Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Promoting Reform in the Middle East -or- Deceptive Imperialism

powerclown · 07-07-2004, 10:25 AM

Good points, rb.

I've heard it said before that blaming the problems of the Middle East on Israel is like blaming the problems of the United States on Rhode Island. The Arab world is sitting on huge quantities of valuable natural resources, and if they are poor, it's because they allow themselves to be run by tribal kleptocracies and be hobbled by medieval interpretations of their religious beliefs that prevent them from joining the modern world. As well, the governments of the Middle Eastern countries avoid scrutiny of their corruption and pillaging by blaming Israel and the US for all their problems.

It is a double-edged sword isn't it? Isolationism vs. Intervention. Im sure most know the arguments for and against both, so I won't rehash. Obviously because the world is so technolgically inter-related (Didn't Andrew Grove of Intel refer to this new technology as "Opening Pandora's Box", ie., as something evil for the world, and something he regretted introducing?) civilizations are inevitably going to clash.

So, if civilizations are going to clash, does that mean there must be a dominant and a submissive? Is there a way to get on so that both partners retain their dignity?

07-07-2004, 10:25 AM	#7 (permalink)
powerclown Junkie Location: Detroit, MI	Good points, rb. I've heard it said before that blaming the problems of the Middle East on Israel is like blaming the problems of the United States on Rhode Island. The Arab world is sitting on huge quantities of valuable natural resources, and if they are poor, it's because they allow themselves to be run by tribal kleptocracies and be hobbled by medieval interpretations of their religious beliefs that prevent them from joining the modern world. As well, the governments of the Middle Eastern countries avoid scrutiny of their corruption and pillaging by blaming Israel and the US for all their problems. It is a double-edged sword isn't it? Isolationism vs. Intervention. Im sure most know the arguments for and against both, so I won't rehash. Obviously because the world is so technolgically inter-related (Didn't Andrew Grove of Intel refer to this new technology as "Opening Pandora's Box", ie., as something evil for the world, and something he regretted introducing?) civilizations are inevitably going to clash. So, if civilizations are going to clash, does that mean there must be a dominant and a submissive? Is there a way to get on so that both partners retain their dignity? Last edited by powerclown; 07-07-2004 at 10:30 AM..