|
Turkey is a NATO member who is also a JSF partner. They're planning to buy a lot of Grover's favorite airplane, a commitment that got them the very coveted spot of being the engine maintenance hub for the whole Europe+MENA region. But that was before Erdogan discovered that actually, he likes Moscow, Beijing and Tehran more than Washington. And notably he's buying a Russian air defense system. So now people in the US are getting upset about the whole Turkey being a JSF partner deal. Here comes the threats: https://www.defensenews.com/digital...into-nato-tech/ quote:further action may be forthcoming that could affect the country’s acquisition or operation of the F-35, a top Air Force official said Wednesday. Pundits are bringing some public pressure on the topic, too. http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/i...article/2641027 So Turkey retaliates to blackmail with more blackmail. http://www.yenisafak.com/en/news/turkey-may-remove-us-radar-if-f-35s-not-delivered-on-schedule-2808663 quote:In retaliation to the American blackmail, Ankara may take measures of its own in response, atop of which is the possible dismantling of the powerful Malatya- Kürecik AN-TPY-2 radar that was set up by the U.S. in 2012.
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 15:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 18:03 |
|
|
Count Roland posted:Is there still an IS enclave bordering the Golan Heights? Yup. They also still hold some territory in Damascus as far as I remember.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 15:24
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:So Turkey retaliates to blackmail with more blackmail. Those sorts of escalating threats make Turkey leaving NATO seem a lot more plausible than it seemed even a year ago, and certainly than it seemed just a few years ago after Turkey shot down a Russian plane. I supported using the YPG as proxies against ISIS, but the way it's contributed a lot to a growing alliance between Turkey and Russia is obviously less than ideal, and this is where having some sort of exit strategy from Syria so we can try to reset our relations with an important country (even if it's ruled by a lovely dictator) might be helpful. I don't think Erdogan was ever going to be the dependable ally that Turkey's military dominated governments were, but giving him a shove into permanently joining the Russian camp seems unwise. If we work out some kind of negotiated framework between the SDF and Russia/Assad, the YPG stops being a problem for Turkish-American relations and either Turkey finds a way to live with the new status quo or it becomes a problem for Turkish-Russian relations. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 15:58 on Nov 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 15:55
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Those sorts of escalating threats make Turkey leaving NATO seem a lot more plausible than it seemed even a year ago, and certainly than it seemed just a few years ago after Turkey shot down a Russian plane. I supported using the YPG as proxies against ISIS, but the way it's contributed a lot to a growing alliance between Turkey and Russia is obviously less than ideal, and this is where having some sort of exit strategy from Syria so we can try to reset our relations with an important country (even if it's ruled by a lovely dictator) might be helpful. I don't think Erdogan was ever going to be the dependable ally that Turkey's military dominated governments were, but giving him a shove into permanently joining the Russian camp seems unwise. If we work out some kind of negotiated framework between the SDF and Russia/Assad, the YPG stops being a problem for Turkish-American relations and either Turkey finds a way to live with the new status quo or it becomes a problem for Turkish-Russian relations. Experience so far has shown that appeasing Erdogan only gives him all the wrong ideas. I am also convinced that Putin secretly hates Erdogan and will happily throw him under the bus the moment a good opportunity comes along.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 16:54
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Those sorts of escalating threats make Turkey leaving NATO seem a lot more plausible than it seemed even a year ago, and certainly than it seemed just a few years ago after Turkey shot down a Russian plane. I supported using the YPG as proxies against ISIS, but the way it's contributed a lot to a growing alliance between Turkey and Russia is obviously less than ideal, and this is where having some sort of exit strategy from Syria so we can try to reset our relations with an important country (even if it's ruled by a lovely dictator) might be helpful. I don't think Erdogan was ever going to be the dependable ally that Turkey's military dominated governments were, but giving him a shove into permanently joining the Russian camp seems unwise. If we work out some kind of negotiated framework between the SDF and Russia/Assad, the YPG stops being a problem for Turkish-American relations and either Turkey finds a way to live with the new status quo or it becomes a problem for Turkish-Russian relations. I called it well over a year ago that Erdogan was going to move Turkey out of the Western camp and towards Russia because they won't give him any grief over his dictatorial style and maneuvering Turkey away from the West is enough of a reward for Iran and Russia. He is an incompetent and unreliable partner who has no intention of leaving office before he dies and is furious over his failure to become a regional power broker and, in no small part, he blames the United States. Both for failing to act decisively against Assad and acting decisively against ISIS through the Kurds. Erdogan's radical swings in his position are enough evidence of that fact to say nothing of how he turned Turkey into the closest thing ISIS had to a sponsor and ally. I agree with you that there is a narrow needle that we need to thread regarding the SDF, Syria and Turkey and hopefully the deescalates the situation but, even if that were to occur, I still see Turkey turning towards Moscow and Tehran. There is just too much momentum and little enough reason to stay with the West, especially with the weakened and chaotic state that is engulfing both the United States as well as the European Union. This is not necessarily a bad thing if it is a necessary step towards removing our presence from the region and allowing the powers to sort out their own affairs.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
