Now is the time at SDA when we juxtapose!
Barack Obama, November 2007;
“I truly believe that the day I’m inaugurated, the [Muslim] world looks at America differently.”
Via Gateway Pundit
Now is the time at SDA when we juxtapose!
Barack Obama, November 2007;
“I truly believe that the day I’m inaugurated, the [Muslim] world looks at America differently.”
Via Gateway Pundit
Your view, which is similar to that of Obama, ie, to ignore them, is in my view, disastrous.
ET, ET, ET! Obama didn’t ignore them. He sucked up to them, appeased them, supported our sworn enemies betrayed our most important ally. Made America look weak.
Osama: weak horse/strong horse.
ET, an analogy:
You know how we hate Bloomfied’s nanny state interventions on softdrinks, Michell O’s scolding on nutrition (to which Barry himself displays nothing but contempt).
They’re not wrong, are they?
Their views are probably quite sound.
BUT, no one wants to be lectured by these useless elites.
The Bush Doctrine is like that isn’t it?
Perhaps (?) well-intentioned but nevertheless the advice and guidance was unsolicited, wasn’t it.
No one likes or appreciates a busybody, no matter how well-intentioned. Least of all a busy-body who invades their country.
Ron Paul wasn’t totally out of line when he asked us to consider how we’d feel with a large military contingent from a foreign — alien — country on our soil.
ET, I was as neo-con as you early on. But there comes a time when facing a disaster you have to cop to being wrong.
ET >
Why jump off topic to Iran, previous references were with the current Arab Spring in North Africa? It’s what I was referring too.
Regardless, I’m certainly no fan of Obamba but to say that US interests are ignoring Iran is also disingenuous. US interests not the little Affermative Action community organizers.
The NY rag of Liberal choice even admits to the military buildup in the Gulf.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/03/world/middleeast/us-adds-forces-in-persian-gulf-a-signal-to-iran.html?pagewanted=all&_moc.semityn.www
Today:
http://www.rferl.org/content/us-allies-begin-persian-gulf-exercises/24710472.html
‘…he only went in and I repeat that, only went in when forced to by France and the UK.” – ET
His masters.
Pretty shameful I agree, but why does invading Libya for French & Italian foreign interests, support your undying view of The Bush Doctrine?
They the French & Italians loved Bush and his doctrin so much that they said – “hey wait a minute, forget Libya’s oil & Gaddafi’s gold reserves we need to support Al Qaeda and the Muslim brotherhood to overthrow Gaddafi thus creating a middle class and supporting our beloved cowboy intellectual George Bush in America”.
I dunno, smells a little to me.
me no dhimmi, yes, Obama ignored them. Words aren’t actions, and Obama’s pompous words to them, telling them how wonderful they were, how innovative (?!), how we Americans must apologize – those are empty words.
But the infrastructure (and again, an infrastructure is exactly what it means, a foundational structure)..was ignored. The infrastructure of enabling and encouraging a middle class private sector economy, of enabling and encouraging the democratic infrastructures of a constitution etc….he did nothing.
Remember that Clinton also did nothing, and we know the results of that.
Bloomfield and Michelle Obama’s preachings are about superficial end-state behaviour. Not infrastructure. And no, their rhetoric has nothing to do with the Bush Doctrine, which you have obviously never read. I certainly oppose them both as interfering emptyheads.
I won’t refer to the first three parts of the Doctrine, which deal with direct attacks on terrorist infrastructures. Remember that terrorism is an activity of war not defined by a nation, but kept and supported within a nation.
And no, this doesn’t mean a military sitting in your nation.
It’s the fourth part, which the Bush administration said was a long term strategy (thus realistically denying the Harry Potter instant changes so many on this blog want). Its tactics are primarily economic and political and are focused around the modernization of the MENA.
That is, the US should (1) support basic human rights freedoms in their interactions with these nations. These include such things as the rule of law, freedom of worship, and respect for women. In addition, (2)the strategy calls for the United States to promote economic growth through capitalist free markets and free trade. And (3) the promotion of developing a constitution, rule of law, and elections.
This is the part of the Bush Doctrine which interests me. It is NOT an imposition of these values; it is NOT ‘at the end of a gun’. It says that IF you want to be part of the global economic network, THEN, we in the West consider that basic human rights are fundamental.
