The title of this thread is the most important lesson I have learned from the endless pontificating by talking heads of all breeds on America's foreign policy decisions of the past years.
We hear over and over again how the US government screwed up (repeatedly) in giving arms and assistance to the Afghan rebels during the Cold War, and then once the war was over, leaving them be, only to have them turn on us twenty years later.
The goal of our intervention in Afghanistan back then was to prevent the spread of communism, which we saw to be a coruppt and detrimental political system (we were right, but that's another argument.) We accomplished that goal, dealing the Soviets a defeat which in no small part contributed to the eventual collapse of the USSR and the move towards freedom in Eastern Europe. We avoided a wider war, by fighting by proxy. The alternative, which no one found acceptable, were either sending in our own troops, or letting the USSR take Afghanistan, thus bringing them one large step closer to controlling the lifeblood of the Western World, the oil fields of the Gulf. (Remember, there were numerous other pro-Communist groups in the Middle East, including 1/2 of Yemen for a time.)
It WAS the best decision that could have been made at the time. Unfortunately, it required the use of some unstable characters.
Some say we should have stayed around and helped rebuild. Very possibly. We WERE the largest international contributor of money and relief to Afghanistan, before these recent events. (One wonders how much the talking heads gave.) However, the presence of so many westerners in that area would not have had a stabilizing influence, either. In fact, it is one of the main reasons cited for BinLaden's attacks.
Some say we should reconsider our support of Israel. That is exactly what the terrorists want most, which is the reason we should not give it to them. What they seem to be forgetting is that the Israelis twice defeated massed armies of several nations arrayed against them, BEAT them, and doubled the size of their held territory. WE are the ones who got them to give the Siani BACK to Egypt. We have done a great deal to KEEP Israel from retaliating with full force when it was attacked. Remember the Gulf War? Iraqi Scuds hitting Israeli cities? Did they strike Back? Who convinced the not to? Tell you the truth, I'd wager the Israelis would have tripled their territory by now, if we hadn't been holding them back.
So we return to what I've been saying. These talking heads haven't made a policy decision in theior whole lives beyond what color socks to wear. The decisions that have been made were the best that could be made with the information available. Those who disagree should present their own, viable solutions, or cram their criticisms where the sun don't shine.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
posted
Snay: Point taken. But there is a difference: _I'M_ not criticising anybody.
I'm criticising the 'talking heads,' true... but then again, I AM qualified to be a talking head, so I'm able to criticise them.
The_Tom: what, and you think the Arabs built THEIR own T-tanks and MiG's?
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
posted
Actually, Israel tends to purchase weapons from who ever will sell them, and then modify the design and make new ones themselves.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Fo2: By "the Arabs" who do you mean? The Syrian and Egyptian Armies of the the past who were severely outgunned and handily beaten by the Israelis in '67 and '76? Or the Palestineans, with bottle rockets as the pinnacle of their military technology?
[ October 19, 2001: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Isrealies are not as "backward" as you guys thought, they can, and already has built all form of weapons for their own army, airforce and navy.
They built their own ships, they built their own tanks, and they build their own warplanes.
They developed "Kfir" fighter, and it is still in service.
They also developed "Lavi" which surpass American F-18 and F-16's performance (and that's why the project was scrapped thanks to American pressure).
Python 4 made by the Israelies are the best short range air-to-air missile in the world right now.
Israelies developed and built the tank "Merkava" all by themselves, and it is ranked as the same performance level as M-1 and surpass that of T-72 used by other Arab countries.
Israelies also designed and built the "Saar" class missile boat which incorporate the latest in steath technologies and equipped with full arrays of best weapons the world has to offer, of course, many of them are made by the Israelies.
All the the examples above just prove that Israel is not a "baby" that can't leave the American's craddle of protection, they have the ability to do everthing themselves.
[ October 19, 2001: Message edited by: BlueElectron ]
-------------------- "George Washington said, 'I cannot tell a lie.' Richard Nixon said, 'I cannot tell the truth.' Bill Clinton said, 'I cannot tell the difference.'"
-- comedian TOM SMOTHERS, from his latest stage act with brother DICK SMOTHERS.
Registered: Jan 2000
| IP: Logged
MIB
Ex-Member
posted
BlueElectron is right. I vaugly remember hearing that Israel and the U.S. once participated in war games pitting ourselves against them. The results says it all. If I remember correctly, for every Israeli plane we shot down, the Israelis shot down approx. 10 to 15 of OUR planes. The fact that the Israelis were forced to scrap the development of a new fighter simply because it was better than our standard dogfighters really pissed me off. Rather than improve ourselves so that we can remain the best nation in the world, we, instead, let ourselves go to hell in a hand basket while preventing other counties from advancing at the same time. That is just plain stupid IMHO. Not to mention that you really do not want to mess with the MOSSAD. From what I have heard, those people play the hardest hardball than anyone else in the world, including the CIA and MI-6.
IP: Logged
Cartman
just made by the Presbyterian Church
Member # 256
posted
Yes, now they do, after having been funded enormously for roughly six decades...
In hindsight, it is always easy to judge. That does NOT mean, however, that we all should just refrain from criticizing. Far from it. And I despise anyone who spews this "either come up with some good ideas yourself, or STFU" crap.
This is still a free society in which people have the right to voice their opinions, thank you very much.
[ October 19, 2001: Message edited by: Mojo Jojo ]
posted
The question is not so much about modern Israel, BE, but First's claims that Arabs should be thankful America "restrained" Israel during the first three decades of its existence. During that time period the US poured tens of millions of dollars of military cash and kind into the country with which Israel (a) forcibly doubled its size through conquest, (b) became far and away the most-heavily armed nation between Europe and the Indian subcontinent, and (c) developed the military-industrial conplex to independently maintain that status to the present day.
[ October 19, 2001: Message edited by: The_Tom ]
-------------------- "I was surprised by the matter-of-factness of Kafka's narration, and the subtle humor present as a result." (Sizer 2005)
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote:But there is a difference: _I'M_ not criticising anybody.
You've never criticized the decisions of any polticial leaders up to today? You haven't criticised Bill Clinton's administration? You crit just as much as anyone, just not on this specific issue.
posted
He criticizes decisions as they're made, not fifteen years after the fact.
-------------------- "This is why you people think I'm so unknowable. You don't listen!" - God, "God, the Devil and Bob"
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
America's actions in regards to Afghanistan have been criticized for a LONG time. You missed the protests about Vietnam? Both symptoms of the flawed foreign policy of "Containment" ...
And that's a horseshit reply, Omie-san. What gives him the right to criticize and tell others they can't? Hmmm?
[ October 19, 2001: Message edited by: Malnurtured Snay ]
It is bad to criticize foreign policy of the past. It is okay to criticize foreign policy of the present. Therefore, by that logic, it must be wrong to criticize the Clinton administration, right?
What Omega seems to fail to realize, is that the criticism of U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East -- and to be fair, Carter got us into the Afghan thing -- dates back to another old policy called 'Containment', which got us messed up in this tiny little Asian country called 'Vietnam' as well. As some of you who actually have a passing familiarity with history may be aware, Vietnam and Containment policy were protested long and hard in the 60's. U.S. foreign policy has *always* been criticized. Yet, now Rob says it's bad for us to critique stuff that happened in the past. Omega ammends that to say it's okay to critique stuff as long as you critique it when it happens. What Omega fails to realize is that it *was* critiqued when it happened! And it's still being critiqued!
Whatever.
[ October 19, 2001: Message edited by: Malnurtured Snay ]
Printer-friendly view of this topic
