The Middle East (general catch all)

[Bob's World]

Couldn't be helped. Americans were damned lucky to tear those governments away of the Soviet sphere in the first place.

Presley,

Agree, the US waged the Cold War hard in the Middle East. And well from our perspective. The problem is that we locked those Cold War control measures in place and rode them from the fall of the Berlin Wall to the fall of the Twin Towers. Then, we modified them by adding an aggressive CT layer of engagement and HN security force capacity building directed at capabilities to go after "terrorists." AQ guys are really very few. AQ AP, HOA and Maghreb are made up primarily of nationalist insurgents with a handful of AQ hardcores running the UW program to organize, train, finance, supply, etc.

We let our intel guys throw a big net over the whole mess and call it "terrorism" and granted hunting licenses, provided support and encouraged aggressive pursuit of all.

If we are going to do Security Force Capacity Building with some Ally we need to focus it on dealing with external threats 99% of the time. Help the Saudis deter or defeat an attack by Iran? No problem. Help the Saudis round up the dissenting members of their own populace? I have a problem with that. If the Saudis want to do that, that is there business, but it flies in the face of US principle and law and it weakens us globally when we support suppression abroad of actions that are legal, encouraged, and honored at home.

Bottom line is that we got off track. Our handling of the current rash of popular uprisings, both in how we deal with those governments and how we deal with those populaces, is critical to getting back onto azimuth with our national ethos and principles. We will still do hard things when hard times such as the Cold War dictate. But now is not such times, and there must be healing when conditions change.

[Dayuhan]

Help the Saudis round up the dissenting members of their own populace? I have a problem with that.

The Saudis, like the Libyans, have never needed our help or asked our permission to round up dissenting members of their own populace, nor would they stop doing it if we told them we didn't like it.

[Bob's World]

The Saudis, like the Libyans, have never needed our help or asked our permission to round up dissenting members of their own populace, nor would they stop doing it if we told them we didn't like it.

Agreed. Yet we used our power and influence to encourge this behavior all the same. And I suspect you underestimate our ability to either push things in the direction we desire, or steer them elsewhere. Here we pushed where we should not have, and we will never know what might have happened if we had tried to steer in stead.

[Dayuhan]

Agreed. Yet we used our power and influence to encourge this behavior all the same. And I suspect you underestimate our ability to either push things in the direction we desire, or steer them elsewhere. Here we pushed where we should not have, and we will never know what might have happened if we had tried to steer in stead.

I think you hugely overestimate our ability to control others, or to steer them... especially in matters of domestic policy that they perceive as essential to their own survival.

If we push them to do things our way they make a show of agreement, moan in private over our naivete, and keep doing things their way... if, that is, they need something from us. Many of these countries need nothing from us, and wouldn't even bother to fake it.

People generally resist being steered, especially in a direction they don't want to go.

[tequila]

I think Americans do overestimate our ability to influence others, as well as our overall centrality in the politics of other states. However, especially when it comes to our client states, the U.S. can often play a positive role.

Taiwan and South Korea are two examples directly relevant to my own personal experience. Both countries experienced peaceful transfers of power to opposition parties. In our own hemisphere. El Salvador recently elected an FMLN President with no threat of violence from a military which killed thousands fighting the FMLN. The Turkish military has subordinated itself to civilian authority in a similar way, partly due to EU and U.S. pressure. The Bush Administration successfully orchestrated a democratic transition in Pakistan, from Musharraf to a civilian government.

As the example of Pakistan shows, the departure of the dictator hardly means that the problems of the country end. But at the very least it means that the progress can, hopefully, get started.

[Bob's World]

A former CIA counterterrorism official that I can agree with. This article by Robert Grenier is IMO spot on and parallels my own beliefs and experiences within the SOF/military community.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth...255184637.html

[Dayuhan]

A former CIA counterterrorism official that I can agree with. This article by Robert Grenier is IMO spot on and parallels my own beliefs and experiences within the SOF/military community.

http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth...255184637.html

I quite agree that these revolts are good things, that there's no need to fear them, that they need to happen and where they are happening we should not oppose them, and indeed that we should help them along in appropriate way.

If we take that one step further and go out and try to provoke them in countries where they aren't yet happening, or support them too energetically (giving the impression that they are our pawns or doing our bidding) we will turn a good thing into an unholy mess.