And, IF you want loans from the IMF and from the US and the EU, THEN, your statist economic mode can’t even pay the interest on these loans! You must develop a private sector economy.
AND, democracy inevitably follows the growth of a middle class (that private sector economy) because all societies MUST give political power to the producers of wealth in their society. SO, we will help advise you WHEN you are ready to set it up.
As for my being a ‘neo-con’, heh, no, I’m not into nationalism. I support the CAS, or complex adaptive systems theory, and in the societal world, this means a globally networked economic and informational complex system.
knight, invading Libya has nothing to do with Bush, and I didn’t support it. I also objected because Obama refused to go to Congress with it, declaring that it wasn’t ‘a war’. Incredible what he does with Words.
Iran is the most dangerous nation in the whole MENA area. Its imperialist agenda, which has nothing to do with Islam, which it uses as a means of repression, is all about economic power and control.
ET >
I’ve asked you several times to explain exactly how you intend to carry out this ‘isolation’ or, again, whatever term you use. You’ve never replied.
You have never specifically asked, please reference where you had, and I have explained in great length my position on this on many previous threads.
The term “Isolation” is one you labeled my explanation, which I rejected as merely a lazy way to marginalize my answer. The “term” you are absentmindedly searching for that I used was “non-interventionism” go ahead look it up.
“Non interventionism” reflects the views of America’s founders, not the rabble that steals and lies to the public whether they call themselves Democrat or Republican.
So I won’t continue to repeat my argument if you can’t grasp it, flogging a dead horse over and over again with the same cut & paste rhetoric and expecting different results is well kind of crazy, pardon the tongue in cheek.
ET >
“knight, invading Libya has nothing to do with Bush, and I didn’t support it.”
What?
How stupid do you honestly think people who daily comment or read SDA really are?
You have done nothing but support the Arab Spring including the invasion of Libya as a part of that movement steadfast for over a year now. Anyone can pull up any thread over the last year on the matter and see volumes written by you ET in support of it.
ET >
“As for my being a ‘neo-con’, heh, no, I’m not into nationalism. I support the CAS, or complex adaptive systems theory, and in the societal world, this means a globally networked economic and informational complex system.”
Exposed!
A liberal Progressive in line with UN Global centralization objectives.
For heaven’s sake, Knight, a CAS (complex adaptive system) has nothing to do with the global progressive centralization.
A CAS is, by nature, decentralized! That’s its strength. There’s no central authority in a CAS. I suggest you look up the term.
Your policy of non-intervention, which I called isolationism, won’t work in the 21st century. It’s no longer the era of the Founders (whose principles of freedom and democracy I strongly support). We no longer, economically, function as isolate nation-states; we work as a global economy with vast trading, communication and information exchanges – and we can’t do without this network.
Our electronic informational network means that isolation or ‘non-intervention’ simply doesn’t work. After all, a Japanese nuclear accident or a famine in the Ukraine effects the world’s economies.
You wrote: ‘George W Bush did not invade or overthrow Gaddafi or Mubarak, he sensibly used them as allies in the region, and they we’re comfortable places for tourist, expatriates and overall business to travel to. Each country had a high for Africa standard of living, controlled the extreme elements of their society, and each was generally at peace with Israel.’
Really? Are you aware that the Egyptian economy is imploding? What ‘high standard of living’? They are impoverished, and this didn’t happen overnight.
And I wrote, and I repeat, “After all, no rational person can support military dictatorships under the illusion that ‘at least they provide stability’ because that is a faux stability, which can last only as long as the economy can support the people. That economy was coming to an end, and so would the military dictatorships.”
So, Knight, I reject your ‘non-intervention’ as an unfeasible 18th century premise. The world is a complex adaptive system, it is economically and informationally networked – and no, this does NOT mean progressive global centralism – but the opposite. It’s decentralized but, basic economic and political principles of operation are common (capitalism and constitutional democracy). A good book on this is Manuel Castells, The Rise of the Network Society.
I can see a smoldering Iran from my house.
Place your bets on the exact date…..
“I truly believe that the day I’m inaugurated, the [Muslim] world looks at America differently.”
