Dark Places and Expression

[TheLeviathan]

 

You may be alluding to the following but I'll elaborate. One thing the various rival factions in the area, including NATO ally Turkey, seem to absolutely agree upon is that none of them likes the Kurds. There is a major segment of the Kurdish population that would like to carve out portions of various countries and establish a sovereign Kurdistan. Tread carefully when thinking about even being seen as tilting in their direction; everyone will wind up angry at us, including the Kurds themselves when they realize the support they're getting from us is limited.

 

This isn't a simple bilateral Hatfields and McCoys feud in that part of the world.

 

Yup, that's what I was alluding to.  

[Bark's Lounge]

Thought it was high time time to reactivate this thread.

 

Just to give kudos to the last posts on this thread. The Kurds have been doing the dirty work and getting it done, where as no one else has. Now that Turkey is involved, I have great fears about keeping this brave and determined group of fighters alive, in the fight and focused on the destruction of the Islamic State.

 

The president of Turkey, Recep Erdogan is an Islamist, he wanted nothing to do with the IS conflict until a bomb killed 30 something Turkish peace workers he had no care for, who opposed his leadership. There were riots in Istanbul, because in the western part of that country the citizens for the most part are secular and want this **** to stop just like the the rest of us, but that crap is close to home for them.

 

Sure, there are other socialist opposition groups and what not, but they are being used as an excuse and after the suicide bombing of the peace workers, Erdogan used this as an excuse to let America in and use their Incirlik base for bombing. Giving him an open door to eliminate his Kurd nemesis.

 

I hate Erdogan and I hope Turkey can get back to the secular government they have had for 70+ years before he came into power. The US cannot let down the Kurds and when and if this conflict ever comes to a conclusion, the Kurds should get the top half of Iraq and the regions they secured in Syria. They are the only fighting forces that have put their neck on the line. It seems like a fair reward.

 

The Iraqi Army is weak and an embarassment. There is too much political bull**** to trust any of them. The Shia/Sunni conflict will never come to a close.

 

I was pleased to see that Americans were the ones who foiled the terrorist attack in Northern France. Maybe it was the right place at the right time kind of scenario, but they put it on the line and got the job done, They saved tens of lives+

 

Great job, proud of you guys.

 

We are lucky that religious extremists in our country are more content on robbing elderly and vulnerable poor people of their money, instead of recruiting them into terrorist camps and training them in guerrilla warfare to push forth their agenda.

 

One Step at a Time.

[Shane Wahl]

The actual answer is a cultural one (and by that I mean not in the sense of imposing "Western" culture somehow) and can never be a violent one. Waging war is not going to resolve a damn thing. It only exacerbates the problem.

 

Which is why the Pentagon wants to keep waging war. Wars beget wars.

 

See "Why We Fight."

[TheLeviathan]

I would very much disagree with the idea that culture can't change out of violence/war.

 

One stark example would be Japan.  I'm not saying that's the solution, I just disagree with the notion that the aftermath of war/violence can't produce a cultural shift for the better.

[drjim]

I would very much disagree with the idea that culture can't change out of violence/war.

 

One stark example would be Japan. I'm not saying that's the solution, I just disagree with the notion that the aftermath of war/violence can't produce a cultural shift for the better.

Or most of Europe and a lot of SE Asia.

 

I fear the disasterous boundaries of a century ago still need to get worked out in much of the world.

[Craig Arko]

This is why I love brilliant artists. In this case, Leonard Berstein.

 

http://www.brainpickings.org/2014/11/25/leonard-bernstein-jfk-speech/

[Bark's Lounge]

As we all know - Europe is dealing with an unprecedented number of refugees from Syria and North Africa, mostly of which are muslim.

 

On one hand I feel the passion of helping these people because of the unimaginable horror of which they have been through. On the other hand, I see the existing citizens of the sponsoring countries being put on edge and not wanting anything to do with it.

 

Islamophobia is ripe in many/all European nations and if things keep going the way they are, it is going to explode. As we all know, some landmark bad things have happened the last few years with Islamic extremists in Europe and I can understand why people are living on the edge of their seats and the same goes for the 2nd/3rd generation of euro muslims who want to live a peaceful life and go about their business as citizens of these nations without being discriminated against.

 

But the truth is, they have a really big problem on their hands. The fact that thousands of European citizens have been recruited to join Islamic State is scarey and the shock waves of this movement are very much alive and still tempting the remaining confused and disfunctional individuals.

 

Islamism is fairly a new phemomena. Sure, it's roots might be 70 years old, but it has kept evolving to the point it is at now... a very dire point - almost unrealistic.