Ikasuhito posted:Yup. They also still hold some territory in Damascus as far as I remember. How is the continued existence of this enclave justified? Bordering both Jordan and Israel gives ample opportunity to strike at them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 18:43
|
|
|
Brother Friendship posted:This is not necessarily a bad thing if it is a necessary step towards removing our presence from the region and allowing the powers to sort out their own affairs. Middle East sorting out their own affairs. I believe it when I see it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 19:25
|
|
|
It'd help if we didn't keep prodding at things every few years.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 19:45
|
|
|
I think a part of me seriously doubts there will ever be a permanent break with Turkey, the Bosphorus is simply too strategic as it has always been and "turning" Turkey would mean a major shift in the balance of power in the region. That said, I do think we need to admit at a certain point that Russia and China are both more than regional powers and are making major moves outside their "home" regions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 19:52
|
|
|
To me, Russia has always wanted the Bosphorous straits. Like...since the last several centuries, if not a millenia. So Erdogan chumming up with Putin, to me, looks like his one-way ticket to a royal backstab in the long-term, if not the short-term, precisely because of how unreliable he has proven to be and how Russia would immediately start working on somehow nixing him from the picture altogether to make things more predictable. I suppose it is possible his ego is so bloated that he doesn't see it coming and legitimately thinks he can be Russia's buddy, but I'd still be amazed if he completely ignores that very real possibility in the future, if he keeps distancing himself from NATO and/or Europe. CrazyLoon fucked around with this message at 20:16 on Nov 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
CrazyLoon posted:To me, Russia has always wanted the Bosphorous straits. Like...since the last several centuries, if not a millenia. So Erdogan chumming up with Putin, to me, looks like his one-way ticket to a royal backstab in the long-term, if not the short-term, precisely because of how unreliable he has proven to be and how Russia would immediately start working on somehow nixing him from the picture altogether to make things more predictable. Turkey's a regional power, not just a scrub tier country Russia could easily subvert if they left NATO. They'd always have plenty of options to realign back to the West if they needed to, and would be impossible to absorb in any case (they have over half the population of Russia, higher GDP per capita (!) and a different religion), so I don't think they have anything to worry about. I mean Iran has been a problem for the US since 1979 and we've never done anything about them, and Turkey's more powerful than Iran, while Russia is less powerful than the US. Just having Turkey as an ally effectively gives Russia what they've always wanted in a strategic sense, at least in the modern version in which you can't just conquer countries because you feel like it. Even their interventions in Georgia and Ukraine have been pretty limited by historic standards, and only stand out now because Europe is otherwise at peace. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 20:43 on Nov 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 20:23
|
|
|
A good piece here looking at what happens next with accountability around Syrian chemical weapon use (not much for now): http://www.irinnews.org/analysis/2017/11/20/russia-has-finished-un-s-syria-chemical-attack-probe-what-now
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
More than 50,000 Yemeni children expected to die by the end of the year.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 22:50
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Turkey's a regional power, not just a scrub tier country Russia could easily subvert if they left NATO. They'd always have plenty of options to realign back to the West if they needed to, and would be impossible to absorb in any case (they have over half the population of Russia, higher GDP per capita (!) and a different religion), so I don't think they have anything to worry about. I mean Iran has been a problem for the US since 1979 and we've never done anything about them, and Turkey's more powerful than Iran, while Russia is less powerful than the US. When was the last time Turkey and Russia were on the same side? Has it ever actually happened before? It's sort of morbidly fascinating that while this massive shift in alignment is occuring, we also have Saudi Arabia flailing about in Yemen and Qatar and Lebanon and making enemies of numerous wealthy, well-connected men. It's unbelievable how unstable everything has become over the last decade.