Well it may not have happened on the very day of inauguration but the Muslim view of America certainly changed. Now they can just kill any ambassador they like when ever they like without any repercussion. Well except for some lame apology. “Oh I’m sorry did I hurt your hand when I stopped your fist with my face” kind of apology.
ET >
“So, Knight, I reject your ‘non-intervention’ as an unfeasible 18th century premise”
You reject that the American founders had the capacity to understand global Imperial power regardless of the fact they lived and fought the globally established British Empire at the time.
Your argument in this regard is that of the Liberal left claiming that the Constitution is “outdated” because the Founding Fathers didn’t own an iPhone or watch Snookie on Jersey Shore.
(Disclaimer: I only know about Snookie because of Obamba’s controversial reference to her – heh)
Knight 99, come on, I don’t reject the Founders. The Declaration and Constitution are in an open file on my desk. I’ve read and reread David McCullough’s great biographies of John Adams, 1776, Cicero (and Truman). I’ve the greatest admiration for what they did, which was to establish an entirely novel nation-state based, not in the collective, but in the rights and capacities and freedom of the individual.
And I reject the activities of the collectivists, the left, who try to take away these basic principles from us.
But, economically and informationally, the world is a different place than it was in 1776. We are economically networked, with resources from Canada, manufacturing in China, and sales in the US. And informationally, there’s no such thing as time and space, no such thing as private or public.
As for your insistence that the Founders rejected intervention, I’m not sure of the grounds for this in the Constitution.
Section 10 refers only to State, not federal powers. It says that ‘No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement compact with another State, or with a foreign power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit to delay’.
But this does not refer to the whole USA, but to an individual State within the USA. Most certainly, since this is a united body of states, no individual state can engage in war.
Under Section 8, on the other hand, which refers to the federal government, it says that Congress has the power ‘to declare War’ but it says nothing about ‘no war unless actually invaded’.
Therefore I don’t see where the Founding Fathers promoted or rejected ‘intervention’.
ET >
“ Really? Are you aware that the Egyptian economy is imploding?”
Yea, well there is no doubt about that now is there.
Since we’re bringing up previous quotes –
“It’s due to the enormous wealth creation from the one-industry mode of oil or Suez tolls (both created by the West for these nations), which is then redistributed to the population by the statist government.” – ET at September 14, 2012 10:08 PM
“….Enormous wealth creation……”
That’s not jiving very with what you are saying today. That original argument BTW was about the source of Egypt’s wealth and its population sustainability, my argument was that it’s was that it had very much to do with the Billions in western aid that was artificially boosting Egypt’s population beyond its natural carrying capacity. You never did get back to me about the discrepancy.
Today it seems you’re a key economist talking about imploding North Africa economies, and the big bad Muslim Brotherhood – “Pajamas Media, also has an excellent column on the disastrous Obama tactic of supporting the MB”, – ET
I remember well you supporting the MB in 2011 to great debate with many other SDA naysayers.
Knight, you know perfectly well that the quote about the enormous wealth was to outline the explosion in population and urbanization, BUT, that this wealth is now no longer sufficient to maintain that population. I’ve said this a zillion times.
And yes, I agreed that western aid to these military dictatorships, in the name of ‘stability’ was artificially bolstering this faux economy. But it’s now reached its carrying capacity, and Morsi can try for billions in loans but even that’s not enough. They will have to go on rations, and the place will implode in anger.
No, I didn’t support the MB; I supported the end of a military dictatorship, because a dictatorship by definition can’t hand power over to the people. And Egypt’s economy must develop a private sector middle class economy – which means that political power would move from the dictator to this class of wealth producers.
I also claim that an ideological group can’t remain utopian ideological when confronted with the hard facts of reality. That includes the MB. It’s one thing to debate and be committed to utopian ideals in the seminar or prayer room; it’s quite another to have the gas importers refusing to allow you credit for more supplies, or banks refusing to give you loans to pay your civil service and police, and importers refusing to provide the wheat for the people when you can’t pay for it. That’s what’s happening in Egypt now.
ET >
“But, economically and informationally, the world is a different place than it was in 1776. We are economically networked”
No spices from India, no silk from China, no tobacco from the America’s, no diamonds from South Africa, no kiwi from Australia/ New Zealand……………
How on earth did they survive?
