Trying to avoid Whataboutism on one story (1 Viewer)

President Biden ordered his first airstrike yesterday.

I'm not interested in comparing numbers from any previous administration and will concede that this is more or less a variation of Theodore Roosevelt's 'Speak softly and carry a big stick'; my 'concern' is that even though the stories are reported, they seem to pretty quickly fade into the background yet are the events that form the image the folks in those parts of the world have of us. As much as I'd like to tear apart the story as reported, I think that would only derail any constructive discussion about the subject of the level of violence our foreign policy relies on way too often.

TBH, I don't know what my point really is, other than reminding everyone that regardless of who is in command, the tactics don't seem to change much, so while we quibble all day long about one side vs. the other, actions like this should underscore that the rest of the world--especially those on the other end of our gunsights--probably won't see much difference between the two when they're sifting through the rubble and swearing revenge.

I don't have any alternatives, and I'm not a 'dove' by any stretch, just sadly calling our collective attention to yet another example of how the horrific has become mundane for us. 

I’m in agreement here, there doesn’t seem to be any endgame in sight, but what’s more puzzling to me is the fact that the United States has consistently made poor decisions when it comes to Middle Eastern foreign policy, and every attempt to right a wrong winds up creating an entirely new (redacted)storm.

Charlie Steiner said:

President Biden ordered his first airstrike yesterday.

I'm not interested in comparing numbers from any previous administration and will concede that this is more or less a variation of Theodore Roosevelt's 'Speak softly and carry a big stick'; my 'concern' is that even though the stories are reported, they seem to pretty quickly fade into the background yet are the events that form the image the folks in those parts of the world have of us. As much as I'd like to tear apart the story as reported, I think that would only derail any constructive discussion about the subject of the level of violence our foreign policy relies on way too often.

TBH, I don't know what my point really is, other than reminding everyone that regardless of who is in command, the tactics don't seem to change much, so while we quibble all day long about one side vs. the other, actions like this should underscore that the rest of the world--especially those on the other end of our gunsights--probably won't see much difference between the two when they're sifting through the rubble and swearing revenge.

I don't have any alternatives, and I'm not a 'dove' by any stretch, just sadly calling our collective attention to yet another example of how the horrific has become mundane for us. 

Click to expand...

Statement has been true for decades.  At some point, we'll realize it and change.  I doubt it, but......

The Commish said:

Statement has been true for decades.  At some point, we'll realize it and change.  I doubt it, but......

Click to expand...

This is one of those issues that makes me feel like our collective conscious suffers from long-term memory loss.  Again, that's another thing that's been true for a long time. Makes me think the right person/people haven't been affected enough yet to do anything about it, since changing politicians hasn't altered our course either.

Charlie Steiner said:

This is one of those issues that makes me feel like our collective conscious suffers from long-term memory loss.  Again, that's another thing that's been true for a long time. Makes me think the right person/people haven't been affected enough yet to do anything about it, since changing politicians hasn't altered our course either.

Click to expand...

Have you ever stopped to think that "the right person/people" doesn't exist?  The entire region is a real life cloning experiment where people are brought up to think just like those in power so that when those in power are removed it's "next man up".  There is no difference in view and that's by design.  

The Commish said:

Have you ever stopped to think that "the right person/people" doesn't exist?  The entire region is a real life cloning experiment where people are brought up to think just like those in power so that when those in power are removed it's "next man up".  There is no difference in view and that's by design.  

Click to expand...

I was talking about on our end. Here, it's easier for us to keep doing what we've been doing.  9/11 was the closest thing we had to a reality check, but we really didn't have much of a peaceful option in that case.  I mean that here we need the 'right' person to have an epiphany or some kind of 'movement' to congeal and nudge us toward changing policy, so that throwing more bombs and boots on the ground isn't the go-to option.

i dont have an awful lot good to say about the new president, but i do know this - 20 yrs ago Joe Biden was Charlie Rose's go-to guy, even more than Thomas Friedman, when sumn would bubble up in the Middle East. twas quickly easy to see why - Sleepy Joe just had a handle on the balances over there and was both facile and forceful in his analyses. i no longer care about the world so am not paying attention to what's going on here, but i just wanted to let you know that, if one can trust President Biden on anything, it's this

wikkidpissah said:

i dont have an awful lot good to say about the new president, but i do know this - 20 yrs ago Joe Biden was Charlie Rose's go-to guy, even more than Thomas Friedman, when sumn would bubble up in the Middle East. twas quickly easy to see why - Sleepy Joe just had a handle on the balances over there and was both facile and forceful in his analyses. i no longer care about the world so am not paying attention to what's going on here, but i just wanted to let you know that, if one can trust President Biden on anything, it's this

Click to expand...