|
|
#
?
Nov 20, 2017 23:49
|
|
|
oh good
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
Tree Bucket posted:When was the last time Turkey and Russia were on the same side? Has it ever actually happened before? I think Russia occasionally helped the Ottomans* during the 18th/19th century, but only to keep Austria-Hungary from growing too powerful. Simultaneously Russia tried to take over as much Ottoman lands as they could so it was more "I'll help you defend this from the Austrian so I can take it for myself later". *I'm aware that the Ottoman empire and modern-day Turkey aren't the same, but since no-one's told Erdogan I feel it's worth mentioning. double nine fucked around with this message at 00:34 on Nov 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
New suggested thread title: Middle East Thread of Eternal Despair - Who's the Suze?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
Tree Bucket posted:When was the last time Turkey and Russia were on the same side? Has it ever actually happened before? Poland getting obliterated by an Austria-Russia-Prussia triple team was a pretty good Ottoman use of a monkey's paw. also the Seljuks and Russians both opposed the Mongols, one with more success than the other
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 01:03
|
|
|
coathat posted:More than 50,000 Yemeni children expected to die by the end of the year. At this point I can't imagine that Saudi Arabia's aim is anything less than a complete famine along the lines of those seen in the 18th and 19th century throughout India and Asia. We're talking about the complete collapse of society and there is nothing that the United States is going to do about it, especially with Trump! in charge. I'm not sure if any famine from the 20th or 21st century will compare to it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 01:56
|
|
|
Brother Friendship posted:At this point I can't imagine that Saudi Arabia's aim is anything less than a complete famine along the lines of those seen in the 18th and 19th century throughout India and Asia. We're talking about the complete collapse of society and there is nothing that the United States is going to do about it, especially with Trump! in charge. I'm not sure if any famine from the 20th or 21st century will compare to it. i mean there's the biafran famine from 1968-70. millions dead. that's actually a great comparison because britain sent massive amounts of arms to the nigerian army, helping their blockade starve the igbo. much like the US is doing with saudi arabia now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 02:35
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Turkey's a regional power, not just a scrub tier country Russia could easily subvert if they left NATO. They'd always have plenty of options to realign back to the West if they needed to, and would be impossible to absorb in any case (they have over half the population of Russia, higher GDP per capita (!) and a different religion), so I don't think they have anything to worry about. I mean Iran has been a problem for the US since 1979 and we've never done anything about them, and Turkey's more powerful than Iran, while Russia is less powerful than the US. I do not believe that Turkey will not end up leaving NATO anytime soon. Turkey's position with respect to all of its neighbors is precarious, and it would be especially dangerous to the occupation of Northern Cyprus and Aegean disputes. Turkey with no NATO behind it would have to face off against Greece, which could be backed by the rest of the organization this time. That being said, the Reza Zarrab investigation is really causing the AKP to poo poo itself, and seems to me that it will have major impact. The economy's already poo poo, and sanctions/large penalties would surely do even more damage. It doesn't help it when Turkey does stuff like opening an investigation into former prosecutor on the case Preet Bharara. It's funny how little Turkey will do for some of its citizens jailed abroad indefinitely, but suddenly the manchild Zarrab, an Iranian national who got citizenship just a few years ago, must be protected at all costs. I think it's possible that Turkey might try to negotiate with the U.S. on Zarrab by offering military support for any adventures that might happen in the next few years, cause money is extremely tight right now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
What even is the deal, really, with the ongoing Northern Cyprus thing anyway? Is Turkey really benefiting from that anymore?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 05:51
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DavidKenner/status/932562722834788352 So what's the current standings? Saudi Arabia and Israel, probably back with US arms and support against Qatar, Lebanon, and Yemen and all backed by Iran? I guess Palestine might get involved too?
