wifeisafurd said:

---

"It seems like this admin just is very opposed to using diplomacy at all and we may be walking ourselves into a bigger conflict than what US military power can handle."

I once had a former Secretary of State who I nominally worked for (he was managing partner, and I was a lowly associate) tell me the framework of international negotiations was easy. You let both sides air out their grievances, and then start asking what is that you need. It is the details that are hard.

That works fine when the relevant parties are at the table. But this is a proxy battle between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Hizbollah and Hamas are supported and armed by by the Iranians. The PLO is supported by the Egyptians and Saudis, and cooperates with Israel. The Saudis and Egyptians don't want Iran having influence in the Peninsula and causing instability. Egypt also doesn't want a a few million destitute refugees who are not aligned with their regime's views.

So there is no airing of grievances and asking Hamas and Israel what it is they need for what likely would be a negotiated 2 state solution, because all of the other players are not at the table. Instead, you go the next level of foreign policy which is one side has to lose enough they are forced to negotiate. Israel is now doing that bidding on behalf of Saudesi and Egypt by removing Hamas, with US backing, and replacing them with the PLO. So in case you are wondering, Biden is back with the regular US alliances in the region, and has had held up the release of billions of dollars Iran was supposed to get.

This may in the long run work for Biden. Since taking over Gaza in 2007, Hamas frequently has launched attacks at civilian Israeli targets and perpetrated repeated terrorist attacks on innocent Israeli civilians, with resulting massive incursions by the IDF, leaving many dead Palestinians. Since Hamas took over in 2007, Israel and Egypt have imposed severe restrictions on their borders with Gaza to minimize the flow of sophisticated weapons into Gaza and prevent terrorists from entering Israel. As a result of those border restrictions, Gaza's residents justifiably complain about the abysmal squalor that they have been living in for 16 years. Those border restrictions would not be necessary if Hamas were to stop attacking Israel and recognize its right to exist. That is not going to happen with Hamas being funded by Iran. Over the years, the international community has sent billions of dollars to Gaza. Iran and other countries have sent untold millions more and sophisticated weapons. Hamas has built large reinforced tunnels from Egypt, through which it smuggles in rocket launchers, thousands of rockets, and other deadly offensive weapons, but not food, water, medicine …. Hamas also has built reinforced tunnels for its leadership and terrorists to hide in when Israel responds to Hamas's terrorist attacks. Even the Gaza people have to know that in the interest of the Hamas leaders is themselves. That is why Hamas won't hold elections.

Yet, Hamas has not built adequate housing, power plants, other essential infrastructure, or even bunkers or safe rooms, for its civilians. So if regime change is achieved, and the PLO finally is controlled to stop engaging in massive corruption (which is a big ask), it is likely that Israel and Gaza air out their grievances, US negotiators get to ask what is it that you need to both sides and maybe there is some chance of peace. It worked with Egypt and Israel, and, it could work with Gaza, with some arm twisting of Bibi by Biden, not to mention billions in Saudi and US aide pouring into build a modern Palestinian Gaza state, with the food, water, medicine, good jobs, housing, hospitals, and other infrastructure the Palestinians want.

---

First of all, the Saudis and Iranian rulers have made peace, a rapprochement brought about by Chinese diplomacy, China being the largest trading partner for both countries. They have figured out that both of them stand to lose a great deal by going to war, as their infrastructure and oil revenues would quickly be crushed. Saudi Arabia is joining the BRICS, as did Iran. Both countries would gain from cooperating under Chinese influence instead of maintaining their old adversarial dynamic - basic game theory.

China stands to lose a great deal if a regional war flares up in the middle east, they depend on Gulf oil for their industrial base. That is why they worked to bring Saudi and Iran together.

The antagonism between those two countries is mostly artificial, the result of "great game" divide and conquer outside interference, which dates back to the early 19th century, when the British armed the Wahhabis, who embody the most radical form of Islam in the region. The Brits helped Wahhabi champions Sauds tribe conquer the Arabian peninsula. This ensured a deep religious rift and a civil war between Arabia and the Ottoman empire, which espoused a more moderate and mainstream sunni Islam. This helped the British take over the Levant from the Ottomans, using Arabian tribes as proxy warriors (see T.E. Lawrence). These Arabian tribes practiced guerilla warfare that was effective at dislodging the Ottomans from the Levant, but they weren't strong enough or organized enough to hold that territory, which became easy pickings for Britain and France.

