Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Palindrome wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Still doesn't address the fact we are giving money to these dirt bags.
We should be giving a big fat 0 to them.

If international aid was withdrawn what do you suspect would happen given that significant segments of Pakistani society, including government agencies, are already well on the road to extremism?

This is yet another example of the region being about 5 centuries behind the west in terms of social development, but there isn't a lot that we can do other than hope that they get their gak together.

See, I don't think they'll ever get their gak together.

They have no reason to channel their energy into positive growth when they can just blame the West and Israel for their problems and foster a primitive culture of barbarity.

Us giving foreign aid to them or not certainly won't be the tipping point, we're well past that with them, might as well not waste the money when it could go to people who both need and want our help and aren't trying to commit genocide.

 Grey Templar wrote:


See, I don't think they'll ever get their gak together.

They have no reason to channel their energy into positive growth when they can just blame the West and Israel for their problems and foster a primitive culture of barbarity.

Us giving foreign aid to them or not certainly won't be the tipping point, we're well past that with them, might as well not waste the money when it could go to people who both need and want our help and aren't trying to commit genocide.

Eventually they will fall so far behind that they will have to do something.

We haven't really reached a tipping point yet, I'm not sure if there is one, but Pakistan has the potential to become a very dangerous place so its probably best to have as many levers as possible and aid money is a pretty big lever.

 Grey Templar wrote:
See, I don't think they'll ever get their gak together.

They have no reason to channel their energy into positive growth when they can just blame the West and Israel for their problems and foster a primitive culture of barbarity.

See, I think this is a gross and very wrong statement. I think you cannot just talk about “them” as a uniform mass of non-individuals. I think you ought to inform yourself on those that wish to reform and modernize their culture.And those that would plunge it back into the dark ages. And all the different movements and opinions, and the balance of power between them.

Well, Pakistan is probably developed enough to the point where they might be salvaged.

The rest of the Middle East isn't as... fortunate, I guess. They need to either be bombed back to the stone age and isolated, or forcibly brought in to line. Not that such a dream would ever happen realistically.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
See, I don't think they'll ever get their gak together.

They have no reason to channel their energy into positive growth when they can just blame the West and Israel for their problems and foster a primitive culture of barbarity.

See, I think this is a gross and very wrong statement. I think you cannot just talk about “them” as a uniform mass of non-individuals. I think you ought to inform yourself on those that wish to reform and modernize their culture.And those that would plunge it back into the dark ages. And all the different movements and opinions, and the balance of power between them.

Those who do truly wish to modernize are marginalized and quickly becoming non-players. Overall, the Middle East is going down the drain and not much can be done to stop it.

 Grey Templar wrote:
They need to either be bombed back to the stone age and isolated, or forcibly brought in to line.

Because that has worked so well historically. Economic, social and diplomatic means may work, force certainly won't.

 Palindrome wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
They need to either be bombed back to the stone age and isolated, or forcibly brought in to line.

Because that has worked so well historically. Economic, social and diplomatic means may work, force certainly won't.

Force could work, if anyone had the guts to do it. I did say it was impossible given the current situation, but given adequate resources and damn public opinion we could level the area and start over.

We would literally have to burn most of the Middle East to the ground to do it. It would work, but as I said its not a realistic idea.

 SilverMK2 wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-27586067

If it makes you feel any better a woman is on death row for changing religions...

Correction, sentenced to death for being accused of changing religions.

 Grey Templar wrote:

We would literally have to burn most of the Middle East to the ground to do it. It would work, but as I said its not a realistic idea.

What would the survivors be doing then? I guarantee you they won't be sitting around a camp fire singing kumbaya. Force begets force, if you really want to destabilise the world then a good place to start would be wrecking most of the middle east; Iraq and Afghan haven't exactly made the world a better place after all. Problems solved = 0, problems created = lots. Aside from the obvious political issues it would be morally abhorrent.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Well, Pakistan is probably developed enough to the point where they might be salvaged.

The rest of the Middle East isn't as... fortunate, I guess.

I have never been to Pakistan. I have been to Iran, though. Two times. I am pretty sure it is developed enough to be “salvaged”. Actually, given the news we regularly get from Pakistan, I would say Iran is way more developed and likely to be “salvaged”. The extremists in Iran are less extremists than those in Pakistan, the average people seems more progressive, women situation is better, the government actually controls the whole country, and all that.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Those who do truly wish to modernize are marginalized and quickly becoming non-players.

And that is where our help should go .

 Palindrome wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

We would literally have to burn most of the Middle East to the ground to do it. It would work, but as I said its not a realistic idea.

What would the survivors be doing then? I guarantee you they won't be sitting around a camp fire singing kumbaya.

Why would there be survivors?

 Palindrome wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

We would literally have to burn most of the Middle East to the ground to do it. It would work, but as I said its not a realistic idea.

What would the survivors be doing then? I guarantee you they won't be sitting around a camp fire singing kumbaya. Force begets force, if you really want to destabilise the world then a good place to start would be wrecking most of the middle east; Iraq and Afghan haven't exactly made the world a better place after all. Problems solved = 0, problems created = lots. Aside from the obvious political issues it would be morally abhorrent.

What would they be doing? What we make them do. We'd have to go in and basically rebuild a semi-modern society. And then indoctrinate them over several generations.

And yes, it would be morally abhorrent and politically impossible. But we have a gakky situation, which is only going to have gakky answers.

It would be nice if being nice and sending aid would actually change things, but so far it has failed.

But.... It's a "Religion of Peace" ...?!

 SlaveToDorkness wrote:
But.... It's a "Religion of Peace" ...?!

O'right, forgot about that.

Its ok everybody. We can go home now

I love dakka today. Genocide as an option because the other way is "too hard". Despite the fact that exterminating the entire population of the Middle East would cost far more than the aid budgets and have further lasting consequences.