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 08:31
|
|
|
I have a hard time believing Jordan would just sit a top-billing regional war out. I'd assume that they'd be on the Israel/Saudi side though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 08:34
|
|
|
coathat posted:More than 50,000 Yemeni children expected to die by the end of the year. That's many times more than the entire death toll of the Yemen war up to this point, so nah. I tend to think it's better to err on the side of the sensational rather than the dismissive when it comes to impending human rights disasters, but the problem with that is that someone will eventually hold up reports like this one that end up being wrong in numbers as evidence of biased reporting, and use it to argue that all news about the humanitarian situation in Yemen is sensationalized. That's what happened in Aleppo.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 10:34
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:That's many times more than the entire death toll of the Yemen war up to this point, so nah. I tend to think it's better to err on the side of the sensational rather than the dismissive when it comes to impending human rights disasters, but the problem with that is that someone will eventually hold up reports like this one that end up being wrong in numbers as evidence of biased reporting, and use it to argue that all news about the humanitarian situation in Yemen is sensationalized. That's what happened in Aleppo. Even as someone who's been frustrated with US complicity in the devastation in Yemen being ignored by the media, it does seem like we've been reading headlines about impending starvation for Yemen for well over a year now. I do believe the situation continues to worsen, so maybe people will suddenly fall over the line between near starvation into actually starving to death, and more credible sources seem to be speaking up about a famine this time, but yeah some caution is warranted in assumptions about the death toll. Of course getting lulled into complacency is how a ton of people could end up dying while nobody pays attention, but the sensational headlines over the last year don't seem to have really made anyone care anyway, so  .
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 10:58
|
|
|
Well, it's much easier to speculate than confirm in war zones. It can take a decade or two post war to start getting reliable civilian mortality numbers and even then you have to figure out how to compare them with the "baseline" numbers for famine and disease. Since it's never going to be possible to know exactly how bad things will get, erring on the side of not doing things that could cause humanitarian disasters is probably a good idea.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 13:20
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:That's many times more than the entire death toll of the Yemen war up to this point, so nah. I tend to think it's better to err on the side of the sensational rather than the dismissive when it comes to impending human rights disasters, but the problem with that is that someone will eventually hold up reports like this one that end up being wrong in numbers as evidence of biased reporting, and use it to argue that all news about the humanitarian situation in Yemen is sensationalized. That's what happened in Aleppo. This is a loving stupid argument, holy poo poo dude. 50,000 Yemeni children are dying due to acute malnutrition and 7m people are in a famine, but you don’t think people will die when food imports are completely blockaded? ‘Because only 16,000 Yemeni civilians have been murdered so far, completely shutting down all food imports wont kill tens of thousands of people that are already on the brink of starvation’ is such a farcical argument that I hope for your sake you’re just being purposely disingenuous and you’re not actually this retarded.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 13:35
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:This is a loving stupid argument, holy poo poo dude. No, its a good point he's making. Yemen has been on the "brink" for years now. And indeed the situation there is terrible. But 50 000 is a predicted number. And given how little information is available from inside Yemen, such predictions aren't really worth much. I'd love to see more coverage of Yemen, and most certainly more pressure on those conducting the blockade/invasion. Making up numbers is not a good tactic for this though.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 14:46
|
|
|
Lets not make predictions and in fact just kill more. I’m sure the 600000 with cholera will be doing fine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:38
|
|
|
Saying the numbers are made up isn't fair, but they should be taken with a grain of salt if for no other reason than because people seem to be able to find a way to survive in far worse conditions than we tend to expect. The death toll falling short of estimates shouldn't discredit people trying to point out that a real crisis exists in the country, and that crisis is being worsened with US assistance, but sensational headlines predicting absolute catastrophe that fails to materialize do tend to foster a sense of complacency going forward. The reality is that nobody gives a poo poo anyway since there's no significant interest group in the US that's pushed back against our role in that pointlessly gruesome conflict, so people trying to draw attention to the crisis are in a tough spot, especially because underestimating the scope of a crisis also has consequences.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 15:48
