It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Just Breaking on CNN, Strike on Syria Within Hours Without Congressional Approval
page: 25share:
Watched another tough talk jackhole giving his two cents on syria.... don't know his name, don't care. Let's just say he had a stupid face, just like
his other buds in office.
He was going on about there being multiple pieces of evidence... because of course he wouldn't just go on assumptions. 1 was that syria has a CW stockpile in which they are in control of (NONPOINT...so does the US, so by that logic that is a tick against the states or any country with CWs) 2 was that multiple CWs attacks had occurred, this was just the largest (NONPOINT AGAIN) That is an incredibly STUPID assumption to make off of that last bit and shows how inept their thinking is. If the previous attacks had been attempted but were somewhat "duds" because they weren't deployed right or the CW themselves were old or otherwise non effective... whatever the case was that prevented it from being anywhere near as lethal as what we just recently saw, then don't these brainiacs think for one minute that the previous attacks were conducted by amateurs?... or that maybe they didn't have the best equipment to deploy it? Or that maybe they didn't have access to that huge CW arsenal of Assads that would have increased the odds of the chemicals still being lethal?...In other words... THE REBELS.
WAY TO GO!!!.....(if the objective was to be as obtuse and ignorant as possible to how this all looks)
the 3rd part of the collection of evidence was not yet confirmed and they are still waiting on it....derrrrrrr.
So in other words.... YOU HAVE NOTHING.
OH HOW CONVINCING ON "MULTIPLE" LEVELS.
Then the guy goes on to repeat over and over how the US basically had to do something because if they didn't, it would be a sign of weakness.... and Iran was also mentioned. So not only would this strike be done to prevent them from looking like they can't back up all the things THEY SAID OUT OF THEIR OWN MOUTHS and are ultimately responsible for... but they don't want an entirely different country to think they are weak... so they are going to strike Syria. Oh, that sounds real legal, fair and legitimate.
GENIUS.
Take a look around. Do most other countries have this complex where they think they have to go strike Syria to look tough? No. So basically the guy just admitted they are going to strike Syria due to their own mental complexes that are unique to western countries seeing as how the only ones getting involved are the ones trying to gain something... and the rest are staying out of it with no ridiculous fear of how it makes them look.
ALSO...as if he had not already done enough damage to his own opinion, the interviewer was saying "well, you don't see these other countries who want intervention in syria stepping up and doing anything"...meaning openly. And the guy is like "wellllllll, no, we know a lot of countries are involved in what is going on in syria" and it was a reference to countries in the region that are annoyed with Assad and fueling this, sending in terrorists.
In other words... it's not a civil war no matter how much the media keeps repeating this. Our so called friends in the ME have brought massive terror and war to syria and we are funding them and we are about to go in front of the public eye and do their bidding.
Rumor has it that Al-Qaeda works for the US.... but it's starting to look even worse, that the US works for Al-Qaeda....and this a hole is afraid of looking like somebody's fee-fee???
Somebody needs to inform washington that between bankers and oil criminals, NO ONE looks more like somebody's fee-fee then the morons in our government.
The way these people are bent over in just in just about everything they seem to do makes Miley Cyrus' bending over routine look tame.
Don't hesitate to show how far you'll bend over or how far on your knees you'll get or any of the other filth you'll do for a buck.
He was going on about there being multiple pieces of evidence... because of course he wouldn't just go on assumptions. 1 was that syria has a CW stockpile in which they are in control of (NONPOINT...so does the US, so by that logic that is a tick against the states or any country with CWs) 2 was that multiple CWs attacks had occurred, this was just the largest (NONPOINT AGAIN) That is an incredibly STUPID assumption to make off of that last bit and shows how inept their thinking is. If the previous attacks had been attempted but were somewhat "duds" because they weren't deployed right or the CW themselves were old or otherwise non effective... whatever the case was that prevented it from being anywhere near as lethal as what we just recently saw, then don't these brainiacs think for one minute that the previous attacks were conducted by amateurs?... or that maybe they didn't have the best equipment to deploy it? Or that maybe they didn't have access to that huge CW arsenal of Assads that would have increased the odds of the chemicals still being lethal?...In other words... THE REBELS.
WAY TO GO!!!.....(if the objective was to be as obtuse and ignorant as possible to how this all looks)
the 3rd part of the collection of evidence was not yet confirmed and they are still waiting on it....derrrrrrr.
So in other words.... YOU HAVE NOTHING.
OH HOW CONVINCING ON "MULTIPLE" LEVELS.