“But this does not refer to the whole USA, but to an individual State within the USA.”
Read: George Washington (Farwell Address), Thomas Paine (Common Sense) & Thomas Jefferson
Excerpt:
“We wish not to meddle with the internal affairs of any country, nor with the general affairs of Europe. Peace with all nations, and the right which that gives us with respect to all nations, are our object.” –Thomas Jefferson to C. W. F. Dumas, 1793. ME 9:56
“I sincerely join… in abjuring all political connection with every foreign power; and though I cordially wish well to the progress of liberty in all nations, and would forever give it the weight of our countenance, yet they are not to be touched without contamination from their other bad principles. Commerce with all nations, alliance with none, should be our motto.” –Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Lomax, 1799. ME 10:124
The US constitution indeed gives the authority of assigning Foreign Policy to the office of the President, who can then decide whether to use interventionism or non interventionism among many other political considerations.
The founding fathers made quite clear that which they preferred, with a absolute knowledge of how the world of global economies, politics, and wars worked. To say otherwise is showing utter contempt of their achievements and abilities, precisely as the Liberal left does today.
Including the interventionalist policies of American Presidents since the end of WW 2.
Knight99, I think you’re arguing with ET because you don’t understand that thing she said about complex adaptive systems. Free market capitalism is (roughly) an example of a CAS. It has no “head”, no centralized control. Each member of the market makes his own decisions within the bounds created by mathematics and logistical reality.
Its the thing I was talking about with the traffic lights here: http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/021337.html#c757783
Such an arrangement is also called “human freedom” and will inevitably compete a centrally planned economy into the ground because its more flexible and hugely more efficient. Its what the Founding Fathers of the USA had in mind when they created the Constitution.
What will fix the Middle East is the creation of a free market economy. What remains to be seen is whether or not Western nations are willing to do that, or if they’d rather give up on the idea of individual freedom altogether and slip back into barbarism.
Phantom, thanks. As usual, you explain it better than I was doing.
That’s exactly right, a free market economy, which is indeed a CAS, is incredibly flexible, adaptive, and efficient. The US was indeed created as such an enterprise, with its emphasis on the free thought, movement, activities, of individuals.
And that’s exactly what the MENA needs, a free market capitalist economy. This will produce and empower a middle class, which will then take political power within an elected constitutional legislature.
But it requires the assistance of the West, to set up trade agreements and comment, advise and also, refuse to interact without reciprocity, ie, we just don’t hand over billions in aid for them to remain as a statist military dictatorship and a haven for jihadism as a ‘release valve’ for their own angry citizens.
The Phantom >
Your right I don’t know about CAS, my comment was intentionally flippant but good natured and not meant to be taken literally.
“What will fix the Middle East is the creation of a free market economy.’ – Phantom
Yes and a middle class I know, which misses the point I’ve made since day one about understanding Arab/ Islamic culture.
I suggest watching this current RT Interview with ex- Jihadist/ Muslim Tawfik Hamid on the situation. – Sept 17 2012
He explains it much better than I do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0bxhp4xomo
The real Question is. Has the West the will to survive? Islam really doesn’t matter unless we have given up on our own civilization. Sure there is infiltration by stealth Islam, over immigration that dilutes our common heritage that many people have contributed to. But a strong civilization can shrug these savages off like fleas from a dog. Thing is though If we quail, or shrink from our own values where lost before we can even fight this infection.If we are ashamed or scared to be what we have through the centuries fought for. Namely individual Liberty. Natural rights for all mankind.
Hatred of slavery or oppression of Women.
Communism didn’t win because at one time we felt we where better. We laughed in the face of that form of totalitarianism, including those who would betray our Nation for an alien doctrine of human thuggery. Today we give ground to every nut case that comes along.Appease the ever growing legion of madmen with an agenda, that at its root demeans Individuals, destroys any progress. We apologize for success, plus freedom. Make excuses for inhumanity worldwide, mutilation, slavery. You name any abomination. Including envy of those who through hard work have become successful instead of a Government parasite.That civilization is doomed.
Whats to fight for when we are a house divided, overrun with corruption of the soul? When a sizable portion of the population has abandoned our values as individuals for forms of tyranny?