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Saying the numbers are made up isn't fair, but they should be taken with a grain of salt if for no other reason than because people seem to be able to find a way to survive in far worse conditions than we tend to expect. The death toll falling short of estimates shouldn't discredit people trying to point out that a real crisis exists in the country, and that crisis is being worsened with US assistance, but sensational headlines predicting absolute catastrophe that fails to materialize do tend to foster a sense of complacency going forward. The reality is that nobody gives a poo poo anyway since there's no significant interest group in the US that's pushed back against our role in that pointlessly gruesome conflict, so people trying to draw attention to the crisis are in a tough spot, especially because underestimating the scope of a crisis also has consequences. Calculating deaths from famines is notoriously difficult and you may indeed have thousands of people still alive but may soon die from secondary infections. that may or may not show up in statistics. By all, accounts the famine in Yemen is massive and the devastation is already happening. The 50,000 number was indicated by an NGO, and we may never actually know that number comes to fruition or not. That said, in other historical circumstances (India, Ukraine) very rarely are verified deaths recorded, but rather some estimate is done on total causalities. In the end, the verified deaths may be "surprisingly low" but in reality, the costs may be much higher than that. Count Roland posted:No, its a good point he's making. The NGO that came out with the numbers has workers in Yemen, and those numbers are only referring to children, not the total causalities. I think you need to provide some evidence that the "numbers are made up." Btw, 130 children dying a day is the current baseline estimate. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 16:45 on Nov 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Even as someone who's been frustrated with US complicity in the devastation in Yemen being ignored by the media, it does seem like we've been reading headlines about impending starvation for Yemen for well over a year now. I do believe the situation continues to worsen, so maybe people will suddenly fall over the line between near starvation into actually starving to death, and more credible sources seem to be speaking up about a famine this time, but yeah some caution is warranted in assumptions about the death toll. Of course getting lulled into complacency is how a ton of people could end up dying while nobody pays attention, but the sensational headlines over the last year don't seem to have really made anyone care anyway, so There's a lot of things that play into it. A lack of on the ground English reporting with access to the victims, lots of bullshit floating around, and few journalists with the knowledge to sort out the facts from the bullshit. I remember when I first started researching trying to find accounts from your every day Syrian activist, it was really easy. In Yemen, it's been 10 times harder. The most prominent one was Hisham al-Omeisy, and now he's gone, so I barely know anyone. There's also a lack of footage, which doesn't help create exposure. So what you're left with is a handful of humanitarian NGO's and the combatants themselves to give accounts. The NGO's do a decent job, but at the end of the day, they are advocates making emotional appeals, not journalists trying to inform. It's not a big deal for them to overstate a crisis. All that matters is whether they are able to make an impact on the crisis by bringing it into the public conscience and/or obtaining and providing aid. That's their purpose. A year or so ago, there were reports that x hundred thousand people under Houthi siege in Taiz didn't have any access to aid, and would begin to die very soon. The UN even got involved in calling for action. At the end, aid was allowed to go through, and the humanitarian situation I guess improved enough so that all those people didn't end up dying. It's a situation where I would say the system worked, but I think for more casual followers, what they would've seen is "100,000 people are going to die soon, 100,000 people are going to die soon," then a year passed and relatively speaking, nothing happened. Or, they may just think that those hundred thousand people did die, and have a really warped perspective on Yemen. There's also another thing I believe is happening, where western journalists simply don't know how to read through the lines of the reports from actors in Yemen. I bet at some point, there's been a Saudi-backed article that talked up some horrific Houthi siege and humanitarian disaster, then a Westerner stumbled across it and thought god, this is horrible, and this whole situation is Saudi Arabia's fault. Then he writes an article about how KSA is creating this humanitarian disaster, and by the time we see it, what the hell are even supposed to do with it. It's just layers of bullshit at that point. The reporting on the subject just seems really weak and the truth is hard to pick out. I'd bet money the UN counter is still going to be well below 10,000 total civilian deaths by the end of the year though, just based on the trends. For people to start dying en masse now would be a huge aberration that would require a massive change imo. Here's hoping at least.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 17:31