Then the guy goes on to repeat over and over how the US basically had to do something because if they didn't, it would be a sign of weakness.... and Iran was also mentioned. So not only would this strike be done to prevent them from looking like they can't back up all the things THEY SAID OUT OF THEIR OWN MOUTHS and are ultimately responsible for... but they don't want an entirely different country to think they are weak... so they are going to strike Syria. Oh, that sounds real legal, fair and legitimate.
GENIUS.
Take a look around. Do most other countries have this complex where they think they have to go strike Syria to look tough? No. So basically the guy just admitted they are going to strike Syria due to their own mental complexes that are unique to western countries seeing as how the only ones getting involved are the ones trying to gain something... and the rest are staying out of it with no ridiculous fear of how it makes them look.
ALSO...as if he had not already done enough damage to his own opinion, the interviewer was saying "well, you don't see these other countries who want intervention in syria stepping up and doing anything"...meaning openly. And the guy is like "wellllllll, no, we know a lot of countries are involved in what is going on in syria" and it was a reference to countries in the region that are annoyed with Assad and fueling this, sending in terrorists.
In other words... it's not a civil war no matter how much the media keeps repeating this. Our so called friends in the ME have brought massive terror and war to syria and we are funding them and we are about to go in front of the public eye and do their bidding.
Rumor has it that Al-Qaeda works for the US.... but it's starting to look even worse, that the US works for Al-Qaeda....and this a hole is afraid of looking like somebody's fee-fee???
Somebody needs to inform washington that between bankers and oil criminals, NO ONE looks more like somebody's fee-fee then the morons in our government.
The way these people are bent over in just in just about everything they seem to do makes Miley Cyrus' bending over routine look tame.
Don't hesitate to show how far you'll bend over or how far on your knees you'll get or any of the other filth you'll do for a buck.
edit on
30-8-2013 by NotAnAspie because: (no reason given)
reply to post by NotAnAspie
Western cultures like the US are largely individualists. Out for "me and mine". Eastern cultures are more collectivist, (us and ours). When watching the house of the lords speaking yesterday they talked about culture in the end - a need to find a middle ground.
If we were more collectivist we would feel pride in what we decide is best for the group - the whole culture regardless of how it made us look individually. As an individualist society there is pride in how one looks (how does this affect me before all else), or in this case how it makes their immediate circle of others look (ie: me and "mine" - the administration).
That's really generalized but that is one big cultural difference. If we want to help we must try to understand their most basic way of thinking (generally since individualism has spread into other cultures somewhat). Its a mess over there because each group thinks they know what is best for the whole.
How do you approach that? Not by adding another "and this is what we think is best for the whole by the USA". They are doing bad stuff - for a long time. Its hard to watch. Knee jerk - please make it stop. That does not make this problem go away though. It never has and it never will.
Western cultures like the US are largely individualists. Out for "me and mine". Eastern cultures are more collectivist, (us and ours). When watching the house of the lords speaking yesterday they talked about culture in the end - a need to find a middle ground.
If we were more collectivist we would feel pride in what we decide is best for the group - the whole culture regardless of how it made us look individually. As an individualist society there is pride in how one looks (how does this affect me before all else), or in this case how it makes their immediate circle of others look (ie: me and "mine" - the administration).
That's really generalized but that is one big cultural difference. If we want to help we must try to understand their most basic way of thinking (generally since individualism has spread into other cultures somewhat). Its a mess over there because each group thinks they know what is best for the whole.
How do you approach that? Not by adding another "and this is what we think is best for the whole by the USA". They are doing bad stuff - for a long time. Its hard to watch. Knee jerk - please make it stop. That does not make this problem go away though. It never has and it never will.
edit
on 30-8-2013 by Dianec because: Added
reply to post by Dianec
not sure I could disagree with you more......we can be partisan but I don't know of any city that is divided into regions based on political party or religion in the U.S. (don't pull some anecdotal nonsense)
Shia/Sunni......Muslim/anyone else........arab/jew.........yeah, tell me again how the eastern culture is about community.
not sure I could disagree with you more......we can be partisan but I don't know of any city that is divided into regions based on political party or religion in the U.S. (don't pull some anecdotal nonsense)
Shia/Sunni......Muslim/anyone else........arab/jew.........yeah, tell me again how the eastern culture is about community.
I wish I could find it but I think it is a wsj stream and it's probably locked now because I just went through my history links and just found locked
pages asking for subscription when earlier, I was reading them. I hate the wsj.
I'd like to know who this guy was but I didn't catch it and had to leave.
Bad argument after bad argument is all that is coming out of our politicians.
They better be glad they are not on trial for something because they are representing their side so poorly I can hardly believe it.
