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.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Okay, I am confused by OP. The U.S.A. have been BFF with Saudi Arabia for, what, more than 70 years already, is it not ? So, how could they fall lower in any way? How could Brunei be worse than Saudi Arabia? Not saying we are in any way better over here, it is the same gak.

US foreign policy is a bizarre mix of ideological pandering and realism. We are allied with Saudi Arabia because it is practical to our foreign policy interests (ensuring the protection of Israel/the stability of oil prices) but we only really back Israel in the first place out of ideological reasons.

No one said international relations made sense

Though if you want a job beheading people. Saudi hiring and offering you a free sword.

Edit

No Fast and Furious drifting on your way to work

 djones520 wrote:
Funny part is he makes kissy face with these despots to keep that oil flowing, but doesn't want to fully open our own capabilities, thereby making us able to break that dependency, and maybe begin to hold those guys accountable for their actions.

You mean like what every other president did for the last 70 years?

 LordofHats wrote:
We are allied with Saudi Arabia because it is practical to our foreign policy interests (ensuring the protection of Israel/the stability of oil prices) but we only really back Israel in the first place out of ideological reasons.

Do you truly believe that ? I mean, the Israel part ? Of course your government cares about oil prices. But I doubt they care even remotely that much about Israel. Or any other country, for that matter. Pure cynic amoral profit-above-all-else at work here. Again, not that we are in any way better around here.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

 djones520 wrote:
Funny part is he makes kissy face with these despots to keep that oil flowing, but doesn't want to fully open our own capabilities, thereby making us able to break that dependency, and maybe begin to hold those guys accountable for their actions.

You mean like what every other president did for the last 70 years?

We're discussing this current one. Not everyone else.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

Do you truly believe that ? I mean, the Israel part ?

They care because the Christian right cares and the Christian right is a significant voting block. They also care because Israel is a democracy surrounded by dictatorships and the US is the 'guardian of democracy.' Sure Israel can also be practically useful to us for stabilizing the Middle East, but look at how we approach that subject. A lot of out foreign policy decisions are made on ideological grounds, but at the same time we also take more practical approaches and decisions like allying with US friendly dictators.

A big deal gets made about Saudi Arabia, but Jordan is one of our longest standing frenimies in the middle east and look what goes on in that country and how much they've backed us in the war on terror. It's a messy thing

 djones520 wrote:
We're discussing this current one. Not everyone else.

So, why are you surprised in any way that this current one is doing the exact same thing that every other has done for 70 years?
Surely the only other candidate with a chance to win would have done the very same thing. Unless I am mistaken and he has openly taken position against Saudi Arabia ?

 LordofHats wrote:
They care because the Christian right cares and the Christian right is a significant voting block.

The Christian right cares about what they are told to care .

 LordofHats wrote:
They also care because Israel is a democracy surrounded by dictatorships and the US is the 'guardian of democracy.'

You kidding, right ? Right ? You do not actually believe any of this nonsense. If you do, I do not even know where to begin.

 LordofHats wrote:
A lot of out foreign policy decisions are made on ideological grounds

I totally disagree with that statement. Except if money and power count as an ideology . And again, just to make sure, that is in no way specific to the U.S.

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:

You kidding, right ? Right ? You do not actually believe any of this nonsense. If you do, I do not even know where to begin.

You're talking to the guy who thinks most of American politics constitutes nonsense

I totally disagree with that statement. Except if money and power count as an ideology . And again, just to make sure, that is in no way specific to the U.S.

The entire cold war was a war of opposing ideology. If money and power were all that mattered in these decisions, we'd have allied with the Soviet Union as a valuable trade partner and built strong ties but we didn't because trade was bad. We went to war in Korea and Veitnam because of McCarthyism, a shoddy ideological idea that made no sense to begin with but was driven by fear and 'they're not a democracy' in a post war age where anything not a democracy was less than desirable. Its hard to sell money and power in a post-Imperial age (and even then, the money and power was the ideology driving Imperial decision making).

feeder wrote:
The only people who have something to fear from this are those who are breaking the law. Don't want to get flogged? Don't break the law. What's the problem here, exactly?

This kind of thinking is abhorrent to me, and is the kind of thinking that allows atrocious acts to be carried out, the "good men do nothing while evil triumphs". Not only do the punishments not match the crime (hooray getting stoned to death for boning out of wedlock!), but we're also talking about a place that doesn't exactly have the best criminal justice system, innocent people spend huge amounts of time in prison in the US all the time, imagine how many innocent people get to walk about missing hands or with whip scars for crimes they never committed.

 LordofHats wrote:
If money and power were all that mattered in these decisions, we'd have allied with the Soviet Union as a valuable trade partner and built strong ties but we didn't because trade was bad.

Did you miss “power” ? The USSR was a rival. And not very inclined to do trade too.