 

Mostly all countries deal with religious fundamentalist groups, some are not so dangerous, some are very dangerous and what we consider terrorists - and their attacks will be pulled off from time to time. That is very disturbing, but it is a reality we must get used to.

 

For America, we had the the tragic shooting and murders at the Military recruiting office in Tennessee. We also had some dip**** American who was influenced by IS to attempt to attack a Military base in Kansas.

 

Unlike Europe or other regions, we are more bogged down with unexplainable killing sprees - Columbine, Sandy Hook, the Morning news reporter and camera man in Virginia + many, many more.

 

I have great disdain for religious fundamentalists. Take off the mask, enjoy the one life that you have, make the best out of it, pretty yourself up, if you have the money - buy something for yourself that makes you feel good or smile.

 

I hope no one takes offense to what I have typed out, I am accepting of all religions, but all religions need to be part of the solution and not the problem. It is your personal journey and not mine or the guy or gal next to me. Understand that belief is a smaller world than what you once imagined and define it upon your own sacrifices or accomplishments and keep it contained to your own Shangri La.

 

Saying that, which I am sure is flawed. What the hell can we do to make this awful movement we have going on in Syria and Iraq and the refugee crisis in Europe solvable?

[TheLeviathan]

I honestly don't think there is a solution.

[Shane Wahl]

 

Or most of Europe and a lot of SE Asia.

I fear the disasterous boundaries of a century ago still need to get worked out in much of the world.

 

Even the madness of Nazi support and the madness of support for the Japanese "Empire" does not compare to utter irrationality of radical religion, especially in a very illiterate and impoverished region. Violence will only be met with violence until deep cultural grassroots change occurs. I don't want to sound like a Western jackass, but an Enlightenment actually has to happen in some parts of the world still.

[Shane Wahl]

Move a society towards equality for women. Loosen up strict prohibitions on sexual relations. Those two things get the ball rolling.

[Craig Arko]

My concern here is that almost every time the West tries to 'solve' these things it winds up worse than before. Maybe a little enlightened 'butt out' is a new plan worth trying.

[TheLeviathan]

 

Even the madness of Nazi support and the madness of support for the Japanese "Empire" does not compare to utter irrationality of radical religion, especially in a very illiterate and impoverished region. Violence will only be met with violence until deep cultural grassroots change occurs. I don't want to sound like a Western jackass, but an Enlightenment actually has to happen in some parts of the world still.

 

The Shinto religion was a huge part of the Japanese madness.  It was one of the principle motivating factors for the slaughters that commenced in China and other places.

 

Religion has been intertwined with many violent regimes/countries - sometimes it takes a dramatic, violent defeat of their numbers and power for the enlightenment to start.

 

Afterall, how the hell do you get women's rights and sexual freedom started when everyone in power doesn't want it to happen?  Sometimes you have to purge the disease before you can start the healing.  But I tend to be with Mr. Arko - I think we're going to have to sit this one out.  The problem is the people who suffer, typically, are the ones that are our best hope for an enlightened change.

[Bark's Lounge]

 

I honestly don't think there is a solution.

yeah, unfortunately, that is the same conclusion I have come to.

[drjim]

 

Even the madness of Nazi support and the madness of support for the Japanese "Empire" does not compare to utter irrationality of radical religion, especially in a very illiterate and impoverished region. Violence will only be met with violence until deep cultural grassroots change occurs. I don't want to sound like a Western jackass, but an Enlightenment actually has to happen in some parts of the world still.

 

I'm a defender of religion but I agree with you here.

 

Nationalism is nasty but it doesn't compare with radical religion because there is a theoretical limit to nationalism once borders have been established.

 

The difference in recent history is that nationalism fused with the most advanced/wealthy societies while religion has fused mostly with stateless actors that just don't have the resources to cause the damage that nationalism fueled countries did in the last century.

 

I agree with Levi to a point, that violence must be met with violence, but there is also a role to be played by people within the midst of a movement/religion to reform and stop themselves. It has happened with nationalism in the past and other religions, and will ultimately happen with Islamism. Just a matter of how long and how many dead it will take.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I agree with Levi to a point, that violence must be met with violence, but there is also a role to be played by people within the midst of a movement/religion to reform and stop themselves. It has happened with nationalism in the past and other religions, and will ultimately happen with Islamism. Just a matter of how long and how many dead it will take.

 

To be clear, I'm not saying it always must be met with violence.  I just deny that violence met with violence hasn't been effective in the past as well.  That doesn't mean it will be here, though.