I'd like to know who this guy was but I didn't catch it and had to leave.
Bad argument after bad argument is all that is coming out of our politicians.
They better be glad they are not on trial for something because they are representing their side so poorly I can hardly believe it.
Obama needs to save his face regarding his prior warning on the crossing of Red Line. This is at the least.
Then he needs to punish the users of CW otherwise every third world psychopath in power will find some sick entertainment using WMDs.
But who will be held accountable for fueling the civil war in Syria that has already killed 100K people. Is that not another form of sick entertainment and that too of far more gruesome and graphic kind. Guess 50 killed in a battle in Damascus is a NEWS but 50 killed in CW attack is a NOISE that needs to be shut down.
World needs to look and find the causes which have resulted in much more deaths and destruction.
Or is it all media manipulation. Blow up some topics and cool down the others.........does not matter how outrageous the real facts are.
Why not have Tomahawks find targets in Saudi Arabia for supplying weapons to Syrian Rebels?
Then he needs to punish the users of CW otherwise every third world psychopath in power will find some sick entertainment using WMDs.
But who will be held accountable for fueling the civil war in Syria that has already killed 100K people. Is that not another form of sick entertainment and that too of far more gruesome and graphic kind. Guess 50 killed in a battle in Damascus is a NEWS but 50 killed in CW attack is a NOISE that needs to be shut down.
World needs to look and find the causes which have resulted in much more deaths and destruction.
Or is it all media manipulation. Blow up some topics and cool down the others.........does not matter how outrageous the real facts are.
Why not have Tomahawks find targets in Saudi Arabia for supplying weapons to Syrian Rebels?
edit on 30-8-2013 by victor7 because: (no reason given)
reply to post by victor7
If that's the case he should be taljing about targeting the fsa. Afterall they have used sarin and most likely made the last chem weapons attack.
If that's the case he should be taljing about targeting the fsa. Afterall they have used sarin and most likely made the last chem weapons attack.
There is a way Obama can bypass the UN.
US and allies can recognize the FSA as a legitimate government of Syria. Just like they did to the Libyan Rebels.
Then have this government request help from outside to quash the oppression by the Assad regime. Remember, Friends of Libya logic. It is like one country asking for help and the other more than happy to oblige.
However, full intervention into Syrian civil war bring many other risks and issues, some the BO would not want to be associated with.
US and allies can recognize the FSA as a legitimate government of Syria. Just like they did to the Libyan Rebels.
Then have this government request help from outside to quash the oppression by the Assad regime. Remember, Friends of Libya logic. It is like one country asking for help and the other more than happy to oblige.
However, full intervention into Syrian civil war bring many other risks and issues, some the BO would not want to be associated with.
edit on 31-8-2013 by victor7 because: (no reason given)
reply to post by Res Ipsa
There is a massive amount of scientific evidence that supports collectivists and individualistic societies. Not anecdotal. Look up peer reviewed journals on the matter. There are thousands of studies. The west is very well known for individualistic attitudes while the east is more collectivists. I said "in general" for a reason. We are fast becoming a global society (integrating). Regardless of this there is a reason those in helping professions, as an example, are required to take into account cultural variables such as this very basic and well known one. It will not disappear unless all cultures become like one.
Here is one example:
Maslow's heirarchy of needs has been criticized for being a western bent theory on human motivation (everyone needs to self actualize before they die to be truly fulfilled). He defined reaching ultimate fulfillment as "reaching ones highest potential" This is largely true for western cultures as the literature has shown over and over. For Collectivists cultures, studies found, the greatest and highest satisfaction was a sense of belonging and knowing one contributed greatly to the community in their life. Maslow had belonging, as an example, as a lower need on his scales yet it was found to be the ultimate goal (people felt the most complete) in collectivist cultures when they felt a sense of belonging.
I can't say I know how this would play out in an international situation like this one but there is value into looking at cultural differences when deciding how to approach a war. If your going to help, how can you do this and not take this into account?
Right off the top of my head I could theorize there are groups who think they know what's best and to reach their highest potential their beliefs for what is best must be fulfilled. Osama bin laden was an example of this. That is way too simplistic but is a beginning thought on it. They are for sure a collectivist culture overall. We are beginning to see westernized thinking but this has been imbedded into that part of the world since the beginning of time so becoming individualistic wont happen overnight if at all, and hopefully not.
An even more likely theory is population growth and resources. Cultures have become blended with other cultures. I think of the Mayan. They had different tribes but all were Collectivists. Their greatest goals were taking care of the group. It was the greatest achievement they could attain. They fought but they also were able to put space between each tribe.