While the monsters at the door are confident, that we are already dead or divided?
What will fix the Middle East is the creation of a free market economy. What remains to be seen is whether or not Western nations are willing to do that, or if they’d rather give up on the idea of individual freedom altogether and slip back into barbarism.
as if the West had the power to do that
as if the West could decide what Muslims in the middle east are going to do
when the West finds out how to make cats bark and dogs purr, Muslims in the middle east will become what the West wants them to be
They freaking hate the West, how the hell are we going to make them become more like us??????
what part of hating the West and having hated it forever do you people don’t understand?????
Canadian Friend, regarding the free market and your statement “…as if the West had the power to do that…”
A free market is not something that gets imposed. What part of FREE market did you fail to understand? Nobody has to play if they want to stay poor and hungry, that’s the freedom part. The thing about a free market is its unstoppable. Governments don’t impose it, they just get out of the way and watch it go all by itself. Everybody makes money, everybody gets what they want.
A free market is when Canadians buy stuff off Egyptians, man to man. Supporting a free market is when Canadians shoot the third party thugmonkey who won’t let a deal go through without taking his cut. This will be popular with Egyptians. We should start here first though, so the Egyptian guys can see an example of free men doing business.
Free markets are not supported by “international aid”. They are destroyed by it. Aid is a tool of the Left.
Then fiddle said this howler: “Anyway, not very freedom loving of you to interfere in free choice of other nations. They are that way because the people like it that way.”
Yeah, Egyptians love their 50% unemployment and starvation diets. They love getting hauled out of bed by a mob and killed in the street. You’re such a friggin’ tool.
The Phantom >
What do Egyptians & Lybians sell that Canadians can’t buy already?
BTW – What do Egyptians & Lybians sell?
Note current Libyan corporate and personal income tax laws:
Maximum personal income tax rate is flat 10%.
http://www.worldwide-tax.com/libya/libya_tax_regime.asp
Having lived in Lybia for 5 years I can personally attest that Lybians can freely sell what they make on the open market. I have a closet full of handmade junk to prove it.
“What do Egyptians & Lybians sell that Canadians can’t buy already?”
Cotton. Apparently Egyptian cotton is a particularly in-demand commodity whose price is climbing steeply of late. You can see this reflected in the prices at places like the Gap.
Plus, there’s almost as many people in Cairo as there are in Ontario and Quebec. Maybe if their government wasn’t such a bunch of peckerheads they’d be able to find something worthwhile to do.
The Phantom >
Cotton. Apparently Egyptian cotton is a particularly in-demand commodity…….. You can see this reflected in the prices at places like the Gap.
Yea, absolutely I should have thought of cotton, great example. Which is part of the point, Egyptian cotton can be bought in Canada via free markets.
Lets also remember:
Consumer gasoline prices in Egypt = $0.31 per liter.
Consumer gasoline prices in Libya = $0.14 per gallon
Libyan people also had universal health care and a government gift of $50,000USD for all Libyan newlyweds for housing. (if I remember the exact value correctly – essentially it was considered a free house as a wedding gift to all Libyan nationals).
Egyptian facts & figures:
http://www.taxrates.cc/html/egypt-tax-rates.html
Personal Income
Income (EGP) Tax Rate
Up to 5,000 0%
5,001 to 20,000 10%
20,001 to 40,000 15%
Over 40,000 20%
“Individuals are not subject to a tax on capital gains except in the case of the disposal of real estate or building sites within the boundaries of Egyptian cities. Such gains are not subject to income tax but are taxed at the rate of 2.5% on the value of the property.”
Other taxes on individuals:
Capital duty – No
Stamp duty – Stamp duty applies at various rates depending on the type of document.
Capital acquisitions tax – No
Real property tax – All real property in Egypt is subject to the real estate tax. The tax rate is 10% on the annual rental value after allowing a 30% deduction from the rental value to cover related costs for residential property and a 32% deduction for nonresidential property. A residential unit with an annual rental value less than EGP 6,000 is exempt. The property owner pays the real property tax, which is due in 2 instalments, one in January and one in July. The annual rental value of real estate is assessed every 5 years by the tax authorities.
Inheritance/estate tax – No
Net wealth/net worth tax – No
Social security – The social security regime applies to local nationals.
