If you thought the courts were bad in your neck of the woods.....
 

http://www.iol.co.za/index.php?sf=86...3B252&set_id=1

There are a BUNCH of these stories on the links to the right of the page. When you read these it make me wonder what some people on the far left are thinking when they say we should try to understand why these sort of people hate us? Screw'em.

Re: If you thought the courts were bad in your neck of the woods.....
 

Indeed.

I heard an interesting POV on the radio the other day along those same lines.

People who are trying to understand the value systems of the east and west (especially those condemning the west) should look at the societies that each builds.

I think the rule is more like: "Screw 'em... Unless they have 10 billion barrels of oil. Then it's Kiss their Ass."1

Oh yeah, can't forget: "Screw 'em... Unless they have nukes - then send them money before Kissing their Ass."2



For those following along that's:
1 Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, etc
2 Pakistan

While your statement is grossly exaggerated, perhaps if we could drill where WE have the oil we wouldn’t need to do business with them.

The fact remains that until we start working on the root causes like poverty and gross lack of education in the Mid-East and elsewhere, you're going to continue to see women getting killed for committing adultery, men killed for being homosexual, children abandoned for having deformities, etc etc etc. Engaging these countries with increased aid to fight poverty and ignorance stops the potential terrorists, while at the same time using military and police aid to root out the current ones. This White House is doing a decent job at the latter problem, and a half-assed job at the former.

Yes free money had helped our poor in this country so much, I can't see how it would fail elsewhere.

How very clever. :rolleyes: If you weren't interested in discussing this topic, why even start it?

Do you think Nigeria would even what us to help them change their society?

" here is money, all you have to do is change your education, seperate your church and state, and drop your rule by Islamic law"

" O boy, sure, I thought you would never show us ignorant people how its done"


Come on, places like Nigeria THINK they doing the correct thing, and WE are wrong. Do you actually think they will accept our help? Sure they will accept our money, but to actually do something with it?

To play a certain pinball game for a moment:
Many civilized countries consider our use of the death penalty to be barbarous. Should they then adopt the attitude of "screw 'em" towards us? I find your solution overly simplistic, Ustwo.

So you suggest that we get involved with every nation that differs from us?

Actually, Nigeria has LOTS of oil but it had no government to speak of and was under the rule of pretty brutal dictators for the last upteen years untill 1999. Said dictators were insanely corrupt and set an example of corruption, ie corruption is a freaking massive problem in Nigeria. *comp gov class last year*

Making any arguments about the people and culture pretty moot, Ustwo and Endymon that was directed at you two.

*edit: but just incase ya don't believe me http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/...k/geos/ni.html

Now, I'm no international diplomacy expert, but here's a few thoughts:

2 options when it comes to money, the first being cold, hard cash, the second being trade agreements. These are FAR from the only two options we can dangle in order to provide incentive for change, others being military cooperation, improved world standing, etc.

Now, I could be wrong, remember, I'm no expert, but the way these agreements between nations work is that we demand something in exchange for our generosity. Stuff like shutting off government funding of the madrasahs that teach only the koran, building real schools, etc. Get the picture?

Now Bush has a chance to show the world that his speech at the UN wasn't the cynical piece of political grandstanding much of the world took it for, and to really put his money where his mouth is.

*edited to remove personal attack on Endymon32*

Sparhawk, this 5 minute google search is for you.


http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...6B14A7C20.html

http://quickstart.clari.net/qs_se/we....Rvoi_DNE.html
You know, just because its not a story on commondreams, truthout, or CNN doesn’t mean the US isn’t doing just what you think. Nigeria is an excellent example of this failing as well. Clinton did his best to give aid, with the understanding that Nigeria would reform some policies, even giving them waivers when they didn’t meet the goals, but instead they went the other way with it and now we get single mothers being stoned. Why do you assume the worst of the Bush administration without doing a little footwork on your own first?

I would also like to point out that the US sent earthquake relief to Iran w/o strings, to which the Iranian govt. basically said, thanks, but you still suck.

So Sparhawk, your kneejerk responses aren't helping your case.

Of course we work in our self interest. All nations do. Yes we have made mistakes. Some really big ones. But as a whole society, Americans are the most generous and giving you could with to find.

Lebell, how would you define "Screw 'em"? Kneejerk doesn't come to mind? :rolleyes:

Follows is an excerpt from an article entitled "Fighting Effective War Against Terrorism":

Here are some well thought out proposals on making sure 9/11 doesn't happen again:

I bolded what I especially wanted to highlight for you all.

And I'll bet that the court that sentenced this pair to death by stoning had a stone monument of the Koran on display in the
lobby. When courts are run by conservative non-secularists you get a perversion of justice.

avoiding the geo-political angle for a sec hereI know but stoning has to be a really bad way to die. I mean you can only protect your head for so long

<-----violently shuddering

I'm not trying to be a smart aleck, but I honestly didn't understand this post.

Re: If you thought the courts were bad in your neck of the woods.....
 

This is what we call Irony. (I, too, don't mean to be a smart aleck)

This isn't some sort of left-wing argument either. To defeat your enemy, you must first know and understand your enemy. I think some Eastern philosopher said that...