What do you do with all Middle Eastern descent citizens of Western countries? Imprison them?

Good American Christian values right here...

Never said anything about them, or implied we should do anything with them. Its the middle east thats the gak hole. Most of the people who have left are the kind of people who'd be worth saving.

Ridiculous.

Yes, in a civilized country we would just shame the women and drive her to suicide through harassment.

These stoning guys have a lot to learn.

 Easy E wrote:
Yes, in a civilized country we would just shame the women and drive her to suicide through harassment.

These stoning guys have a lot to learn.

While advocating genocide for said stoning guys, because they're bad.

Solution: Turn the country into a glass parking lot.

 VermGho5t wrote:
Solution: Turn the country into a glass parking lot.

And afterwards, we can focus on the middle east!

Ba-dum-tish!

 Grey Templar wrote:
Never said anything about them, or implied we should do anything with them. Its the middle east thats the gak hole. Most of the people who have left are the kind of people who'd be worth saving.

feth. THAT. STUPID. gak.
Are you seriously suggesting all those gaks that came to “the West” and decided that “homegrown terrorism” was an attractive career choice are more worth saving that reformers that fight to get their countries out of this stupid oppressive conservative mindset? Of course you are. Why am I even wasting time talking with you…

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Never said anything about them, or implied we should do anything with them. Its the middle east thats the gak hole. Most of the people who have left are the kind of people who'd be worth saving.

feth. THAT. STUPID. gak.
Are you seriously suggesting all those gaks that came to “the West” and decided that “homegrown terrorism” was an attractive career choice are more worth saving that reformers that fight to get their countries out of this stupid oppressive conservative mindset? Of course you are. Why am I even wasting time talking with you…

ummm, no.

You seem to have completely misinterpreted my post.

I'll break it down for you.

Most of the people who have left are the kind of people who'd be worth saving.

Most of the people who have emigrated are not terrorists. Some certainly are, but not most of them.

The reformers who are trying to fix their countries are doing an admirable thing, but ultimately it is likely futile. The extremists are just too entrenched.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Most of the people who have emigrated are not terrorists. Some certainly are, but not most of them.

Most of the people that stayed are not terrorists either, you would notice. That did not stop you from calling for their eradication, did it?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Most of the people who have emigrated are not terrorists. Some certainly are, but not most of them.

Most of the people that stayed are not terrorists either, you would notice. That did not stop you from calling for their eradication, did it?

Far more of them are though. Or at least casually support or are apathetic towards them. Which is just as bad.

 Grey Templar wrote:
Far more of them are though. Or at least casually support or are apathetic towards them. Which is just as bad.

I do not think so. Certainly not by a huge margin, at least. And I do live in a country with a much, much bigger proportion of migrants from Islamic countries than yours.
You do know most migrants come for economic reasons, not political ones, do you? Not to mention that among those that come for political reasons… Well, a lot of Islamists come to European countries as refugee. Really.

Have a look to this :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_Tunisian_Constituent_Assembly_election,_2011
Look at the votes for Tunisians living in Europe .
35% for Ennahda from Tunisians in Europe, 37% for Ennahda global.

 Ahtman wrote:

 soundwave591 wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Disgusting and guess what.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/02/americas-most-awkward-allies-103889.html#.U4VNfHJ_u2U

see and list like this just tend to piss me off, we are giving those nations money while we are in a insane amount of debt.

[url=http://www.usglc.org/2010/12/03/americans-vastly-overestimate-u-s-foreign-assistance/]
[/url]

I'd be comfortable with that 1% being lower.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:
Most of the people who have emigrated are not terrorists. Some certainly are, but not most of them.

Most of the people that stayed are not terrorists either, you would notice. That did not stop you from calling for their eradication, did it?

Far more of them are though. Or at least casually support or are apathetic towards them. Which is just as bad.

Actually a lot of terror groups do a bang up job recruiting domestically from disenchanted second generation immigrants from those areas. I'm not saying I either approve or disapprove of your somewhat controversial 'blow up the middle east' plan, but there isn't that huge of a difference. Good people stay in their countries sometimes, bad people move sometimes.

And I am fairly certain that there would be no peaceable conversion to western values amongst middle eastern immigrants if and when we blew up the middle east.

 cincydooley wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 soundwave591 wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Disgusting and guess what.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/02/americas-most-awkward-allies-103889.html#.U4VNfHJ_u2U

see and list like this just tend to piss me off, we are giving those nations money while we are in a insane amount of debt.

[url=http://www.usglc.org/2010/12/03/americans-vastly-overestimate-u-s-foreign-assistance/]
[/url]

I'd be comfortable with that 1% being lower.

So, you want no help to any county, even for major disasters?

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 soundwave591 wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Disgusting and guess what.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/02/americas-most-awkward-allies-103889.html#.U4VNfHJ_u2U

see and list like this just tend to piss me off, we are giving those nations money while we are in a insane amount of debt.

[url=http://www.usglc.org/2010/12/03/americans-vastly-overestimate-u-s-foreign-assistance/]
[/url]

I'd be comfortable with that 1% being lower.

So, you want no help to any county, even for major disasters?

Depends... do they have oil?

 whembly wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 Ahtman wrote:

 soundwave591 wrote:

 Jehan-reznor wrote:
Disgusting and guess what.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/02/americas-most-awkward-allies-103889.html#.U4VNfHJ_u2U

see and list like this just tend to piss me off, we are giving those nations money while we are in a insane amount of debt.

[url=http://www.usglc.org/2010/12/03/americans-vastly-overestimate-u-s-foreign-assistance/]
[/url]

I'd be comfortable with that 1% being lower.

So, you want no help to any county, even for major disasters?

Depends... do they have oil?