This particular incident, per the article I linked, seemed very 'surgical' in execution and result.  That's great, collateral damage was as minimal as possible, I applaud the efficiency; the problem I see with it is that for the affected locals, they don't seem to either care or worry about that part of it, as someone will use this, like always, will get a ton of fuel to keep the anti-America fires burning. Maybe this is the only way to deal with that region, I just wish we didn't make it so easy for our enemies there to use our own actions as PR against us.

Charlie Steiner said:

I was talking about on our end. Here, it's easier for us to keep doing what we've been doing.  9/11 was the closest thing we had to a reality check, but we really didn't have much of a peaceful option in that case.  I mean that here we need the 'right' person to have an epiphany or some kind of 'movement' to congeal and nudge us toward changing policy, so that throwing more bombs and boots on the ground isn't the go-to option.

Click to expand...

Ah...gotcha.  Sadly, I think the same thing can be said of "our side".  This narrative that we can "fix" the middle east is a fool's argument.  Not too different from "Oh, give me a shot...I can change him!!!!!".  They don't WANT to change and any forced change would be fleeting.

The Commish said:

Ah...gotcha.  Sadly, I think the same thing can be said of "our side".  This narrative that we can "fix" the middle east is a fool's argument.  Not too different from "Oh, give me a shot...I can change him!!!!!".  They don't WANT to change and any forced change would be fleeting.

Click to expand...

Part of me wants to believe there is a middle ground we can reach over there, although my gut feeling is that our support of Israel will always be the 'leverage' any opponent over there will use to ensure any kind of 'compromise' greatly favors their side and can be broken because we're infidels.  

Part of me wants to believe Swedish twins are still a possibility...

wikkidpissah said:

Part of me wants to believe Swedish twins are still a possibility...

Click to expand...

Well, who doesn't?

I also agree that the state of things are rotten. But I would say that the world's most powerful state being worried about the humanitarian concerns of completely violent theocracies that haven't emerged from the Middle Ages -- or consciously seem to want to re-create the Middle Ages -- is something that world historians will likely consider about our intractable wars, and they will likely give us a pass on these actions when it comes to judging the worthiness of our state in history. It's one of the few things they will forgive us for, but in our societal decline and shaky certainty about our role in the world, we see the roots of our self-doubting foreign policy, a policy thankfully infused with a concern for the fragile and human. In histories past, dominant states did not really suffer from the justifications or concerns that we belabor ourselves with. In addition to our often unrecognized humanitarian efforts is the underlying likelihood that those states affected are a century's technology away from weapons that can wipe us off of the map or at least make us take heed to their way of theocratic living. We could, indeed, de-map them quite easily and let the civilized world continue apace.That we do nothing to stop this oncoming danger will be what the history books will likely find unforgivable, rather than a targeted bombing or twenty. You cannot even offer to pick up and help from bootstraps when bootstraps have a murder/suicide pact inherently attached, a smile pending your demise, and the conversion of the rest of the infidels under their own bombs.

We can still do better, though it would take a Herculean effort to get those that have cultures that spawn subcultures that think it's fun and sporting to poop on barely pubescent girls as payment for their existence to sexual appetites unbridled, that we can really do anything that would appease them other than get out (and supply them with fresh eleven year-olds with which to poop on) and get busy immolating ourselves so the Caliphate can indeed rule the world again.

Really, if you accept the premise that how you treat your women is a good indicator of your culture's humanitarianism, and on one hand you have being henpecked to oblivion as the sport of sitcoms and societal humor compared to fifty unshowered, filthy men deciding that now is the time to start ravishing a journalist covering an event in the street or, in the words of the Byrds, gather stones for casting at the nearest accused adulteress, and you've pretty much gotten how the two cultures work.