Collectivists culture does not mean everyone in the land joins together. Rather there are cultures within cultures. Its a way of life. And the US is definitely an individualistic country.
There is a massive amount of scientific evidence that supports collectivists and individualistic societies. Not anecdotal. Look up peer reviewed journals on the matter. There are thousands of studies. The west is very well known for individualistic attitudes while the east is more collectivists. I said "in general" for a reason. We are fast becoming a global society (integrating). Regardless of this there is a reason those in helping professions, as an example, are required to take into account cultural variables such as this very basic and well known one. It will not disappear unless all cultures become like one.
Here is one example:
Maslow's heirarchy of needs has been criticized for being a western bent theory on human motivation (everyone needs to self actualize before they die to be truly fulfilled). He defined reaching ultimate fulfillment as "reaching ones highest potential" This is largely true for western cultures as the literature has shown over and over. For Collectivists cultures, studies found, the greatest and highest satisfaction was a sense of belonging and knowing one contributed greatly to the community in their life. Maslow had belonging, as an example, as a lower need on his scales yet it was found to be the ultimate goal (people felt the most complete) in collectivist cultures when they felt a sense of belonging.
I can't say I know how this would play out in an international situation like this one but there is value into looking at cultural differences when deciding how to approach a war. If your going to help, how can you do this and not take this into account?
Right off the top of my head I could theorize there are groups who think they know what's best and to reach their highest potential their beliefs for what is best must be fulfilled. Osama bin laden was an example of this. That is way too simplistic but is a beginning thought on it. They are for sure a collectivist culture overall. We are beginning to see westernized thinking but this has been imbedded into that part of the world since the beginning of time so becoming individualistic wont happen overnight if at all, and hopefully not.
An even more likely theory is population growth and resources. Cultures have become blended with other cultures. I think of the Mayan. They had different tribes but all were Collectivists. Their greatest goals were taking care of the group. It was the greatest achievement they could attain. They fought but they also were able to put space between each tribe.
Collectivists culture does not mean everyone in the land joins together. Rather there are cultures within cultures. Its a way of life. And the US is definitely an individualistic country.
Originally posted by victor7
There is a way Obama can bypass the UN.
US and allies can recognize the FSA as a legitimate government of Syria. Just like they did to the Libyan Rebels.
Then have this government request help from outside to quash the oppression by the Assad regime. Remember, Friends of Libya logic. It is like one country asking for help and the other more than happy to oblige.
However, full intervention into Syrian civil war bring many other risks and issues, some the BO would not want to be associated with.edit on 31-8-2013 by victor7 because: (no reason given)
And the president himself made sure he covered that base earlier in the game.
That's one of the first things they started commenting on after this really started getting magnified in the media.
Anyone had to wonder how they could see the rebels in such a light, being mixed with terrorist groups but it was all just to cover that base, so they were expecting not much international support. Makes me wonder why they even tried to appeal it to the public this way. Did they actually think anyone would buy it? Maybe so when it seems that the brain parasites are doing their thinking for them.
I just wish they'd go to their hidey holes already because I'm tired of hearing their ridiculous crock of lies.
reply to post by Dianec
I would beg to differ and seriously. Due to shortages and deprivation it is the East which is individualistic. US or West is more collectivist as people do not really care for puny things.
Why are you harping on the leftist agenda? Leftist agenda hurt the humanity by slow and constant oppression and outright deprivation of common material goods and freedoms to do things. Blaming all of the world problems on the US is not right.
Only social support I would vote for is the free health care for all.
I would beg to differ and seriously. Due to shortages and deprivation it is the East which is individualistic. US or West is more collectivist as people do not really care for puny things.
Why are you harping on the leftist agenda? Leftist agenda hurt the humanity by slow and constant oppression and outright deprivation of common material goods and freedoms to do things. Blaming all of the world problems on the US is not right.
Only social support I would vote for is the free health care for all.
victor7
reply to post by Dianec
I would beg to differ and seriously. Due to shortages and deprivation it is the East which is individualistic. US or West is more collectivist as people do not really care for puny things.
Why are you harping on the leftist agenda? Leftist agenda hurt the humanity by slow and constant oppression and outright deprivation of common material goods and freedoms to do things. Blaming all of the world problems on the US is not right.
Only social support I would vote for is the free health care for all.
Did you even read my reply and what it was to? Nowhere within it did I say the worlds problems were because of the US. To recap - being careful to consider cultural differences is what I was referring to. I was providing examples to another member. Read it in context to the subject at hand (war), and my response instead of taking the first impression that crosses your mind and making assumptions.
