Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Funny how some folks have a tendency to characterize folks as being either enemy or an ally as opposed to being independent actors who agree on some issues and disagree on others.
Well gee, both leaders are now dead thanks to US "humanitarian aid" to those rebels we bankrolled.
Saddam was going to switch to the Euro while Ghadaffi floated the idea of the gold dinar.
The gold dinar had a lot of favor among countries as their own countries could become more economically powerful based on their own gold reserves.
Ghadaffi was more of a threat to the petrodollar than Saddam IMHO but both were making moves to unseat the petrodollar.
Funny how some folks have a tendency to characterize folks as being either enemy or an ally as opposed to being independent actors who agree on some issues and disagree on others.
When it comes to ME policies they are either on one side or the other.
El-Sisi ----what would he bring to the table? Educate me.
el-Sisi brings the militery which can use deadly force to eliminate opponents or at least intimidate them
Unless his troops or junior officers mutiny he's got all the aces.
Go back to the CIA backed coup in Iran and read your history forward.
The US doesn't involve itself in all countries; only those that serve our purpose.
Those rebels from Iraq did go to Libya. And the US did supply arms to them and money, plenty of money.
I have no idea what you are talking about in your last sentence.
Do you think "serving a purpose" is a one way street? Has every US "purpose" since 2001 been successful for the US? Other than forming "diplomatic relationships" at the cost of lives and money, I would say there have been no other benefits. Hatred from ME countries towards the US has grown because of all the US meddling the US has done in the business of other countries. Although ME countries govern by Sharia law, they hate the Muslim Brotherhood and Obama didn't help the US by supporting Morsi/the MB and supporting and arming the Muslim Brotherhood against Syria.
While the US thought it was going to change the way the dog wagged it's tail, it became the useful idiot for the Muslim Brotherhood.
What a joke. Do you think someone waved a wand when Egypt became a democracy and poof - magically the Egyptians were fully versed in what you refer to as "the laws of democracy"?
Do you really expect a country that has existed under the control of rulers and dictators throughout its history, and now for the first time in its history, is a democracy for a year, should know how democracy works? Under Morsi the Egyptian people didn't even get a taste of democracy and lost more to him in the one year he was President.
The people and the military took the only route they knew throughout their history which was a military coup. They have yet to learn how a democratic government works and implement democracy. If they can hold onto their democracy it will take them years to get it right. You seem to think that because they are a democracy that they should have known better. In time they will, but that won't happen overnight.
As for cutting military aid, America can't afford to take that risk, and if they do, Egypt will survive and thrive, and the US will suffer the consequences. You don't seem to understand who has the leverage. Egypt isn't concerned about losing $1.5 billion in military money from the US when Saudi Arabia is ready to double that number, and other wealthy Arab countries will follow suit to support Egypt and the people. Arab countries are not too thrilled over Obama's interference and support for the Muslim Brotherhood.
We should have learned something about cutting aid and technical assistance to Egypt. In 1959 we did just that we said no to helping them build the Aswan High Dam. The result was another Dam builder called the Soviet Union stepped in and by the early 1970s it was one of the world's largest sources for hydoelectric power. It is a real tribute to Soviet engineering. The Soviets then became the chief source of military equipment for Egypt (for example the Egyptian Air Force was equiped with Badger bombers and Mig 19s, and 21s). Plus they got SAM anti aircraft missiles and Soviet radar. Israel paid the price for that in 1973. The Russians tried to get the old Royal Navy bases at Port Suez and Alexandria. Before 1959 and before Eisenhower and Dulles snubed Nasser over the dam issue our name was quite good because we and the Soviets forced Britain, France and Israel to give back the Suez Canal and the Sinai take in the 1956 war. But Dulles pissed it all away.
The US didn't get into the game until in 1970 the Soviets tried to influence the sucession in Egypt and get their own leader into power. The tried to oust Anwar Sadat because he wasn't Socialist enough and not willing to give the USSR what it wanted and needed a base of operations in the heart of the Middle East.
I have no idea what you are talking about in your last sentence.
Do you think "serving a purpose" is a one way street? Has every US "purpose" since 2001 been successful for the US? Other than forming "diplomatic relationships" at the cost of lives and money, I would say there have been no other benefits. Hatred from ME countries towards the US has grown because of all the US meddling the US has done in the business of other countries. Although ME countries govern by Sharia law, they hate the Muslim Brotherhood and Obama didn't help the US by supporting Morsi/the MB and supporting and arming the Muslim Brotherhood against Syria.
While the US thought it was going to change the way the dog wagged it's tail, it became the useful idiot for the Muslim Brotherhood.
Then you should read up about how much the US was involved in the Libyan invasion.
It happened way before Obama "sent in the drones".
Then you should read up about how much the US was involved in the Libyan invasion.
It happened way before Obama "sent in the drones".
I'm fully aware of the US involvement in Libya thank you very much. You just seem to throw in comments that come out of left field and are totally unrelated to a post that you are responding to. You seem to be all over the place at times. I guess juggling 10 threads at a time and having to do a mental search through that knowledge bank in your head can be distracting.
I'm fully aware of the US involvement in Libya thank you very much. You just seem to throw in comments that come out of left field and are totally unrelated to a post that you are responding to. You seem to be all over the place at times.
Not really. It's about CIA/US involvement in determining who gets to rule and who gets to die.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