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Calculating deaths from famines is notoriously difficult and you may indeed have thousands of people still alive but may soon die from secondary infections. that may or may not show up in statistics. By all, accounts the famine in Yemen is massive and the devastation is already happening. I mean they're made up in that they're predictions, which the actual result may or may not bear any resemblance too. Its arguing semantics I know, but when involving numbers I want to be sure about them.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 18:59
|
|
|
coathat posted:Lets not make predictions and in fact just kill more. I’m sure the 600000 with cholera will be doing fine.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 19:24
|
|
|
Volkerball posted:There's a lot of things that play into it. A lack of on the ground English reporting with access to the victims, lots of bullshit floating around, and few journalists with the knowledge to sort out the facts from the bullshit. I remember when I first started researching trying to find accounts from your every day Syrian activist, it was really easy. In Yemen, it's been 10 times harder. The most prominent one was Hisham al-Omeisy, and now he's gone, so I barely know anyone. There's also a lack of footage, which doesn't help create exposure. So what you're left with is a handful of humanitarian NGO's and the combatants themselves to give accounts. The NGO's do a decent job, but at the end of the day, they are advocates making emotional appeals, not journalists trying to inform. It's not a big deal for them to overstate a crisis. All that matters is whether they are able to make an impact on the crisis by bringing it into the public conscience and/or obtaining and providing aid. That's their purpose. This, but for all the fighting in MENA since 2001 and not just in Yemen post-2015.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
The nearly instantaneous code-switching between Reasonable and Nuanced Discourse and histrionic performative breast-tearing--and please don't think I'm singling anyone out here, because its utterly endemic to every single side in online argues especially relating to the SCW--is fascinating to me because in each very slightly different particular instance I can't clock the degree to which it's merely bog-standard human scumminess and dishonesty in the name of servicing one's presupposed ideology, and that to which the individual has actually been made schizoid by sad news on the internet.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
Willie Tomg posted:The nearly instantaneous code-switching between Reasonable and Nuanced Discourse and histrionic performative breast-tearing--and please don't think I'm singling anyone out here, because its utterly endemic to every single side in online argues especially relating to the SCW--is fascinating to me because in each very slightly different particular instance I can't clock the degree to which it's merely bog-standard human scumminess and dishonesty in the name of servicing one's presupposed ideology, and that to which the individual has actually been made schizoid by sad news on the internet. To be honest, I think most people arguing have some type of "dog" in the fight even if they have never visited MENA once or know a single person from it. I think it is endemic of a broader struggle for power that is occurring across the world. Some people may just be caught up in the debate, but usually, they aren't the ones that are constantly there in the "trenches' so to speak. It really isn't a new thing of its own either, it just feels knew because 1. consumer access to the internet didn't exist during the Cold War (I am sure you could find some gems from Usenet), and 2. the post-Cold War order is starting to seriously slip.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 21:59
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:To be honest, I think most people arguing have some type of "dog" in the fight even if they have never visited MENA once or know a single person from it. I think it is endemic of a broader struggle for power that is occurring across the world. Some people may just be caught up in the debate, but usually, they aren't the ones that are constantly there in the "trenches' so to speak. I'd replace Cold with WW2 there. These are revolutionary times we live in.
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 22:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 18:03 |
|
|
Count Roland posted:I'd replace Cold with WW2 there. These are revolutionary times we live in. Yeah, what on earth is going on? Have things always been this mad, or are we just more aware of it? I keep getting the very distinct and very unpleasant sensation that we are living through History. There's a dreadful resonance in all those old stories of civilisations bickering about last century's fight while next century's disaster creeps up on them. (I need to stop reading the news for a while.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 21, 2017 23:28
|
|