And for those who don't know what Collectivist and individualistic is - please look at some of the literature before saying which countries are which. Heck, even just google It at this point.
reply to post by Dianec
Sorry Darling, I am little illiterate so could not make real meaning of your longish love letter.....;-)
I consider western societies to be more successful because they have done a better job at collective approach. People have freedoms of various kinds but they follow the law made by the system and hence they contribute towards the collective good.
East preaches collectivism but end result is individualism. People break laws, have little respect for common properties, due to lack of opportunities conduct corruption for extra income etc. With opening of the markets in Third World countries like India and Brazil as example, more opportunities have come up, people easily do 2 jobs or job and business etc. I was surprised to read that in India the unemployment rate is 2% in urban areas now. When average human is even half way decently taken care of, that individual develops a sense of responsibility towards the system. Slowly real sense of collectivism is coming in those countries too as a result of the system that allows individualism. Kind of strange but very true.
Sorry Darling, I am little illiterate so could not make real meaning of your longish love letter.....;-)
I consider western societies to be more successful because they have done a better job at collective approach. People have freedoms of various kinds but they follow the law made by the system and hence they contribute towards the collective good.
East preaches collectivism but end result is individualism. People break laws, have little respect for common properties, due to lack of opportunities conduct corruption for extra income etc. With opening of the markets in Third World countries like India and Brazil as example, more opportunities have come up, people easily do 2 jobs or job and business etc. I was surprised to read that in India the unemployment rate is 2% in urban areas now. When average human is even half way decently taken care of, that individual develops a sense of responsibility towards the system. Slowly real sense of collectivism is coming in those countries too as a result of the system that allows individualism. Kind of strange but very true.
reply to post by victor7
So you believe if we westernize the world it will be a better world. That's fine. That's your opinion. I chose to ask why these cultures are struggling since the whole world is not individualistic at this time. We aren't at your ideal so what good does that do for us during this conflict? How does this add anything to a solution for Syria?
My initial response was to support the consideration of cultural differences with this conflict. I never assigned a value to either. Your responding with an argument on which culture is right or better. This is off track of my intended purpose - that a difference exists and the importance of taking this into account.
So you believe if we westernize the world it will be a better world. That's fine. That's your opinion. I chose to ask why these cultures are struggling since the whole world is not individualistic at this time. We aren't at your ideal so what good does that do for us during this conflict? How does this add anything to a solution for Syria?
My initial response was to support the consideration of cultural differences with this conflict. I never assigned a value to either. Your responding with an argument on which culture is right or better. This is off track of my intended purpose - that a difference exists and the importance of taking this into account.
edit on 31-8-2013 by Dianec because: To clarify
edit on 31-8-2013 by Dianec because: Another thread was started on the topic.
Originally posted by Dianec
......
Everyone wants to hold the argument that the western way of life is better because of our creature comforts & not a lot more. Crime is high, the death rate is high, criminal profiteering is high- a whole bunch of really bad things under a sugar coated surface. PLUS, we have MASSIVE waste in the US. Just think if you didn't have garbage pick up & each day we spread our garbage around in our yards. Anybody knows what a mess that would be. Our wrappers, our packaging, millions & millions of rolls of toilet paper used daily, all the electricity we use just to stare at a TV screen with the stupidest crap on it. We are one of the most detrimental societies to the planet & the media just glosses over it.
I'm all for having cool stuff & some luxuries, but in a smarter way than what US does it. The US refuses to change. There are people in Palestine who sell out to the Zionist plot just because they are putting up some stores to steer the people because people cannot resist junk. This is why people think it is so much better in western countries than it is elsewhere, because they have forgotten how to survive without their junk & they can't stand the thought of being inconvenienced. HOWEVER, they will be greatly inconvenienced when all this comes back to bite us in the ass, because there is no way we can keep this waste up & the slaughter of the planet. They are trying so hard to promote China as a big consumer & waster but we use twice as much oil as China... & on top of that, someone (IMHO) is inflicting environmental terrorism on China to magnify those problems. There's no way you can turn an entire (very large) river red without trying really hard. There's no way that thousands of pigs & chickens just accidentally get dumped into the river.
There'd be less toxicity in the world in general if someone dropped several nukes on us as strange as that sounds- You think of all the radiation but that doesn't necessarily have to be the case. I'm not saying I think it should happen but what I'm saying is that everyone seems to walk around with this idea that to decimate this society would cause to many problems in the aftermath & so it would never happen b/c no one, even countries against us want to destroy the planet. To destroy our society would be HELPING the planet, even if it took nukes. This is why I think they built those DUMBs, -They knew eventually that mutually assured destruction was imminent & if it ever gets rolling, they will hide underground & launch their missiles from there.