That we care one whit about these people is amazing and we should chalk up our concern and their scorn as a net positive, all things considered.

That we earn the rest of the world's scorn for undertaking such necessary actions is the symptom of their own decadent rot and self-doubt as former colonialists in the region. Too bad.

Charlie Steiner said:

Part of me wants to believe there is a middle ground we can reach over there, although my gut feeling is that our support of Israel will always be the 'leverage' any opponent over there will use to ensure any kind of 'compromise' greatly favors their side and can be broken because we're infidels.  

Click to expand...

They don't want compromise.  They want us out of the region.  

Charlie Steiner said:

President Biden ordered his first airstrike yesterday.

I'm not interested in comparing numbers from any previous administration and will concede that this is more or less a variation of Theodore Roosevelt's 'Speak softly and carry a big stick'; my 'concern' is that even though the stories are reported, they seem to pretty quickly fade into the background yet are the events that form the image the folks in those parts of the world have of us. As much as I'd like to tear apart the story as reported, I think that would only derail any constructive discussion about the subject of the level of violence our foreign policy relies on way too often.

TBH, I don't know what my point really is, other than reminding everyone that regardless of who is in command, the tactics don't seem to change much, so while we quibble all day long about one side vs. the other, actions like this should underscore that the rest of the world--especially those on the other end of our gunsights--probably won't see much difference between the two when they're sifting through the rubble and swearing revenge.

I don't have any alternatives, and I'm not a 'dove' by any stretch, just sadly calling our collective attention to yet another example of how the horrific has become mundane for us. 

Click to expand...

You sound a little twisted in knots.  Maybe you should just come out and criticize Biden.  The sun will still come up tomorrow.

Charlie Steiner said:

This is one of those issues that makes me feel like our collective conscious suffers from long-term memory loss.  Again, that's another thing that's been true for a long time. Makes me think the right person/people haven't been affected enough yet to do anything about it, since changing politicians hasn't altered our course either.

Click to expand...

As much as I can’t stand Trump at the moment, he WAS a different politician on foreign policy.  Unfortunately it’s so politically incorrect to compliment Trump on anything that people can’t acknowledge the success he had in this area.  There’s a lot to learn from that success, and it’s not whataboutism to talk about it.

ekbeats said:

You sound a little twisted in knots.  Maybe you should just come out and criticize Biden.  The sun will still come up tomorrow.

Click to expand...

It's hard to criticize him for this, since what he ordered was business as usual for our government. Trump did it, Obama before him, Bush II before him, Clinton before him, etc. Biden hasn't done anything that I would criticize; in fact, it's been kind of comforting to see that he's exactly the centrist that he's always been.  I can't exactly criticize for going after low hanging political fruit, and I'm actually taking some sick pleasure in how he's not pleasing the more fringe elements of his own party.  The way I see it, he'll continue  to go after the less problematic changes and hand it off to Kamala in 4 years.

ekbeats said:

As much as I can’t stand Trump at the moment, he WAS a different politician on foreign policy.  Unfortunately it’s so politically incorrect to compliment Trump on anything that people can’t acknowledge the success he had in this area.  There’s a lot to learn from that success, and it’s not whataboutism to talk about it.

Click to expand...

I agree with you here.  When he was elected, I accepted that we had stepped through the looking glass so to speak, so I took everything the ensuing 4 years brought with a grain of salt.  I'm no Nostradamus, but I sort of saw the battle with the media unfold the way it did, where it got to the point we became fatigued with the constant hammering and couldn't give him credit for anything positive. While his term wasn't pretty, it also wasn't a 100% failure, either. Sadly, life under Trump became so toxic that only a far-right racist misogynist moron could give him credit for anything positive.

The whataboutism I wanted to avoid in this thread was comparing prior administration's actions to Biden's, which of course would have devolved into left/right bickering.  So far, all the posters in this thread have been on their best behavior, for which I'm grateful. I don't think anything has been accomplished here, but at least there's been some polite discussion. 