Second, Gaza has been under an economic blockade by Israel for over a decade, with recent peaceful protests being met with thousands of Palestinians being shot with live ammunition. This blockade is not just about denying Gaza military equipment, it's about maintaining that population under duress. Israel for instance restricts Gaza exports.

Cal88 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

"It seems like this admin just is very opposed to using diplomacy at all and we may be walking ourselves into a bigger conflict than what US military power can handle."

I once had a former Secretary of State who I nominally worked for (he was managing partner, and I was a lowly associate) tell me the framework of international negotiations was easy. You let both sides air out their grievances, and then start asking what is that you need. It is the details that are hard.

That works fine when the relevant parties are at the table. But this is a proxy battle between Iran and Saudi Arabia. Hizbollah and Hamas are supported and armed by by the Iranians. The PLO is supported by the Egyptians and Saudis, and cooperates with Israel. The Saudis and Egyptians don't want Iran having influence in the Peninsula and causing instability. Egypt also doesn't want a a few million destitute refugees who are not aligned with their regime's views.

So there is no airing of grievances and asking Hamas and Israel what it is they need for what likely would be a negotiated 2 state solution, because all of the other players are not at the table. Instead, you go the next level of foreign policy which is one side has to lose enough they are forced to negotiate. Israel is now doing that bidding on behalf of Saudesi and Egypt by removing Hamas, with US backing, and replacing them with the PLO. So in case you are wondering, Biden is back with the regular US alliances in the region, and has had held up the release of billions of dollars Iran was supposed to get.

This may in the long run work for Biden. Since taking over Gaza in 2007, Hamas frequently has launched attacks at civilian Israeli targets and perpetrated repeated terrorist attacks on innocent Israeli civilians, with resulting massive incursions by the IDF, leaving many dead Palestinians. Since Hamas took over in 2007, Israel and Egypt have imposed severe restrictions on their borders with Gaza to minimize the flow of sophisticated weapons into Gaza and prevent terrorists from entering Israel. As a result of those border restrictions, Gaza's residents justifiably complain about the abysmal squalor that they have been living in for 16 years. Those border restrictions would not be necessary if Hamas were to stop attacking Israel and recognize its right to exist. That is not going to happen with Hamas being funded by Iran. Over the years, the international community has sent billions of dollars to Gaza. Iran and other countries have sent untold millions more and sophisticated weapons. Hamas has built large reinforced tunnels from Egypt, through which it smuggles in rocket launchers, thousands of rockets, and other deadly offensive weapons, but not food, water, medicine …. Hamas also has built reinforced tunnels for its leadership and terrorists to hide in when Israel responds to Hamas's terrorist attacks. Even the Gaza people have to know that in the interest of the Hamas leaders is themselves. That is why Hamas won't hold elections.

Yet, Hamas has not built adequate housing, power plants, other essential infrastructure, or even bunkers or safe rooms, for its civilians. So if regime change is achieved, and the PLO finally is controlled to stop engaging in massive corruption (which is a big ask), it is likely that Israel and Gaza air out their grievances, US negotiators get to ask what is it that you need to both sides and maybe there is some chance of peace. It worked with Egypt and Israel, and, it could work with Gaza, with some arm twisting of Bibi by Biden, not to mention billions in Saudi and US aide pouring into build a modern Palestinian Gaza state, with the food, water, medicine, good jobs, housing, hospitals, and other infrastructure the Palestinians want.

---

First of all, the Saudis and Iranian rulers have made peace, a rapprochement brought about by Chinese diplomacy, China being the largest trading partner for both countries. They have figured out that both of them stand to lose a great deal by going to war, as their infrastructure and oil revenues would quickly be crushed. Saudi Arabia is joining the BRICS, as did Iran. Both countries would gain from cooperating under Chinese influence instead of maintaining their old adversarial dynamic - basic game theory.

China stands to lose a great deal if a regional war flares up in the middle east, they depend on Gulf oil for their industrial base. That is why they worked to bring Saudi and Iran together.

