BF2S Forums Presidential Election 2016

Last edited by uziq (2019-10-28 11:02:23)

uziq wrote:

yeah it is britain’s fault for the two gulf wars and afghanistan. and not at all america’s own political devising. the british empire man!!!

uziq wrote:

to say that britain is culpable for america's follies in the gulf wars and afghanistan is an ahistorical pisswad, fired from the back of that toolshed-cum-classroom that jay sits in.

saddam was very much 'your man', until he didn't play ball and used the financial/military backing of the west to do something else. don't blame a creaky old empire's map dividing 100 years prior for your foreign policy mis-steps. there isn't a direct line of causation from the mandate of iraq to the invasion of kuwait.

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

to say that britain is culpable for america's follies in the gulf wars and afghanistan is an ahistorical pisswad, fired from the back of that toolshed-cum-classroom that jay sits in.

saddam was very much 'your man', until he didn't play ball and used the financial/military backing of the west to do something else. don't blame a creaky old empire's map dividing 100 years prior for your foreign policy mis-steps. there isn't a direct line of causation from the mandate of iraq to the invasion of kuwait.

Saddam was 'our man' because of the Iran hostage crisis. The Iran hostage crisis occured because the Brits had strong oil interests in Iran and propped up the Shah for decades in the face of all corruption and civil unrest. The enemy of my enemy is my friend fully applied here.

Our oil interests were in Saudi Arabia because Chevron controlled the oil fields.

Britain and France created the geopolitical situation after the fall of the Ottoman Empire and then left a power void after their own empires collapsed. The US stepped in to maintain the status quo that the former empires could not. Instability is bad for business.

This propitious start to the relationship, which positioned Washington more favorably than the imperial machinations of Britain and Russia, is all but forgotten today, thanks to the U.S. role in ousting Iran’s nationalist prime minister in 1953 and the subsequent embrace of Shah Mohammad Reza by successive American administrations. The coup was a momentous turning point for Iran; coinciding with a broader imperative around American engagement in the Middle East, the CIA’s role in preserving the monarchy meant that for the first time, Washington assumed a real stake in Iran’s fate. The generous American program of technical and financial assistance that followed the shah’s reinstatement enabled him to impose greater central control and reassemble the instruments of the state under his personal authority. Over time, it would become painfully clear that the costs of the coup in stoking paranoia, enabling repression, and undermining the Pahlavis’ legitimacy vastly outweighed its short-term benefits, but at the time the preoccupation with the Cold War obscured Iranian resentment fueled by the American intervention.

Last edited by uziq (2019-10-28 13:31:10)

Last edited by uziq (2019-10-28 13:35:36)

Jay wrote:

uziq wrote:

i bet it was a real shock to you when you realised you'd have to actually do something for all that welfare money and the free college ticket.

explains your anti-British resentment over the korean war. another conflict staffed by young recruits who never expected to be called to war.

No, not really. I was pumped to go to Afghanistan after the towers came down.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Jay Gatsby wrote:

I was pumped to go to Afghanistan old sport.

Nah, this is a history you've invented for yourself, something you tell your sons when you want to see stars in their eyes and potential employers when you want that next job. You were scared to the core and sick to your stomach when you realised you'd made a horrible mistake and were going to actually risk your neck for those free lunches and that college course - when you could have, you know just taken out a loan.

Its hard to argue with someone who gets his history from neo-con shock-jocks and revisionist propaganda puff-pieces written by 'trained singers'.
Its part of the infantilism of the right wing, everything is someone elses fault - usually the British. 'It wasn't me sir, I didn't do it sir, it was an older boy sir, can I have a cookie now?'

I suppose the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour was the fault of the British, wait, I have it, the opium wars so weakened China and disrupted the balance that Japan became dominant and decided to attack America for no reason - nothing to do with belligerent expansionism by the US in the region and threats against Japan - it was the British a century before!

So who was America nobly riding to the rescue of in that one? The people of Bikini Atoll?

Jay wrote:

I was excited to go. I wanted revenge.