Our culture is not all it's cracked up to be. Those who have less.... JUNK... need not be ashamed of that Their leftovers return to the dust w/ much less wasteful residue than what western society produces.
Our culture could GREATLY have the potential to become what it should be b/c we have the means & we have the freedoms (SUPPOSEDLY) to change our way of life & still have tech but live smartly, efficiently, not so egotistically proud/stubborn but it's not happening. We have NO EXCUSE to not change. US is a big festering zit on the planet waiting to pop & people still have the audacity to think this way of life will go on forever. They don't look at the numbers, the facts that are there. They never write out the full equation of the true cost of American life, not just in our country but how it effects other countries as well.
This is why other countries are a shambles. We keep them that way. We make sure that they do not better themselves very much so we can use them as an example. We say "look at those countries that can't govern themselves & have nothing good except constant chaos" There are people in this country who honestly believe that countries who have non white populations are doomed to also be in chaos because and they promote the idea that it is due to nothing more than the color of the race of that country. They call them "the mud races". You know it makes no sense. It's beyond the color of skin & this is plain to see- Smart AND stupid people come from all races. What conclusion could that possibly leave? The suspicion is that there has been deliberate repression of those cultures, but it needs to be backed up with facts before drawing that conclusion so you go to history for the details & it's ALL THERE. It ALWAYS leads back to European crusaders. ALWAYS. Now, America who is an offshoot of that corporatocracy is right on that bandwagon & actually uses this racism AS DOGMA & in some very dangerous channels too! Law enforcement is eat up with this viewpoint because they get thrown up against the rage of downtrodden black society & the military is eat up with the impression that American way is the only way because they get thrown into areas that have NOTHING but war & death & all they want is to do is go home to their comforts.
edit on 31-8-2013 by NotAnAspie because:
(no reason given)
reply to post by Dianec
Cultural differences are the reason why ME nations get sooooooooooooooo easily into brutul. gruesome, graphic levels of internal fight i.e. CIVIL WARS.
Western nations would not!!!!!!! and do not call it lack of education because one needs little education to know that he/she should not dig in daggers into someone else for a small disagreement.
Yes, I consider Western cultures to be better where there are even rights and responsibilities towards animals, not to mention humans. Western cultures are not perfect though and none will ever be. There are areas where western cultures are struggling, these areas will be solved but new one's will prop up. That's a dimension of human societies and changes that take place. Civilizations have risen and peaked and then disappeared or minimalized ex: Greece, Persia even Mongolia etc. etc. and this change is constant in the human history for everyone.
Finally, go and ask the general populations of BRICS countries as to if they are better off today or were 20 years ago...........when the market reforms were taken up seriously in their respective countries.
Even now in BRICS nations (probably except Russia), anywhere from 25 to 65% of infants are chronically malnourished. These socieites, cultures and lifestyles..........I cannot call as even partially successful.
Cultural differences are the reason why ME nations get sooooooooooooooo easily into brutul. gruesome, graphic levels of internal fight i.e. CIVIL WARS.
Western nations would not!!!!!!! and do not call it lack of education because one needs little education to know that he/she should not dig in daggers into someone else for a small disagreement.
Yes, I consider Western cultures to be better where there are even rights and responsibilities towards animals, not to mention humans. Western cultures are not perfect though and none will ever be. There are areas where western cultures are struggling, these areas will be solved but new one's will prop up. That's a dimension of human societies and changes that take place. Civilizations have risen and peaked and then disappeared or minimalized ex: Greece, Persia even Mongolia etc. etc. and this change is constant in the human history for everyone.
Finally, go and ask the general populations of BRICS countries as to if they are better off today or were 20 years ago...........when the market reforms were taken up seriously in their respective countries.
Even now in BRICS nations (probably except Russia), anywhere from 25 to 65% of infants are chronically malnourished. These socieites, cultures and lifestyles..........I cannot call as even partially successful.
edit on 31-8-2013 by victor7 because: (no reason
given)
edit on 31-8-2013 by victor7 because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by Dianec
Cultural differences are the reason why ME nations get sooooooooooooooo easily into brutul. gruesome, graphic levels of internal fight i.e. CIVIL WARS.
Western nations would not!!!!!!! and do not call it lack of education because one needs little education to know that he/she should not dig in daggers into someone else for a small disagreement.
Finally, go and ask the general populations of BRICS countries as to if they are better off today or were 20 years ago...........when the market reforms were taken up seriously in their respective countries.
