Japan tells us otherwise.
The problem with nation building isn't in the concept itself, it's that it's a multi generation project that you can't half ass.
Middle East Trump makes way for Turkey operation against Kurds in Syria
- Thread starter LifeisTiresome
- Start date
The problem with nation building isn't in the concept itself, it's that it's a multi generation project that you can't half ass.
D
Deleted member
Guest
Did we really change Japan all that much, or did we just kill all the fanatics so Taisho democracy could reassert itself?
D
Deleted member
Guest
Russian troops are now patrolling a contact line around Manbij between Turkish and Syrian forces.
Let us put this very simply: Putin is brilliant. He is the smartest living national ruler on the planet today. Many people have talked about his 4-d chess while we play checkers. Many people have pushed back and said he is a common tyrant, a dictator who is going to screw up. He may be a dictator, but he is also the most brilliant living politician.
For the Russians to step in so quickly and deconflict the situation simply means one thing. This was coordinated. From the moment that Trump agreed to withdraw, like the Hitler-Stalin pact, the operation in Syria against the Kurds was coordinated between the Turks and the Syrians by the Russians. Presumably, decades from now, we will hear about the secret negotiations which led to an agreement over the areas of Syria which were to remain in a Turkish sphere, and which ones were to be reunified under Assad's rule.
The Russians have now totally dominated the mid-east, and we are playing on the defence with only the Gulf states as allies. This is incredibly damaging to the United States--and the most masterful diplomatic act of my entire adulthood.
Let us put this very simply: Putin is brilliant. He is the smartest living national ruler on the planet today. Many people have talked about his 4-d chess while we play checkers. Many people have pushed back and said he is a common tyrant, a dictator who is going to screw up. He may be a dictator, but he is also the most brilliant living politician.
For the Russians to step in so quickly and deconflict the situation simply means one thing. This was coordinated. From the moment that Trump agreed to withdraw, like the Hitler-Stalin pact, the operation in Syria against the Kurds was coordinated between the Turks and the Syrians by the Russians. Presumably, decades from now, we will hear about the secret negotiations which led to an agreement over the areas of Syria which were to remain in a Turkish sphere, and which ones were to be reunified under Assad's rule.
The Russians have now totally dominated the mid-east, and we are playing on the defence with only the Gulf states as allies. This is incredibly damaging to the United States--and the most masterful diplomatic act of my entire adulthood.
ShieldWife
Marchioness
Russia dominates the Middle East? Let them have it. May they fare better there than we have.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member
Guest
They will. They are unconstrained by morality and will execute their objectives according to maximal realist foreign policy principles.
Terthna
Professional Lurker
So when are we kicking Turkey out of NATO? Because it sounds like they're under the control of the very enemy NATO exists to combat.
StormEagle
Well-known member
Russia’s welcome to the sand pit of misery and death. And I hope they bleed themselves dry trying to keep the damn place.
I mean was there ever going to be a way it didn't end this way? Syria was already in Russia's sphere and under it's protection as was copiously demonstrated by Russia blocking Western action into Syria. Turkey was never going to get far without it's say so because Russia wasn't about to let it blow up it's investment there. The US didn't have a realistic win condition, it's options amounted to sit there permanently bleeding money and lives to keep it in a stalemate that got them nothing or leave. The only "winning" move you had was not to play.
The only way you were going to deny Russia Syria was if you destroyed the country in spite of Russia's objections and support of them and quite bluntly that's a stupid idea that would at best caused Libya 2.0 and gotten even more countries hostile to you and at worst would have got you into a war with Russia.
The only way you were going to deny Russia Syria was if you destroyed the country in spite of Russia's objections and support of them and quite bluntly that's a stupid idea that would at best caused Libya 2.0 and gotten even more countries hostile to you and at worst would have got you into a war with Russia.
ShieldWife
Marchioness
Has the USA been constrained by morality with regard to our Middle Eastern policies in the last few decades? Considering the suffering, destruction, and massive numbers of deaths caused by recent activities there, the questionable (to put it mildly) justifications we have had, and the “allies” we aid there - I actually have trouble seeing the Russians being worse for the region.
If true, it's far from the first sign of the romance of Turkey with Russia going over the line - the F-35/S-400 choice was a pretty clear sign of which way the winds of the great game blow.
It's not hard to imagine that it could also have been hammered out on the go too - with enough persuasion from Moscow, potential of the S-400 deal, which Turkey committed to, trade deals (they are major trade partners) or worse things being put on the line, and Erdogan not wanting to risk skirmishes with combined Syrian/Russian forces in Syria while in historical low of relations with USA/NATO - so they have compromised on a line. All 3 countries involved are ones with one guy having the bulk of authority to make such decisions, so it's not unthinkable that they have made a deal this quickly, they aren't the EU...
It's not hard to imagine that it could also have been hammered out on the go too - with enough persuasion from Moscow, potential of the S-400 deal, which Turkey committed to, trade deals (they are major trade partners) or worse things being put on the line, and Erdogan not wanting to risk skirmishes with combined Syrian/Russian forces in Syria while in historical low of relations with USA/NATO - so they have compromised on a line. All 3 countries involved are ones with one guy having the bulk of authority to make such decisions, so it's not unthinkable that they have made a deal this quickly, they aren't the EU...
D
Deleted member
Guest
We certainly let our ideology dictate how we executed policy in the middle east, and it's led to several disasters. That's why I consider Wilsonian "moralising" foreign policy.
We changed Japan, a lot.
D
Deleted member
Guest
How much of Japan imitating successful foreign powers was already ingrained, though? How much did we really change? I see our main accomplishment as being the elimination of militarism, the rest was already present in Japanese pre-WW2 society.
Terthna
Professional Lurker
The most important change we made was making sure they never held a grudge against us for beating them; something they were well equipped to do, and which would have meant severe consequences later down the line. Instead, we turned what was once our hated enemy into one of our most loyal allies, and I don't think the significance of that feat should be discounted.
One thing to note is that both Japan and Germany were already major industrial powers, or in other words, developed countries of the time, as proven by how much military power they could bring up, with all the implications and requirements in culture, economy, education and governance ability, making pushing them towards being like the other major industrial powers much easier than it is ever going to be with, say, countries where a lot of the population lives in a way closer to 10th than 20th century, plus some resource extraction economy if they are lucky.
D
Deleted member
Guest
Yes, it's an incredibly significant and brilliant feat that deserves to be lauded, but it is not, say, rebuilding their culture, or even government, from the ground up.
Francis Urquhart
Well-known member
I don't think we did. Japan was an unusual case; most of the fundamental civil institutions remained largely unchanged (the Emperor for example remained in place). What actually happened was that a lot of additional and deleterious changes/additions that accumulated in the 1920s went out the window. Japan wasn't rebuilt or subject to 'nation-building', as a very thoughtful Japanese business friend of mine puts it, Japan was restored. Japan was also lucky in that the restoration only had to remove 25 years worth of ugly additions.
Germany is a much better example of nation-building that did work. In fact, Germany is the one significant example of a nation-building effort that actually succeeded. Exactly why would probably be a good PhD thesis for somebody.
HistoryMinor
Well-known member
Guys settle down... We went into Iraq for oil and to feed Cheney's ties to the military industrial complex.
It's a theory common in certain circles, but now, equipped with the immense power of hindsight, we can verify the "cui bono" part of it.
How much oil did USA supposedly get out of it, how much money did it spend on the whole undertaking, and in turn, was the price per barrel even remotely reasonable?
HistoryMinor
Well-known member
Sure the public lost out, but oil companies and haliburton made bufu bucks.