The antagonism between those two countries is mostly artificial, the result of "great game" divide and conquer outside interference, which dates back to the early 19th century, when the British armed the Wahhabis, who embody the most radical form of Islam in the region. The Brits helped Wahhabi champions Sauds tribe conquer the Arabian peninsula. This ensured a deep religious rift and a civil war between Arabia and the Ottoman empire, which espoused a more moderate and mainstream sunni Islam. This helped the British take over the Levant from the Ottomans, using Arabian tribes as proxy warriors (see T.E. Lawrence). These Arabian tribes practiced guerilla warfare that was effective at dislodging the Ottomans from the Levant, but they weren't strong enough or organized enough to hold that territory, which became easy pickings for Britain and France.

Second, Gaza has been under an economic blockade by Israel for over a decade, with recent peaceful protests being met with thousands of Palestinians being shot with live ammunition. This blockade is not just about denying Gaza military equipment, it's about maintaining that population under duress. Israel for instance restricts Gaza exports.

---

NIce selective facts.

Let's start with the blockade. Just drawing a blind eye to a huge border with Egypt where the Egyptians have been enforcing their own boycott. Even today, the New York Times has a major article on how Egypt viewed the tunnels as a threat and destroyed any tunnels they could find near their border. Egypt does everything in its power to isolate Gaza and only was willing to allow humanitarian aide when the US insisted.

Then there is the fiction about how Saudi and Iran now place nice, because they actually agreed to exchange ambassadors under the Beijing agreement (which puts Iran back on equal footing with Israel). That may look nice in appearances and got China some goodwill, but it has not contributed to managing, or even resolving, conflicts elsewhere in the Middle East that are actually occurring right now. The competing regional agendas of Riyadh and Tehran have compounded devastating wars in Yemen and Syria, and continue to fuel instability in Lebanon and Iraq. Saudi and several Gulf Arab states have long been concerned about direct threats from, or even attacks by, Iranian proxies, as well as alleged Iranian support for dissident movements. Israel, which also now had the same diplomatic relations with Riyadh, meanwhile, sees Iran's nuclear program as an existential threat. It does not diminish the risk of a crisis triggered by Iran's rapidly advancing nuclear program and the threat it poses, in particular for Israel, but also for some of Iran's neighbor's, Suadi allies, and also includes Saudi Arabia. Tehran accuses Israel of sabotaging its nuclear program, and now accused Saudi Arabia of backing Israel in that effort, and also supporting ethnic opposition groups in Kordestan, Baluchistan and other troubled provinces, along with sponsoring hostile Iranian diaspora media.

The thing you make such a big deal about, this minor gain achieved by China of exchange ambassadors, can be traced to January 2016, when Iranian protesters stormed the Saudi embassy in Tehran after Riyadh in response ordered the execution of Shiite cleric Nimr al-Nimr, a prominent dissident supported by Iran. It ignores all the major issues that impact hostile Saudi and Iran actions against each other today, such as even today funding opposing proxy groups to fight each other.

You have repeatedly tried to take a separate action and define it to stand for way broader policy or objectives through out this thread. This is an approach President Trump made famous leading to false news.

As for Gaza under Hamas and Israel attacking each other, you can't really go about being selective to describe the actions of the other. That should be apparent at this point.

1.) A document from the Israeli Intelligence Ministry dated October 13th, 2023 recommends the entirety of the 2.3 million (less every day) Gaza population be moved to tent cities in the northern Sinai peninsula on Egyptian land, and the construction of permanent cities and the opening of a humanitarian corridor. It includes a seven kilometer wide sterile buffer zone inside Egypt to ensure the population cannot settle on Israel's borders.

The Israeli Intelligence Ministry cites concerns with international legitimacy as a con, but the warning it sends to Hezbollah as a pro, in a nod to Israel's former illegal occupation of southern Lebanon from 1982 to 2000.

The Intelligence Ministry also has two other options - importing Palestinian Authority control to Gaza, or propping up a puppet regime, but this is the recommended option from the Intelligence Ministry to the government.

https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-30/ty-article/.premium/israeli-govt-document-suggests-possible-relocation-of-gazans-to-northern-sinai/0000018b-7ff6-d1da-a1bb-7ffe83ed0000

2.) Over the weekend, Benjamin Netanyahu has made a few comments. In a press conference, he said

"You must remember what Amalek has done to you, says our Holy Bible. And we do remember, and we are fighting. Our brave troops and combatants who are now in Gaza or around Gaza, and in all other regions in Israel, are joining this chain of Jewish heroes, a chain that has started 3,000 years ago from Joshua ben Nun, until the heroes of 1948, the Six-Day War, the '73 October War and all other wars in this country"

https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/netanyahu-goal-of-war-is-to-defeat-the-murderous-enemy-ensure-our-existence-in-our-land/

Ok, so what's the big deal with Amalek? What does the Holy Bible say about them?