Even now in BRICS nations (probably except Russia), anywhere from 25 to 65% of infants are chronically malnourished. These socieites, cultures and lifestyles..........I cannot call as even partially successful.edit on 31-8-2013 by victor7 because: (no reason given)
Oh yeah... then why is the gov so worried about riots? Because they know that chaos is just a matter of breaking down security. Intelligence maneuvers put in a lot of effort to break down security in countries that are not in compliance with the western controlled world banking system. If security was broken in the US... do not think for one second that all hell would not break loose. It's not because we are simply better than them... that is ridiculous and not something they should continue to be punished for with bombs. How is that going to fix anything? the US does nothing but attempt to make those problems worse. Even if you could convince everyone that the problem was solely because of their culture, you could never say that the US has the solution. It's hype... it's tired propaganda.
You can't uphold the nourishment of a society that feeds it's children things loaded down with sugar and other unhealthy and fattening foods as a standard of health because even though the little ones may be porkers when they are small... all you have to do is look at cancer statistics to see who is the most unhealthy... and it's western country after western country. science has proven that feeding a mammal a frugal, but healthy diet prolongs it's lifespan substantially. I'm not saying children should be deprived of food, but he western standard of nourishment is a load of crap... literally. Weight is not an indication of a lack of health compared to western children on poor diets and considering that other races have different averages of weight and height...there's no way you will ever prove that the western way of life is healthier because the statistics CONSISTENTLY prove otherwise. In the west you eat junk and you take medication and they call that some type of betterment.
edit on 31-8-2013 by NotAnAspie
because: (no reason given)
reply to post by NotAnAspie
I agree with you on how we call ourselves the most healthy society on earth and wish to spread it but fail to see our shortcomings.
It is interesting to try and figure out how much our values (western/individualist) have impacted collective cultures (especially how it may have impacted where the ME is today). To push our values onto another on an individual level is wrong and it is equally as wrong to do so on a larger scale. If someone is a Mormon I can get along with them but if they are bent on telling me I should be a Mormon we are not going to get along so well.
I think (just an initial theory), there is at least some impact from our involvement as well as overcrowding along with the regular conflict that is ancient. We have gone into situations not understanding fully the culture we are impeding upon. Which side are we taking? The one whose values most closely match our own of course (or appear to march our own). Killing is wrong. I'm sure even people in these cultures get that much. What are they killing for? A belief system that they feel needs to be implemented; a way of life. Bring into that mix an entirely new belief system and overcrowding and this equals more chaos.
One theme I've gotten out of that part of the world is "stop westernizing us". "Stop taking away our traditions and values with your evil ways". I can't imagine living as they do as I'm an American but I attempt to see their perspective.
I don't think the United States made the Middle East as it is but I do believe they haven't helped matters. If you really want to help you seek to understand. You withhold judgement, and you meet people on their level. You work from there.
If you wouldn't want to be treated like that on an individual level why would you apply those methods on an international level. Have someone not hear your reasons for doing things the way you do; accusing you because of a preexisting bias; telling you this is how it will be done and thats the end of it, etc. I hear people (the minority at this time) justifying the use of force to send a message. I ask what this will do. Can't really get an answer to see how this will help long term. That's because it won't. It won't make the chaos in that region stop. It won't do anything unless we go in there and remove every weapon they have. Even then the fighting will continue.
To me - its too messy to send some fire in there to make a point. If that's all they want to do there are other ways. If not planning to take the weapons out it makes no sense. There is no such thing as a "small" intervention in the ME. Its not the United States.
I agree with you on how we call ourselves the most healthy society on earth and wish to spread it but fail to see our shortcomings.
It is interesting to try and figure out how much our values (western/individualist) have impacted collective cultures (especially how it may have impacted where the ME is today). To push our values onto another on an individual level is wrong and it is equally as wrong to do so on a larger scale. If someone is a Mormon I can get along with them but if they are bent on telling me I should be a Mormon we are not going to get along so well.
I think (just an initial theory), there is at least some impact from our involvement as well as overcrowding along with the regular conflict that is ancient. We have gone into situations not understanding fully the culture we are impeding upon. Which side are we taking? The one whose values most closely match our own of course (or appear to march our own). Killing is wrong. I'm sure even people in these cultures get that much. What are they killing for? A belief system that they feel needs to be implemented; a way of life. Bring into that mix an entirely new belief system and overcrowding and this equals more chaos.
One theme I've gotten out of that part of the world is "stop westernizing us". "Stop taking away our traditions and values with your evil ways". I can't imagine living as they do as I'm an American but I attempt to see their perspective.
