International Events : How I learnt to stop worrying and love the-

[House Balstroko]

14 hours ago, ljkeane said:

Indeed. From a realpolitik perspective of the US regional allies Saudi Arabia is obviously the most significant and I’d argue Egypt, Turkey and the UAE are more useful for US interests than Israel. The US is probably harming its own interests in the region with its support for Israel.

It’s kind of odd that supporting Israel no matter what has become such a central feature of US foreign policy. It really wasn’t the case until the 80s, maybe the 90s?

ETA: Thinking about it, it was definitely the late 90s. It really wasn’t a notable thing for the US to vote in favour of Security Council resolutions critical of Israel before then.

Perhaps not as much as one might be inclined to believe. There’s been a gradual normalisation of ties between various Arab countries and Israel. That’s because many Arab governments want little to do with Palestinians, as a result of various actions committed in the past.
 

-Jordan had its king assassinated

- Lebanon was plunged into a civil war

- Egypt wants to distance itself from the Muslim Brotherhood 

Since the 1979 revolution, Iran has been a clerical theocracy, whose goal is to export its revolution to the Islamic world. This poses a direct threat to absolute monarchies like those of Saudi Arabia and the UAE. They see an alliance with Israel and by extension the West as strategic. 

[Zorral]

I don't know about you all, but this farmer's daughter feels heartbreak looking through the photos here of what were fertile, carefully tended fields, with the variety of food crops they grew, deliberately turned into ash and mud.

Israel’s offensive is destroying Gaza’s ability to grow its own food
By Nilo Tabrizy, Imogen Piper and Miriam Berger