1 Samuel: "Go and attack Amalek," Samuel tells Saul, speaking for God. "Utterly destroy all that they have; do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, child and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey" (1 Sam. 15:3). Saul carries out the commandthough he preserves everything of economic value, along with the Amalekite king, Agag. "All that was despised and worthless they utterly destroyed" (15:9).

"Remember what Amalek did to you on your journey out of Egypt," we read in Deuteronomy, "how he attacked you on the way, when you were faint and weary, and struck down all who lagged behind you; he did not fear God. Therefore when the Lord your God has given you rest from all your enemies on every hand, in the land that the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance to possess, you shall blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; do not forget" (Deut. 25:1719).

Christian Zionist organizations use the invocation of Amalek to justify genocide, including justifying the purge of Native Americans, Protestants against Catholics, Catholics against Protestants, and Hutu preachers in Rwanda justifying the slaughter of Tutsi neighbors. This is historically powerful language of hatred and genocide justification.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/may/30/christian-fundamentalists-plan-teach-genocide

3.) Meanwhile, more children have been killed in Gaza in the last three weeks than the total number of children killed in ALL CONFLICTS AROUND THE WORLD annually (not cumulatively, but each year) for the past 4 years.

As of yesterday, 3,257 children have been killed, including 3,195 in Gaza, 33 in the West Bank, and 29 in Israel.

"The number of children reported killed in just three weeks in Gaza is more than the number killed in armed conflict globallyacross more than 20 countriesover the course of a whole year, for the last three years."

https://www.savethechildren.org/us/about-us/media-and-news/2023-press-releases/gaza--3-195-children-killed-in-three-weeks#:~:text=It%20is%20reported%20that%20at,children%2C%20remain%20hostages%20inside%20Gaza.

I'm not sure how killing children by the thousands or exacerbating the illegal occupation and displacement of a people along ethnic and religious grounds using language invoking religion genocide will do anything but create an even more radical, subversive generation when the impetus of their grievance - forced displacement, violence, and no hope for a future or statehood, is only made worse than it was before. We are not just witnessing insanity, we are sponsoring it and in many cases cheering it along.

If 3,195 dead children isn't enough to call for a ceasefire, what is your number? 10,000? 100,000? How many dead children is enough dead children for accomplishing geopolitical strategic goals?

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Isn't the primary reason that Saudi and Iran are at odds because the former is Sunni Muslim and the other is Shiite?

---

The Saudis and Iranians don't have any meaningful border disputes, their rivalry is primarily one of regional powers wanting to exploit the ongoing shift to a multipolar global landscape. They however have a common interest in maintaining their infrastructure and growing economically, a hot war would be disastrous for both economies, would set them back decades and destablize both countries.

---

I didn't say anything about them wanting war, just that the primary split between them is because their respective leaderships are part of different Muslim sects and don't necessarily want the same thing.

---

My whole point is that the sectarian angle is overblown, in good part because it has been carefully maintained through the classic colonial divide and conquer policy where minorities are placed in power or armed (see the Kurds) and sectarian lines emphacized. In Iraq, NATO went as far as running false flag bombings of mosques in order to stoke sectarian wars:



Iran is a fully independent country, meaning their leadership does what's best for their country, from their own perspective. That is not the case in Egypt for example, whose government and leadership is more or less subservient to US and Israeli power. What's best for Iran is for them to harness their large economic potential, which has been stymied by US sanctions. They can do this by integrating the BRICS economic framework.

Saudi Arabia used to be more like Egypt, a captive US client state. MbS, who was put in place by a palace coup a few years ago, was supposed to be more compliant than his rival cousins in line for the throne, but he has turned out to have a strong independent streak, that is being encouraged by the global shift towards a multipolar world, and the fact that Saudi economic interests lie with China, who is not just their largest oil client by far, but also a partner in future large infrastructure projects, similar to what China is doing in Iran or Pakistan. China is the main engine of economic growth in Asia.

---

It's genuinely impressive how you manage to turn every geopolitical issue into "It's America's fault."

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Isn't the primary reason that Saudi and Iran are at odds because the former is Sunni Muslim and the other is Shiite?