Re: Re: If you thought the courts were bad in your neck of the woods.....
 

No, its just a poor argument. There are people who gain by keeping these nations in the 7th century mentally, and while its nice to say if they had a western education they wouldn't be this way, its also not necessarily true. I spent the last 5 years with some of the best educated Muslims you will find on the hole planet, they had also spent many years in western schools. They came from Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Kuwait, Pakistan, Egypt, and Iran (from a refugee family, he grew up under Khomeini). None of them were going to be putting on a suicide vest, but almost all of them supported it. The Iranian was the only 'western' one, he was dating a catholic girl, and unlike the others didn't leave classes for daily prayers. He told me the other males were constantly harassing him about his behavior, and finally the males all cornered him (literally) and to his credit he stood up to them and didn't return to the fold, after which they told him not to call himself a Muslim and he was ostracized. Its more then education, its the culture that’s the root cause of this. Its arrogance in its highest form to think that a western education will somehow transform their hearts and minds. The only way they are going to move ahead is with a lot of people kicking and screaming along the way, and a lot of bloodshed.

I agree with you here. This method takes a long time to show any results. I think the Bush Administration has done a great job with short-term military solutions in the war on terror, but the long term solutions take a long time to yield, and as of yet its hard to say. Education is the key to long-term success in rooting out terror. As global communication increases with this region of the world, education will also increase when people are no longer subject to short-sighted propaganda about the West being so evil.

Re: Re: Re: If you thought the courts were bad in your neck of the woods.....
 

And it's not arrogant to think that "the only way" is through "a lot of bloodshed"?

Your classmates were not the recepients of a western education until they came to the west to study. They've been taught for the first 18 years of their lives to hate, surprise surprise that they didn't change their minds as soon as they got to the states. Your persian friend, however, was raised with a western education, is dating a catholic girl, and is proving my point. Thanks.

Re: Re: Re: Re: If you thought the courts were bad in your neck of the woods.....
 

Um no, he was raised under Khomeini, thats not being raised western. He told me some fun stories about that, and about when Khomeini died and he didn't hear about it and came to school wearing a red shirt (instead of black). He was beat up on the streets for it. His family was quite western to start with, as are/were a great many Iranians. Anyways if you think somehow you will teach these kids from birth 'western ways' without kidnapping them from their parents at gunpoint you are dreaming. I'm sorry but I don't think you really have a clue here other then what sounds good on paper.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If you thought the courts were bad in your neck of the woods.....
 

Obviously you know more about your personal anecdote than I do. What it sounds like to me is that he suceeded despite adversity, where many others (the people in his youth who beat him up after Khomeini's death, those other muslims who cornered him here in the states) failed. As for the children, and my kidnapping them at gunpoint :rolleyes: most children in the more extreme madrasahs are either orphans or abandoned by their parents. So if you choke off funding for these madrasahs, and redirect it toward real schools, you're shifting the balance, and destroying the pool of future al queda recruits.

As for who doesn't have a clue:

My arguments: increased westernized education, increased foreign aid, increased trade, decreased support for corrupt governments.

Your (apparently sole) argument: "Screw 'em"

Looking back at what led up to 9/11 can you say with a straight face that engagement isn't the answer? Your initial suggestion, while satisfying to those eager for a quick fix, doesn't actually make us any safer, if anything it makes us less safe.

Ah, ok. Now I understand.

I think that the solution lies between what you are Ustwo are arguing. First reach out to those whom you CAN reach out to.

But to those who refuse, marginalize them, isolate them in their on hell hole contries, and if necessary, kill them (e.g. the Taliban).

Nah, our strategy is quite clear: Since the world is going to run out of oil in a few generations, we would much prefer to make them run out first so we are the only country who has any.

So the fact that Osama bin Laden got a Western education doesn't mean anything to anybody?? With the exception of bin Laden himself, these guys aren't religious, fundamentalist nuts. If they were, then they wouldn't be hanging out at strip clubs, keeping stashes of porn on their computers, drinking alcohol, dancing with women, and all of the other things that radical Islamists speak out against. These guys are hard-line political activists looking to destroy the West and get them the hell out of the Holy Land. I agree with you that cutting off the funding to the Madrassas will help out a lot because a good deal of the lesson plans in those schools are based on how to hate the West and the local contact points for the local al Qaeda cells. However, to support a paper from the Dean camp which states "oh, it won't happen again" is to invite another attack on the grand scale of terrorism. While I agree with some of your points here, I think you're slightly misguided in the fact that a strong response to terror whenever it happens is always need, because, as we learned throughout the entire Clinton Administration, letting terrorist attacks go unchecked is simply inviting more and more attacks.

Oh, and just to clarify to people, the article is about Niger, not Nigeria, two completely different countries there, that's just been bugging me since people have been referring to Nigeria.

Listen to me, I agree 100% that a strong response to terrorism is needed, but without working on root causes, you are simply inviting another attack.