Explain to me how things like Operation Ajax, i.e. removing a democracy to enforce a dictatorship instead, was motivated by some love of democracy and fear of dictatorship ?

 Hybrid Son Of Oxayotl wrote:
Explain to me how things like Operation Ajax, i.e. removing a democracy to enforce a dictatorship instead, was motivated by some love of democracy and fear of dictatorship ?

Like I said. A curious mix of ideology and realism. We're happy to remove a state when we think no one is looking and call it a 'victory for democracy'

You are not explaining anything. What were the reasons the U.S. wanted to do that ? I mean, the ideological reasons ? I only see lust for oil and power .

You can try and explain US foreign policy with money and power, but you'll find it lacking Though it is certainly the view of a cynic

Seriously, that explains everything the US did, including Brunei .

Lord I think you wanted "Domino Effect" term then McChrismwhatevernutjobwithemptypaperwavinglistofnames

 Jihadin wrote:
Lord I think you wanted "Domino Effect" term then McChrismwhatevernutjobwithemptypaperwavinglistofnames

McCarthy?

Yeah, that guys. Tons of fun! Are you a communist ? Why do you refuse to admit you are a communist? Why do you lie to us?

 Jihadin wrote:
Lord I think you wanted "Domino Effect" term then McChrismwhatevernutjobwithemptypaperwavinglistofnames

The Domino Effect was implied, McCarthyism being born of the Red Scare and resulting in that hair brained idea that got us sucked into a whole bunch of really stupid gak for most of the 20th century

To be fair, McCarthyism refers to a series of pretty specific internal witch-hunting escapades, and wasn't what got us into either Korea or Vietnam (and we were worried about communism well before McCarthy took office in '47, anyway). General Cold War anti-communist sentiment and a belief in the Domino Theory and the containment policy did that. And not necessarily incorrectly.

 djones520 wrote:
It's all about the oil...

Saudi has a ton of it, Brunei has a ton of it. Funny part is he makes kissy face with these despots to keep that oil flowing, but doesn't want to fully open our own capabilities, thereby making us able to break that dependency, and maybe begin to hold those guys accountable for their actions.

We aren't going to open our own capabilities until we've exhausted everywhere else first.

 Seaward wrote:
To be fair, McCarthyism refers to a series of pretty specific internal witch-hunting escapades, and wasn't what got us into either Korea or Vietnam (and we were worried about communism well before McCarthy took office in '47, anyway). General Cold War anti-communist sentiment and a belief in the Domino Theory and the containment policy did that. And not necessarily incorrectly.

I guess when I say McCarthyism I think of general communism paranoia

 LordofHats wrote:

Like I said. A curious mix of ideology and realism. We're happy to remove a state when we think no one is looking and call it a 'victory for democracy'

But true hilarity only occurs when ideology and realism are forced to play chicken.

 LordofHats wrote:

I guess when I say McCarthyism I think of general communism paranoia

For example the Nicaragua debacle, and the various embargoes on Cuba.

Nah. McCarthyism is witch hunts, intimidation, and smear campaigns against citizens who are deemed unpatriotic.

Brunei goes sharia and its the US's fault?

(scratches head)

 Frazzled wrote:
Brunei goes sharia and its the US's fault?

(scratches head)

Everything that goes wrong in the world is the US's fault

 Frazzled wrote:
Brunei goes sharia and its the US's fault?

(scratches head)

Obama said something nice about the guy who runs the country that just went sharia, so in the minds of some people in the country, it is the US's fault. Or Obama's, really.

I wonder what the penalty is for earning interest on all that wealth the sultan has... as i am pretty sure he will be and i am pretty sure that is against islamic law.

 SilverMK2 wrote:
I wonder what the penalty is for earning interest on all that wealth the sultan has... as i am pretty sure he will be and i am pretty sure that is against islamic law.

I don't see how that's relevant to the guy who has all the money and power.

squidhills wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
Brunei goes sharia and its the US's fault?

(scratches head)

Obama said something nice about the guy who runs the country that just went sharia, so in the minds of some people in the country, it is the US's fault. Or Obama's, really.

But does he likes long walks on Islamic beaches?

Come now D, you're better then that.

 djones520 wrote:
Come now D, you're better then that.

Everybody loves a bromance!

I've often said that the US doesn't really care about "good leaders" and "bad leaders". We might talk about wanting to bring modern freedoms and democracy to the rest of the world, but in the end we don't really care if you are good or bad as long as you are an ally. It's nothing new, we've always done that. If you got something we need or if you are somehow helpful to us, then we are very willing to turn our eyes and become your friends.

People complaining about Obama "praising" the Brunei guy are not really any different than people complaining about Bush being all hanky-panky with the Saudi guys. They are our friends, not because we like them but because they got stuff we want.