What is the US endgame in the middle east? Why does the US seem to have this pathological hatred of secular Arab pan-nationalism and constantly bombs secular regimes into oblivion, while letting psycho Islamists take over who then carry out terrorist attacks all over the world?
Does the US just want to keep the middle east in a permanent state of chaos or something? I'm assuming this is all a very much planned out thing probably by Kissinger years ago. The US obviously is up to something.
Other urls found in this thread:
theatlantic.com
twitter.com
Upsetting Iran and forcing Russia to go to war against the NATO
The US has always feared secularism in the Middle-East because during the 1960s - 1980s, at the peak of the cold war, there were secular governments in that region, and they were quite friendly with the USSR. Socialist governments almost came to power several times, they were in the USSR's sphere of influence, and there was a lot of oil there. The US was scared. So they backed religious fundamentalist, pro-capitalist right-wingers; at the time these groups weren't "anti-American" in the way they are now. Over time, they became so.
i think it was the state department that called mid-east oil "one of the greatest material prizes in world history," so oil/economic interests has something to do with it. but then not everywhere in the "middle east" (a spurious term) is rich in oil. there are "strategic" and "tactical" reasons too, i suppose, to do with maintaining and increasing american power and dominance. maybe dominance itself is the "endgame"? it's an interesting subject, really
i don't think there really is a plan
permanent state of chaos and and a sandbox we can raid for oil and use our military toys in is probably the MO
Possibly.
In case you haven't been paying attention, the US now produces more oil than Saudi Arabia does.
That argument is now obsolete because of slant drilling and fracking techniques.
The shale field in Texas they found not so long ago has been rated possibly the largest field of potentially untapped oil and natural gas reserves yet found, and there's a 0% chance they won't exploit it, so the US won't be importing oil much longer.
This is the most likely answer.
I always thought the constant wars were a way to keep the U.S military and its technology trained and #1, and to bully/intimidate other countries into being U.S puppets, even if it means they have to keep overthrowing them. Or maybe they need an external enemy to keep people distracted from revolution against government and the rich. Maybe there is no endgame and politicians are just idiots.
Very likely.
God think about the massive media fauning and state funeral and shit Kissinger will get when he kicks the bucket, while the entire mainstream media shit on Castro for days non-stop. How depressing will that be.
The US end game in the middle east is to take down Iran. Everything is building up for a war with Iran. God knows fucking why, a large part of it is probably just cold-war warriors wanting their Iranian prize. But you can see the anti-Iran propaganda already flowing.
I will not be surprised if we see a war with Iran in the next few years.
The reason is Israel.
It's ALWAYS Israel.
...
Also
This. If you pay attention to Normie TV shows and movies Iran is continuously offhandedly portrayed as "the bad guys who want to nuke us all".
They're having a hard time drumming up public support for a nfz over Syria because Americans didn't know shit about it but a continuous low-key smearing of Iran since the 70s + some terrorist attack will easily get everyone screaming "nuke Iran!"
What are you trying to say?
It's also a finite resource that the entire world runs off of. Having control over 70% of the worlds oil reserves or at least having a strong presence in the region is definitely not something to write off just because we currently produce more oil.
muslim brotherhood pls go
I think this explains the Cold War-era behavior. I would add that some earlier pre-USSR brushfires that would ultimately worsen things, namely an earlier effort in WWI to militarize the once-geopolitically-irrelevant nomadic Arabs in the peninsula against the Ottomans and similar powers to the north/west/south awakened an endless well of backwardness and fundamentalism that (from about the mid-1700s to WWI) tremendous effort had barely succeeded in stamping out among their Muslim opponents' populaces by westernization and secularization efforts at that time.
Now, after WWI, and after the Cold War, we've just been struggling incompetently to put the genie back in the bottle we spent decades smashing to tiny shards, neither admitting fault for the situation, nor breaking up the worst sources of the problem (Saudi Arabia, UAE, etc.).
Israel stinks of scapegoat, to me. If their neighbors ever stopped being such contrarian shitters and dismantled their decades-old "refugee camps" to properly assimilate the "Palestinian refugees" (especially Jordan, since it's literally to Israel what Pakistan is to India) they treat a thousand times worse than Israel does their own, the amount of poverty and ethnic tension would massively decrease. This would also clear the way for Jordan/Egypt/Syria to annex Palestine (as DMZs, to keep Israel from getting pissy), most likely causing the entire kerfuffle to evaporate like a puff of steam.
endgame? What makes you think they want it to end?
“The essential act of war is destruction, not necessarily of human lives, but of the products of human labour. War is a way of shattering to pieces, or pouring into the stratosphere, or sinking in the depths of the sea, materials which might otherwise be used to make the masses too comfortable, and hence, in the long run, too intelligent.”
― George Orwell, 1984
this
I'm no fan of Israel, but at least know how to get their shit together.
All the other actors sound so bitter and keep complaining about "Zionism" and how the West is infested with it, when both the US White House and EU expressed that the two-state solution is what they desire the most.
What everyone else is saying, and:
It's a pipeline for liberating US tax dollars for themselves. The US pays absurd dollars to tribal cheifs for "valuable intelligence" etc. Also, engineering firms and manufacturing.. you get the drift. Good for the rich, bad for everyone else.
good luck on your discussion
This is true, but let's not forget Ba'athism is NOT Marxism.
Once again by denying mudslimes agency leftists prove themselves to be the true racists
Israel is 100% scapegoated.
Is there apartheid in the Occupied Territories? Absolutely. Does Israel commit war crimes against the Palestinians all the time? Absolutely. Is Israel controlling American foreign policy in the region? Hell no, and it's ridiculous to say otherwise. Israel helps the US secure the region, but even this may not be the case in a few years when the US successfully installs friendly pro-imperialist regimes in Libya and Syria.
US goal was imperialist domination for oil. Their plans have obviously not gone great recently, and Russia has come out stronger because of it. They will counter Russian aggression vehemently to maintain hegemony, which could easily lead to war.
Agreed, but Iran is less a prize and more of just "They are a strong challenger, we should take them out whenever possible for our interest"
Also this. There is no end game right now, it is more of just maintaining the order they have one. The US and the imperial powers have WON already. The task is for the workers of the world to win it back.
Freeing up markets, freeing up resources, giving contractors rubble to build upon, cold-war politics with Russia, military Keynesianism, distraction, etc etc etc
$$$freedom$$$
All I'm saying is that even within that context at some point choices were made to suicide bomb innocents, use human shields, and behead people. If you deny this you're being an actual racist
Check out this interview by Kissinger. It's extremely informative regarding US foreign policy and why they've been so interventionist over the past decade.
theatlantic.com
It mostly boils down to American exceptionalism. In other words, they believe that the US system of government is the gold standard with respect to how a country should function. As a result, they believe that their foreign policy must be geared towards whatever maintains US "supremacy" in the world and prevents opposing systems of government taking hold - e.g. USSR and soon to be China.
*taking hold/gaining too much influence
Kissinger is a fucking ghoul.
Also should read past half century not decade
End hegemonic masculinity.(USER WAS GULAGED FOR THIS POST)
I might just be a cynic, but it's probably the reverse, i.e. "US supremacy must be retained" with the concept of "American exceptionalism" adopted as the morally-palatable justification for preserving American supremacy.
It's like the Monroe Doctrine
If anything women are the hegemonic gender in today's society
...
...