Oh, and just to clarify, the article is about Nigeria, which has a state in it called Niger, along with a river named Niger, and who knows how many other things named Niger. Here's the Factbook entry for the country, scroll down to the government section:

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/...k/geos/ni.html

Yeah, I agree, like I said, education coupled with strong responses are the best ways to fight terrorism (sorry if my diction didn't quite come off as that).

and whoopsie, my eyes deceived me.... misread the article, thanks for pointing it out. Had a little case of lysdexia there.

Props where props are due: That is an excellent comment. If we give money to a country with cultural strings attached, it is at best wasted, at worst, turns and bites us in the ass. That said, if we give money with only fiscal responsibility strings attached ("Use wisely on infrastructure, healthcare, and education in skills or get no more") it can, properly leveraged, have the effect of raising a country's overall standard of living. When people have money for leisure, that's when they start rejecting the kind of medieval practice Ustwo has highlighted.

So, handouts don't work, bribery doesn't work, but honest to god assistance can work handled with intelligence, deference, and proper humility.

Anyplace this 'assistance with humilty' has worked?

Seems to be doing alright for Russia, Georgia, and Turkey. Worked for a while with Liberia (without it, there would be no Liberia). Also Israel. Now, bear in mind, what I mean by humility is to give the benefit of the doubt where cultures differ. We haven't really tested it anywhere that the culture differs too much, though, because then you get into cultural and moral relativism, and that doesn't wash with the electorate at large. Doesn't even wash with me all the time, even though I had some anthropolgy training. Also, this country is notably short on humility. I'd prefer it if you would take that last sentance as an observation, not an indictment.

Now, before getting locked into a really bitter argument, thanks for the article. The whole Sahel is more or less like that, and it's a damn shame. Obviously we need to do something about it, but depopulating a strip of Africa east to west across the widest point is not a viable solution, and that's pretty much what it would take with war or containment. So finacial judo is the best we can do. We don't need to give these folks a ton of money to get them going. Low interest targeted mirco loans would be a good way to raise living standards. Provide some capital and let what entrepreneurial spirit there is in the area come out. In about 10 years, when Bechtel and Halliburton are finished with major reconstruction in Iraq, they'll have a ton of experience in infrastructure repair in high risk areas. Slide 'em 4 or 5 billion dollars and get them working on infrastructure south of the Sahara.

Let's not be so accepting of the Mobutus and Abasajos and Taylors and Kabilas running their little kleptocracies, though. Let it be known we'll help them improve their countries, but they don't get a dime if they want to administer the projects themselves, because then half the roads will lead to private compounds, and the other half to numbered Swiss accounts. Get some prime contractors out there who know how to run a project, and then train the locals to do the work. It could work. It worked for the French up to the point that they forgot that they were helping out and started moving in (leading to Viet Nam and Algeria. It was going so well, then they fucked it all up.)

Was doing a google on foreign aid and just thought I would throw this in for discussion:

LINK

Foreign Aid in the National Interest (Summary)
January 9, 2003

by US Agency for International Development

In September 2002, the Bush Administration released a new US National Security Strategy. The Strategy names development policy as one of three pillars for the United States' international role, along with diplomacy and defense. AID's "Foreign Aid in the National Interest," summarized in this document, details how US development assistance will contribute to this new approach.

The report summarized in this document has one central message -- that "foreign assistance will be a key instrument of [US] foreign policy in the coming decades." Among other objectives, US development assistance will advance six key goals of US foreign policy:

* Promoting democratic governance;

* Driving economic growth;

* Improving people's health;

* Mitigating conflict;

* Providing humanitarian aid; and

* Accounting for private foreign aid.

Link: /file/58_FANI Summary.pdf [485 KB PDF]

Lebell,
This would be awesome news if it were an administration with a track record of looking before leaping. Even with the folks there now, this sounds awesome, but I really worry about how much of it is election year politics and an attempt to look reasonable when history argues otherwise.

Still, I agree that this would be wonderful if there were intelligent follow through on it.

You trust Bush; I don't. That's the difference.

Bush laid some of this out in his speech to the UN back in September.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0030923-4.html

Again, we need to back up the words with action to stop propping up these corrupt countries.

Oh yeah, Lebell, that .pdf has incredibly small font. :hmm:

But as a country, no. Not according to the GNP given to aid anyway.

Let's be clear on what you mean.

In terms of percentage to GNP, no. America is low.

In terms of abolute amount of aid America is among the highest.

But it will never be enough for some.

Niger and Nigeria are different countries, I dont understand the article.

However, for a court to pass this sentence is clearly an act of war against the working class of this state - any retalitory actions taken by the workers against the government, including the destrcuction of the court, the state - both organically and structurally, must be considered as entirely legitimate.

And every Muslim and every Muslim state is not the same.

What you are asking people to do Utswo, is no different than if I was to ask people to judge all Christians and all largely Christian states by the Spanish Inquistion.

The Church throughout the middle ages was hugely corrupt, and often engaged in widespread campaigns of torture and murder - the same Holy Roman Church never ex-communicated Adolf Hitker - you want me to care why these Christian state's hate the rest of the world? Screw 'em.