---

The Saudis and Iranians don't have any meaningful border disputes, their rivalry is primarily one of regional powers wanting to exploit the ongoing shift to a multipolar global landscape. They however have a common interest in maintaining their infrastructure and growing economically, a hot war would be disastrous for both economies, would set them back decades and destablize both countries.

---

I didn't say anything about them wanting war, just that the primary split between them is because their respective leaderships are part of different Muslim sects and don't necessarily want the same thing.

---

My whole point is that the sectarian angle is overblown, in good part because it has been carefully maintained through the classic colonial divide and conquer policy where minorities are placed in power or armed (see the Kurds) and sectarian lines emphacized. In Iraq, NATO went as far as running false flag bombings of mosques in order to stoke sectarian wars:



Iran is a fully independent country, meaning their leadership does what's best for their country, from their own perspective. That is not the case in Egypt for example, whose government and leadership is more or less subservient to US and Israeli power. What's best for Iran is for them to harness their large economic potential, which has been stymied by US sanctions. They can do this by integrating the BRICS economic framework.

Saudi Arabia used to be more like Egypt, a captive US client state. MbS, who was put in place by a palace coup a few years ago, was supposed to be more compliant than his rival cousins in line for the throne, but he has turned out to have a strong independent streak, that is being encouraged by the global shift towards a multipolar world, and the fact that Saudi economic interests lie with China, who is not just their largest oil client by far, but also a partner in future large infrastructure projects, similar to what China is doing in Iran or Pakistan. China is the main engine of economic growth in Asia.

---

It's genuinely impressive how you manage to turn every geopolitical issue into "It's America's fault."

---

Unfortunately in the Mideast at least, it's been very much the case. US neocon wars and invasion have resulted in over a million deaths, conservatively speaking, and the destruction of countries like Iraq, Libya and Syria (Operation Timber Sycamore).

The US has sponsored coups in nearly every country in the region, overturning democratically elected governments like Mossadegh's in Iran (Operation Ajax, run by Ted Roosevelt grandson Kermit), as well as feeding and extending the very bloody Iran-Iraq war by arming both sides ("It's a pity both sides can't lose" Henry Kissinger)

The dynamics between KSA and Iran are very similar to those between Iran and Iraq in the 80s, US neocon, the MIC and Israel want war between these parties and sectarian strife in the region, while a war in the region would devastate China's economy. Basic realpolitik.

Sharp generational divide in public opinion over Israel:

Networked tribalism in action.

Israel is one generation away from losing US support. pic.twitter.com/TZyVwCEUFw

— John Robb (@johnrobb) October 26, 2023

Older/Boomer conservatives have been weaned on Fox neocon coverage of the middle east, while younger people are more influenced by social media.

movielover said:

---

Twenty two chaotic Arab countries exist, with one Jewish state, and many of these countries want the destruction of Israel, a democracy and friend of the USA.

It seems like the Palestinians are a group no one wants, but use as a proxy to attack Israel. I mentioned earlier - why not settle them in the Sinai, and give Israel more security? But apparently the Palestinians have caused havoc for several countries.

A friend claims the high Muslim birth rate and men having multiple wives will eventually make all this moot.

Then we have the bright Iranian people being led by the religious zealot Mullahs. I wonder if we've given Israel any bunker buster bombs to take out the German designed, deep underground bunkers?

---

It's odd that you're so comfortable saying such blatantly false, blatantly racist things on a public forum.

Cal88 said:

---

Sharp generational divide in public opinion over Israel:

Networked tribalism in action.

Israel is one generation away from losing US support. pic.twitter.com/TZyVwCEUFw

— John Robb (@johnrobb) October 26, 2023

Older/Boomer conservatives have been weaned on Fox neocon coverage of the middle east, while younger people are more influenced by social media.

---

It is more accurate to say the older people have lived through enough difficulties to understand the fallacy of the idea that just being nice will placate people who want to murder you because they don't accept your basic right to exist. Conversely, the youth are stupidly naive because they need to learn those same lessons the hard way themselves.

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Sharp generational divide in public opinion over Israel:

Networked tribalism in action.

Israel is one generation away from losing US support. pic.twitter.com/TZyVwCEUFw

— John Robb (@johnrobb) October 26, 2023

Older/Boomer conservatives have been weaned on Fox neocon coverage of the middle east, while younger people are more influenced by social media.