Northern Gaza is in ‘full-blown famine,’ World Food Program leader says

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/interactive/2024/gaza-israel-agriculture-food-fisheries/?

~~~~~~~~~~~

10 hours ago, House Balstroko said:

by extension the West as strategic. 

That is the point -- Israel, by its ruling coalitions have made that choice.  Things change.  Which seems to be something the ruling coalition and its supporters are increasingly incapable of recognizing, i.e. it is 2024, not 1979.  So much has changed since then including those who rule Israel.  Also so much evil has happened since then by the ruling coalition's own choice.  And the global communications networks know it.
 

[Werthead]

It looks like there is momentum behind the latest round of discussions. Hamas is pushing for the proposed ceasefire to be permanent and it looks like the US, Egypt, Jordan and others are backing that idea. Israel is resistant, still planning its operation in Rafah, but its opposition may be wilting in the face of international pressure.

[Zorral]

1 hour ago, Werthead said:

looks like the US, Egypt, Jordan and others are backing that idea.

Washington (AFP) – US President Joe Biden will host Jordan's King Abdullah II next week, the White House said Friday, as negotiations continue in the Middle East for a ceasefire in Gaza.
Agence France-Presse

https://www.rawstory.com/biden-to-host-jordan-s-king-next-week-amid-gaza-talks/

[Werthead]

8 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Washington (AFP) – US President Joe Biden will host Jordan's King Abdullah II next week, the White House said Friday, as negotiations continue in the Middle East for a ceasefire in Gaza.
Agence France-Presse

https://www.rawstory.com/biden-to-host-jordan-s-king-next-week-amid-gaza-talks/

Jordan seems to be emerging from this crisis with some serious clout. It criticised the hell out of Hamas for its initial attack, has been fiercely critical of Israel's response, but then jumped in to defend Israel successfully and then told Iran to go fuck itself when Iran threatened it (remarkable given the rather severe power disparity between the two countries). I get the impression that Jordan has impressed its Arab allies, Israel and the west, whilst also not deviating on its core principle of opposition to the killing of innocents.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

On 5/1/2024 at 10:32 AM, TheLastWolf said:

Why is it that belligerence of autocracies is the only factor considered in conflicts? It is not as if the replying 'democracies' are wholly innocent in choosing a plan of action (usually stupid but profitable). 

So… you buy the line that the US provoked the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

On 5/1/2024 at 10:40 AM, Conflicting Thought said:

I would go further and say that western democracies are a major force driving conflicts, often getting away with things that "shtihole" countries could never.

So… you also buy the Kremlin’s line that the US somehow provoked them into invading Ukraine?

[Mudguard]

3 hours ago, Werthead said:

It looks like there is momentum behind the latest round of discussions. Hamas is pushing for the proposed ceasefire to be permanent and it looks like the US, Egypt, Jordan and others are backing that idea. Israel is resistant, still planning its operation in Rafah, but its opposition may be wilting in the face of international pressure.

I don't see anything in that article, which is essentially the same as all the others I've read recently, that suggests that the US is backing a permanent ceasefire.  All I see is that the US has stated that Hamas should accept the last proposal from Israel, which is a trade of all hostages for a temporary ceasefire.  The only thing the US has asked Israel to do is to protect/evacuate the civilians in Rafah before they commence major operations in Rafah.

I also don't see anything that suggests that Netanyahu is considering accepting a permanent ceasefire.  Acceptance of a permanent ceasefire would mean the end of his coalition, new elections, and the early end of his reign as prime minister.

[TheLastWolf]

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

So… you buy the line that the US provoked the Russian invasion of Ukraine?

I meant nothing but what I said. Go read it again before applying twisted reductionism.

[kissdbyfire]

22 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

I also don't see anything that suggests that Netanyahu is considering accepting a permanent ceasefire.  Acceptance of a permanent ceasefire would mean the end of his coalition, new elections, and the early end of his reign as prime minister.

Same here. Unless we infer from “we will go into Rafah with or without a ceasefire” (paraphrasing) that he’s at least admitting the possibility of a ceasefire. Grasping at straws, but it’s all I’ve got.

Edited May 5 by kissdbyfire

[DMC]

29 minutes ago, Mudguard said:

and the early end of his reign as prime minister.

Well, technicalities aside, I don’t think many would refer to it as an early end.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

2 hours ago, TheLastWolf said:

I meant nothing but what I said. Go read it again before applying twisted reductionism.

So… the US and Ukraine bear no responsibility at all for Russian aggression?  Correct?

[TheLastWolf]

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

1 hour ago, TheLastWolf said:

Then… elaborate.  I know it isn’t binary.  Unpack your statement and explain how you believe the US bears some degree of responsibility.  

[TheLastWolf]

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Then… elaborate.  I know it isn’t binary.  Unpack your statement and explain how you believe the US bears some degree of responsibility.  

If its Ukraine specific, that's a can of worms I'm sure already opened many times in this board. But what we were generally talking about, "Uncle Sam meddling in half the world's affairs, many of which ended disastrously for a large section" doesn't warrant repetitive explanation. Read history man. I'm tired of my inability to do anything other than just jot down transgressions. If you know, you know. Nothing I say is going to make a difference and I'll save myself the effort. It's a simple enough search in the unlikely case you don't already know of multitudes of troublesome US butting-ins. 

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

3 hours ago, TheLastWolf said:

If its Ukraine specific, that's a can of worms I'm sure already opened many times in this board. But what we were generally talking about, "Uncle Sam meddling in half the world's affairs, many of which ended disastrously for a large section" doesn't warrant repetitive explanation. Read history man. I'm tired of my inability to do anything other than just jot down transgressions. If you know, you know. Nothing I say is going to make a difference and I'll save myself the effort. It's a simple enough search in the unlikely case you don't already know of multitudes of troublesome US butting-ins. 

The US has “butted in” many times all over the world.  This is not news.  I’m asking specifically about Ukraine.  Or… is Ukraine the exception to the rule you are stating?

[TheLastWolf]

6 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

The US has “butted in” many times all over the world.  This is not news.  I’m asking specifically about Ukraine.  Or… is Ukraine the exception to the rule you are stating?

I wasn't even talking about Ukraine. It was you who pulled it out of your hat. I started off tangentially from Gaza and now-

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

37 minutes ago, TheLastWolf said:

I wasn't even talking about Ukraine. It was you who pulled it out of your hat. I started off tangentially from Gaza and now-

You are correct… because your orginal statement seemed to apply to Ukraine as well.  Are you saying your original statement doesn’t apply to Ukraine and that the US bears no responsibility for Russian aggression?  
 

In my earnest opinion the Russian claims of provocation are absolute bunk.  They always have been and are based in a Russian Revaunchist Imperialism that some… Irish MEPs Clare Daly and Mick Wallace for example… refuse to acknowledge and actively seek to offer apologia for.

[TheLastWolf]

4 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

In my earnest opinion the Russian claims of provocation are absolute bunk. 

But American policy to the war had a lot of questionable choices.

[Jace, Extat]

5 minutes ago, TheLastWolf said:

But American policy to the war had a lot of questionable choices.

What does this mean? Speak!