Egypt Corporate Income Tax Rates:
The standard rate of corporate tax in Egypt is 20% for manufacturing, trading and services companies, and 40.55% for companies engaged in the exploration and production of oil and gas. The Suez Canal Authority, the Egyptian Petroleum Authority and the Central Bank are taxed at 40%.
Egyptian corporations are subject to corporate profits tax on their profits derived from Egypt, as well as on profits derived from abroad, unless the foreign activities are performed through a permanent establishment located abroad. Foreign companies resident in Egypt are subject to tax only on their profits derived from Egypt.
Oil prospecting and production companies are subject to tax on their profits at a rate of 40.55%. The Suez Canal Company, Egyptian General Petroleum Company (EGPC) and Central Bank of Egypt are subject to tax on their profits at a rate of 40%.
“Which is part of the point, Egyptian cotton can be bought in Canada via free markets.”
Except that due to the I’m sure labyrinthine nature of Egyptian government, the guy doing the work is not the guy getting that nice Canadian money. Even here half our incomes get siphoned one way or another, down there its much worse.
You can’t -buy- a farm in Egypt, you have to know somebody. The bigger the thing you want to do, the bigger the guy is you need to know. Canada on steroids, basically.
What will fix the Middle East is the same thing that will fix Canada. Free. F-ing. Market.
Do you realize that if all government here did was keep the peace, run the military and enforce contracts we’d all be filthy stinking RICH? Or we’d have the same level of income and be working less than half as much.
That’s what ET is talking about. No more Special Deals, just cash on the barrel head. It’d be -awesome-.
The Phantom >
“Except that due to the I’m sure labyrinthine nature of Egyptian government…”
Well this sort of gets to the heart of my point, and yours earlier.
We aren’t free like we think we are free, and North African countries are not quite as enslaved as they are made out to be. In fact they are free to make and sell goods; they also pay less taxes than we do, personal and corporate.
Yes, Arabic culture is riff with corruption, and does not mix with our value system. But American culture does not follow the economic and value system as it was intended by the founding fathers for the Republic.
Empire America is corrupt from the top down, an economic system seeped in crony-capitalism.
America’s individual freedoms along with property rights, freedom of speech et al are disappearing by the day.
When you couple America today, with its utter misunderstanding of Arabic/ Islamic culture, social and economic, you get a big picture as to why there is no/ ZERO honorable justification for the US to be freedom building in the Arab/ Islamic world.
They don’t want it, and they hate America for it. Not the Freedom & Liberty part, but the hypocritical occupation of their sovereignty and culture. These are the feeling of the “Moderates” that everyone likes to flaunt. They in turn would rather support the “Radicals” than America’s faux system of Liberty, and they do as a majority as we see with our own disbelieving and lying eyes every day year in and year out.
“Yes, Arabic culture is riff with corruption, and does not mix with our value system. But American culture does not follow the economic and value system as it was intended by the founding fathers for the Republic.”
Given the headlines today about missing metal inventories in China and all manner of dirty dealings in high finance, at one level you are right. The highest levels of Western finance are corrupt, this is certain.
The difference between Canada and Egypt is, Egyptians generally accept that corruption is just the way things are and will always be. Canadians, Americans, Brits, we don’t accept that. We -expect- it, but rather than just throwing up our hands as a culture we hunt it down and kill it. We -demand- justice, and for the most part we get it. Up until lately anyway, and that is what has people alarmed these days isn’t it?
That’s the basis of my argument that the Left is the -true- enemy we face, whereas Egyptian/Libyan/Syrian/Afghan/whatever militants are no big deal. Socialism is the source of the vast disarray in our government and the source of its ever more bloating size. The Left can’t win until people accept that corruption and evil deeds are -normal- and -proper-.
I’d venture to say that cleaning up SNC Lavalin will probably go quite a way toward cleaning up Libya, given the amount of business they do down there.
The Phantom >
Well said, agree 100%.
“Therefore they like it the way it is, or they would change. duh”
Truly, you are a moron.
Which has been my issue with ET’s theoretical approach, which is happy to burn our money and millions of lives to experiment.
She’s put the cart so far ahead of the horse that it’s wandered off to die somewhere.