---

It is more accurate to say the older people have lived through enough difficulties to understand the fallacy of the idea that just being nice will placate people who want to murder you because they don't accept your basic right to exist. Conversely, the youth are stupidly naive because they need to learn those same lessons the hard way themselves.

---

IMO it's mostly because younger people only know Israel under Netanyahu, and he sucks.

tequila4kapp said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

Sharp generational divide in public opinion over Israel:

Networked tribalism in action.

Israel is one generation away from losing US support. pic.twitter.com/TZyVwCEUFw

— John Robb (@johnrobb) October 26, 2023

Older/Boomer conservatives have been weaned on Fox neocon coverage of the middle east, while younger people are more influenced by social media.

---

It is more accurate to say the older people have lived through enough difficulties to understand the fallacy of the idea that just being nice will placate people who want to murder you because they don't accept your basic right to exist. Conversely, the youth are stupidly naive because they need to learn those same lessons the hard way themselves.

---

Economically speaking, it's the opposite, it is the Boomers who have lived through a period of unprecedented affluence and middle class social mobility, with dirt-cheap housing, education, healthcare and a country with a large industrial base, where most people could raise a family and access the American Dream on just one income. As well this board being that of an elite university is also biased as far as relating with the economic strife among younger Americans today.

I get a lot of flack on this board by pointing out that America is a fairly insular place, where the media plays a larger role in shaping public opinion about the rest of the world. In such a cultural environment, the neocon Huntington Clash of Civilizations narrative has taken root, especially among older conservatives. Younger Americans however have grown up in more culturally diverse environments.

movielover said:

---

Twenty two chaotic Arab countries exist, with one Jewish state, and many of these countries want the destruction of Israel, a democracy and friend of the USA.

It seems like the Palestinians are a group no one wants, but use as a proxy to attack Israel. I mentioned earlier - why not settle them in the Sinai, and give Israel more security? But apparently the Palestinians have caused havoc for several countries.

A friend claims the high Muslim birth rate and men having multiple wives will eventually make all this moot.

Then we have the bright Iranian people being led by the religious zealot Mullahs. I wonder if we've given Israel any bunker buster bombs to take out the German designed, deep underground bunkers?

---

Israel wants to precipitate a war with Iran, done mostly with American blood and treasure, sooner rather than later because they are getting S-400s and 64 Su-35 jets from Russia next year.

Polygamy in the Muslim world is a marginal phenomenon, and the demographic growth rate in most Muslim countries has levelled off, due to their population becoming urbanized. The remianing countries that have bucked the trend are in sub-Saharan Africa. In Saudi and Egypt, the fertility rate has dropped from 6-7 children to nelow 3 today, near replacement rates. The decline is even sharper in Bangladesh, Indonesia, Malaysia etc with current fertility rates at or below replacement.

Arab countries like Iraq, Libya and Syria were stable and relatively affluent before they got invaded or torn up by jihadis funded and armed by NATO and Gulf proxies. Libya had the highest standard of living in Africa by far, Iraq had the best infrastructure in the developing world.

Egypt and Jordan pitching in some territory for a 2-state solution would be very helpful, though the current Israeli administration and even Barak's Labor Party were opposed to a 2-state settlement. Rabin was the last proponent of this solution in Israel, and ended up paying the ultimate price for that, RIP.

As an american I want less US involvement in regards to the middle east. These countries need to figure out what happens to themselves without us stepping in to intervene everytime. Consequences have actions. That also means I want us out of the UN and NATO who I fundamentally disagree with and no longer see either as forces for good. Especially when it comes to US interest.

MinotStateBeav said:

---

As an american I want less US involvement in regards to the middle east. These countries need to figure out what happens to themselves without us stepping in to intervene everytime. Consequences have actions. That also means I want us out of the UN and NATO who I fundamentally disagree with and no longer see either as forces for good. Especially when it comes to US interest.

---

Pulling out of all our alliances means the US will have no allies. I don't see how that will go well.

The KKK was a wing of the Democrat Party, including virtually all of the prominent leaders of slavery and Jim Crow. Just like BLM and Antifa, though some are Anarchists and Communists.

Thankfully the KKK is largely extinct, with some disgruntled uneducated souls trying to foment hate from granny's basement.

Nazis are apparently active in Ukraine, with reportedly 22 active groups today.