 

The problem with doing nothing, or being uninvolved, is that our best allies for change die in the process.  The whole mess just leaves a sea of poor choices to choose from.

[Shane Wahl]

 

To be clear, I'm not saying it always must be met with violence.  I just deny that violence met with violence hasn't been effective in the past as well.  That doesn't mean it will be here, though.

 

The problem with doing nothing, or being uninvolved, is that our best allies for change die in the process.  The whole mess just leaves a sea of poor choices to choose from.

 

I would be interested in accounts from actual Germans about life immediately after WWII. From Nazi supporters to lukewarm "go along with it" Germans. What the hell went through their minds *after* and how did they accept life either West or East afterward. Same with the Japanese.

 

Those were some serious occupations, though, and not in the midst of an entire region of chaos.

 

About involvement and "best allies" . . .it isn't really clear who the best allies are. Certainly, there are plenty and were plenty in Iran. Our actions only made the radicals stronger. Iran was a much different place well into the Shah's reign of terror (but by the 70s . . . ). ISIS does not happen without U.S. involvement (anyone who actually disputes that is seriously clueless).

 

I don't know what I sound like when I say this, but the Bill Hicks bit about dropping food on the entire planet seems along the right path. Hamas has widespread support. Why? It isn't because of terrorist involvement. It's because of charity. It's the gang-banger effect: buy shoes and clothes for kids and you get their loyalty.

 

The script has to be flipped. Of course when we support the savages in Saudi Arabia while doing all this . . .I mean Americans have to get serious about the fact that the U.S. government and the Pentagon have no ****ing interest in actually resolving conflicts and building lasting peace.

[TheLeviathan]

 

I would be interested in accounts from actual Germans about life immediately after WWII. From Nazi supporters to lukewarm "go along with it" Germans. What the hell went through their minds *after* and how did they accept life either West or East afterward. Same with the Japanese.

 

Those were some serious occupations, though, and not in the midst of an entire region of chaos.

 

About involvement and "best allies" . . .it isn't really clear who the best allies are. Certainly, there are plenty and were plenty in Iran. Our actions only made the radicals stronger. Iran was a much different place well into the Shah's reign of terror (but by the 70s . . . ). ISIS does not happen without U.S. involvement (anyone who actually disputes that is seriously clueless).

 

I don't know what I sound like when I say this, but the Bill Hicks bit about dropping food on the entire planet seems along the right path. Hamas has widespread support. Why? It isn't because of terrorist involvement. It's because of charity. It's the gang-banger effect: buy shoes and clothes for kids and you get their loyalty.

 

The script has to be flipped. Of course when we support the savages in Saudi Arabia while doing all this . . .I mean Americans have to get serious about the fact that the U.S. government and the Pentagon have no ****ing interest in actually resolving conflicts and building lasting peace.

 

I think Germany is a pretty unique case and considerably different than our current issue in the Middle East.  Japan as well.  My only point in bringing them up was that it took full scale war to unseat those radical forces driving the culture and the government.  I think, sometimes, it has to be considered that the maniacs have to die before you can rebuild something good.

 

The issue in the Middle East is finding the maniacs.  Islam as a whole has suffered without a second enlightenment period since the Christians annihilated the first.  So it's tough to tell which adherents to it can be part of a more secular, modern world.  

 

Our policy, many times over, has hurt this as well.  I completely agree with you on that.  It's why I tend to favor the "let's just stay the hell out of it" tactic.  It seems hopeless and largely bound to failure if we intervene.  

 

But we also can't pretend that choice doesn't come with some serious consequences.  We're still talking about places that hurl homosexuals off buildings.  Behead people in front of children to mold them into killers.  Use innocents as shields for terrorism.  And warp religion to stir a fervor that is hard to match.  Doing nothing allows those forces to potentially gain control at the expense of the slaughter of those that would seek to change the region in a more acceptable way.  

 

It's why I said what I did earlier - I don't think there is a "good" solution.

[biggentleben]

 

It's why I said what I did earlier - I don't think there is a "good" solution.

 

I'll read this a bit different to agree with it - I don't see a singular best solution to this whole issue. There are many approaches that could have some modicum of success, but each has its downfalls as well, and trying to weigh the downfall of one approach versus another is like comparing which rotting meat is the most appealing for dinner. That said, completely "hands-off" approaches would only be viable if the effects of the issues in the Middle East (and other radicalized regions of the world as the Middle East certainly isn't the only one) weren't already affecting life in the US. There needs to be something done in at least the mode of defense of the country, but I really struggle with any action that leads to offensive movements, whether they be of a military or economic variety.