Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-29-2011, 01:46 AM
Bloggingheads Bloggingheads is offline
BhTV staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,936
Default A History of Meddling (F. Gregory Gause & Shadi Hamid)

Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-29-2011, 12:38 PM
Stapler Malone Stapler Malone is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 213
Default Re: A History of Meddling (F. Gregory Gause & Shadi Hamid)

scholarly skepticism on the GCC, eloquently articulated.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 05-29-2011, 01:17 PM
harkin harkin is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 1,169
Default Re: A History of Meddling (F. Gregory Gause & Shadi Hamid)

One must admit that Obama's speech was ambitious, the fact that he's spending so much time walking it back though just shows how out of his depth he was in making it.

He should have stuck to the form of his speech in the UK, where he basically said nothing.

While Congress was applauding Mr. Netanyahu, Mr. Obama was showing us what leadership isn't. On a visit intended more to advance his re-election campaign than the interests of the United States, Mr. Obama played Ping-Pong with British Prime Minister David Cameron, signed the wrong date in the distinguished visitors' log at Westminster Abbey and botched a toast to the Queen.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 05-29-2011, 01:50 PM
ohreally ohreally is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 666
Default Re: A History of Meddling (F. Gregory Gause & Shadi Hamid)

So the US should say sorry for getting it "wrong" all these years? Is Hamid being naive or supremely cynical? Does he believe that US mideast policy has been just one giant "mistake" in the last 40 years? I'm afraid that, as long as he clings to that view, the likes of Gause will always have the better of the argument. The word mistake implies that the means were incorrectly chosen to reach the ends. But there's no evidence of that. The ends have always included control of the oil fields/lanes and the protection of Israel. The means have been, by and large, suited to the task.

For meaningful changes in US policy, first change the ends. Admit that the US has no legitimate claim on its self-arrogated hegemony over the Gulf region. Then admit that the US has no business supporting apartheid in the territories. Once you've done that, then you can change policy. But until that's done, US-sponsored democracy promotion is nothing but one hot pile of steaming bullshit.
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.