Pakistan PM Imran Khan urges Muslim-Majority Countries to Boycott the West

[Marduk]

Sure, Western powers did conquer parts of the Middle East and exploit them, but that was par for the course of what powerful nations do to less powerful ones and it it was actually extremely compassionate compared to what Muslims did to Europeans/Christians when they had/have the upper hand.

It is still compassionate compared to what Muslims do to each other in 2021. Libya, Syria, Yemen...
Its absolutely not the western armies who have the meanest reputation in any of these.

Our (especially America’s) current policies in the Middle East are bad, I can’t deny that, and Muslim countries are justified in complaints about us conquering countries there, funding terrorists or rebels, propping up one group against another, drone strikes, and all of the other terrible stuff that we do there. They have every right to complain about that, so I can’t help but feel that getting upset over drawing of Mohammed is misplaced anger.

No, they are whining because its worse when infidels trounce them over rather than neighbors, and because infidels care about the complaining, plus some of them are soft hearted enough to throw tons of goodies at them as an apology, unlike the local actors who would only treat such complaining as an invitation for more abuse.
If there's anything bad about western policy in ME is that its not self-interested enough.
Blood for oil maybe sounds bad to altruistic humanitarian types, but blood for nothing but bullshit and huge bills to pay is objectively far worse.

The West’s attitude towards the Islamic World is just as strange though. We bomb and take over their countries, instigate and fund wars there, prop up some regimes and undermine others, and create all sorts of harm in the region, very often helping countries that are hostile to us and attacking those who have never threatened us.

That's normal global politics, played for trade route control, resources, military base locations, classic stuff from history books and strategy games alike. With results worse than would be expected from doing it properly due to various grifts and complications done for optics.

We do all that nasty stuff to them and mostly don’t care, yet at the very same time we open our borders wide as can be, even paying angry Muslims to come to Western nations after their countries have been devastated by Western policies. Then when Muslims misbehave in Western nations, the authorities actively protect them.

That's leftist diversity exploiters of all sorts. They have those even in countries who don't do the former and couldn't even if they wanted to, like Sweden. As such, surprisingly to people living in countries who do both, there is less causal relationship between these two operations than one would suspect to see. They just opportunistically use each other as rhetorical points. If they can't, they just go and switch to other rhetorical points down the list.

 

[GoldRanger]

Blood for oil maybe sounds bad to altruistic humanitarian types, but blood for nothing but bullshit and huge bills to pay is objectively far worse.

Actually, I never understood the moral objections to securing an oil supply with force. Oil isn't just money for rich people, it's also the lives of millions who depend on it for heating, transportation of food and essential items, electricity (which affects vital municipal services like plumbing) and probably a lot more that I'm missing.

Against the death of millions, risking the lives of thousands of soldiers and inflicting death and destruction upon an unfriendly country to secure one's oil supply seems pretty moral to me. More so because if diplomacy fails to solve the problem first (like with Iraq's invasion of Kuwait) it is at least partly the unfriendly country's fault.

 

[Marduk]

Actually, I never understood the moral objections to securing an oil supply with force.

Of course its never nationalists raising those objections, that's for sure. Its the the leftist anti-western types and the naive kumbayah people who should avoid real world politics for the sake of their own mental well being.

Oil isn't just money for rich people, it's also the lives of millions who depend on it for heating, transportation of food and essential items, electricity (which affects vital municipal services like plumbing) and probably a lot more that I'm missing.

There's also the greens who want those gone too, either disregarding or failing to understand the price for that, but the overlap with abovementioned categories is so big that its not a meaningful distinction.