I don't think the United States made the Middle East as it is but I do believe they haven't helped matters. If you really want to help you seek to understand. You withhold judgement, and you meet people on their level. You work from there.
If you wouldn't want to be treated like that on an individual level why would you apply those methods on an international level. Have someone not hear your reasons for doing things the way you do; accusing you because of a preexisting bias; telling you this is how it will be done and thats the end of it, etc. I hear people (the minority at this time) justifying the use of force to send a message. I ask what this will do. Can't really get an answer to see how this will help long term. That's because it won't. It won't make the chaos in that region stop. It won't do anything unless we go in there and remove every weapon they have. Even then the fighting will continue.
To me - its too messy to send some fire in there to make a point. If that's all they want to do there are other ways. If not planning to take the weapons out it makes no sense. There is no such thing as a "small" intervention in the ME. Its not the United States.
edit on 31-8-2013 by
Dianec because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by victor7
reply to post by Dianec
Cultural differences are the reason why ME nations get sooooooooooooooo easily into brutul. gruesome, graphic levels of internal fight i.e. CIVIL WARS.
Western nations would not!!!!!!! and do not call it lack of education because one needs little education to know that he/she should not dig in daggers into someone else for a small disagreement.
Yes, I consider Western cultures to be better where there are even rights and responsibilities towards animals, not to mention humans. Western cultures are not perfect though and none will ever be. There are areas where western cultures are struggling, these areas will be solved but new one's will prop up. That's a dimension of human societies and changes that take place. Civilizations have risen and peaked and then disappeared or minimalized ex: Greece, Persia even Mongolia etc. etc. and this change is constant in the human history for everyone.
Finally, go and ask the general populations of BRICS countries as to if they are better off today or were 20 years ago...........when the market reforms were taken up seriously in their respective countries.
Even now in BRICS nations (probably except Russia), anywhere from 25 to 65% of infants are chronically malnourished. These socieites, cultures and lifestyles..........I cannot call as even partially successful.edit on 31-8-2013 by victor7 because: (no reason given)edit on 31-8-2013 by victor7 because: (no reason given)
I am not saying they have reached fulfillment. Just because they are a collectivist culture does not mean they have reached their highest good. Just as you can do a poll in America to ask how many citizens have self actualized (feel completely fulfilled and have reached their highest potential). If those numbers are low it does not mean individualism has failed (and i believe they are low). It means something else is going on.
It is interesting that as disconnected as we are from one another in the United States we do live in relative peace compared to other countries. Collectivist cultures seem to be falling apart in our example of the Middle East so what's going on? If you met someone fighting for their "tribe" (to bunch it all under one term), would we find they are more satisfied in life than someone here living in peace but who has not self actualized? I would say they are at least on tneir way. They probably find meaning in contributing to whatever it is they believe in (especially if they are a collectivist).
We can and cannot say being a collectivist is causing this. It could be because the more we give them to defend the more purpose we give their lives. Its generational as well. We also cannot say it is the cause because that would be to say 1/2 of the world thinks wrong, and there are many peaceful and fullfilled people living in collectivist cultures.
With that thought how do you approach the Middle East? We can't fix it for them. Their entire system is built on this generational defense mindset. If we understand collectivism we also understand they find meaning in contributing to the greater good of their group.
reply to post by Dianec
Roughly 50-80% of the Syrian Rebels are nothing but Al Queda and Muslim Brotherhood terrorists. They are not fighting to remove Assad, they are fighting to establish the Wahhabi Fanatic Caliaphite from Libya to Pakistan with ambitions for beyond i.e. whole world.
How do you stop these elements? Cut off their weapons supply, financial aid and media attention.
How do you stop Assads from oppressing people? Economic ways are the best. More so, as Syria is not a oil rich country. Assad types can remain in power and enjoy the goodies of free market economies but stupid items like Emergency Rule which allows his henchmen to jail anyone for any cause, such things need to go.
Roughly 50-80% of the Syrian Rebels are nothing but Al Queda and Muslim Brotherhood terrorists. They are not fighting to remove Assad, they are fighting to establish the Wahhabi Fanatic Caliaphite from Libya to Pakistan with ambitions for beyond i.e. whole world.
How do you stop these elements? Cut off their weapons supply, financial aid and media attention.
How do you stop Assads from oppressing people? Economic ways are the best. More so, as Syria is not a oil rich country. Assad types can remain in power and enjoy the goodies of free market economies but stupid items like Emergency Rule which allows his henchmen to jail anyone for any cause, such things need to go.