national media and political and popular and religious culture to keep people distracted from how crappy their government is (which happens to varying degrees in almost all Islamic countries).
Any strategy against this kind of ideology - basically, they say that there was a glory age wherein "true" Islam was practiced that has been strayed from and the situation is so bad we have to kill the Westerners and Jews and traitors that made it that way, or that those people are preventing "true" Islam from spreading its glorious bounty over Muslim countries/the world - has to defeat a lot of misinformation that people believe that makes them receptive to the guy who says kill all these people and things will be better in the first place. The common people in a lot of Muslim countries have been subjected to decades of indoctrination intended to make them suspicious and hateful of foreigners and heretics and alleged threats to their religion. It wasn't Nasser's or Egypt's or anybody Arab or Muslim's fault that Israel kicked his butt twice in 1956 or 1967, it was those sneaky Jews and their American backers and it wasn't a fair fight. The West has no morals and wants to destroy the morals of our Islamic culture to make money because they're controlled by greedy Jews and are quite greedy and lacking in morals themselves anyway. Not all Arab or Muslim countries have that kind of stuff occupying a large part of their culture but a lot do and have for a long time. Kind of makes it easy to recruit for terrorism which the dictators were too short-sighted to see, or to see that the terrorists would aim at them too.
It's going to take a lot of effort and a long time to reverse the attitudes about foreigners and particularly Westerners that have been reinforced by widespread and prolonged circulation of anti-Western stereotypes, stories, myths, rumors, etc. And when the West does do something dumb or bad it's just confirmation of all the accusations that really are crazy to the type of people who wind up becoming terrorists. The dictators/military did quite well surprising the Islamist's until the US/the West decides that supporting islamic rebels would be a great solution to make these countries love the West.
This is backwards. We supported the dictators while they could discreetly keep their shit together because it wasn't too embarrassing. We didn't create the rebels to depose the dictators. The rebels happened as part of a broader cultural and demographic issue. It's just once the rebels happened we couldn't openly support the people gunning them down so we went with plan B, arm the rebels, wait for them to become the new dictator, do business with them.
The west didn't support dictatorships for decades only to change their minds. We supported anyone who could discreetly keep the population under control while selling us natural resources and the scale of the Arab Spring was beyond our dictators so we decided to try and get some new ones.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