I’m not trying to start left/right bickering, but It’s impossible not to bring politics into this, particularly since Biden and Obama had a very bad track record in this area, and past behavior is probably the best indicator of future performance.   Here is a list of U.S. military operations by President:

Jimmy Carter (1977-1980): 2 operations over 4 years

Ronald Reagan (1981-1988): 22 operations over 8 years

George H.W. Bush (1989-1992): 16 operations over 4 years

Bill Clinton (1993-2000): 25 operations over 8 years

George W. Bush (2001-2008): 15 operations over 8 years

Barack Obama (2009-2016): 21 operations over 8 years

Donald Trump (2017-2020): 4 operations over 3-4 years

The fact that Biden launches an air strike just a month into his term should be cause for concern.

Charlie Steiner said:

life under Trump became so toxic that only a far-right racist misogynist moron could give him credit for anything positive.

Click to expand...

This is the crap that flies in here now?  Good grief that's awful.

BTW, images of the airstrike.  If nothing else one can certainly say that this was a precision job.  They got the buildings they wanted and nothing else.

ekbeats said:

As much as I can’t stand Trump at the moment, he WAS a different politician on foreign policy.  Unfortunately it’s so politically incorrect to compliment Trump on anything that people can’t acknowledge the success he had in this area.  There’s a lot to learn from that success, and it’s not whataboutism to talk about it.

Click to expand...

His foreign policy was based on a pillar of Russian appeasement.  Other than his administration, our foreign policy since WWII has been to oppose Russian interests, particularly when it comes to control of oil, and we didn’t care who we had to get in bed with to do it.  Trump’s isolationism and Russian ties produced a blip on the radar, but it wasn’t a “success” in the long term.  

Sand said:

This is the crap that flies in here now?  Good grief that's awful.

Click to expand...

I'm speaking for him, but I don't think he's speaking anything but tongue planted firmly in cheek. He's saying that the average reaction to praise of President Trump is to call the speaker a far-right misogynist moron, which overlooks the policy accomplishments qua policy.

Sand said:

This is the crap that flies in here now?  Good grief that's awful.

BTW, images of the airstrike.  If nothing else one can certainly say that this was a precision job.  They got the buildings they wanted and nothing else.

Click to expand...

Point to one thread, one quote where something he did while President was universally agreed on as good. And I guess pardon my hyperbole as well. 

As for the airstrike itself, I agreed upthread that it was well-executed and efficient; my objection is more in the abstract, as I think while this is a variation of a very American policy of speak softly and carry a big stick, it's also a double-edged sword, as it usually also serves as fuel for our enemies over there to dig in deeper and raise up a new generation of hatred and malice towards the U.S.  Sadly, I don't have any alternative ideas that are anything more than wishful thinking; I just, like I said earlier, sadly wanted to call our attention to something that we seem to have become numb to, and now I'll add that it should be, no matter how precise, objectively horrifying, first because of the violence involved and second because of how quickly we can unleash such violence. 

rockaction said:

I'm speaking for him, but I don't think he's speaking anything but tongue planted firmly in cheek. He's saying that the average reaction to praise of President Trump is to call the speaker a far-right misogynist moron, which overlooks the policy accomplishments qua policy.

Click to expand...

Very accurate.  Thank you.

the rover said:

His foreign policy was based on a pillar of Russian appeasement.  Other than his administration, our foreign policy since WWII has been to oppose Russian interests, particularly when it comes to control of oil, and we didn’t care ho we had to get in bed with to do it.  Trump’s isolationism and Russian ties produced a blip on the radar, but it wasn’t a “success” in the long term.  

Click to expand...

It's really not as easy as that. Trump went into the Middle East with a totally different mindset than previous presidents. Instead of appealing to the Middle East countries with Western morality and Enlightenment thoughts about what they should do, he showed them what they would get out of the deal if they went along. He assuaged their own self-interest with his "peace process" overtures, which were largely previously based on purchased consent and promises or dependence on suspect authorities. He brokered a historic deal with the UAE and others, and pulled (wisely) out the Iranian deal that was a deal with no carrot, and more importantly, no stick. Biden's recent bombing in Syria, which targets Iranian proxies there, was a continuation of those policies that even those on the left -- even those that despise Trump -- considered somewhat remarkable. Trump had the NYT editorial board saying his accord in the Middle East was "good" through mightily clenched teeth. It was that impossible to deny the accomplish of getting Arabic and Abrahamic states to recognize Israel as a state.

Criticizing Trump's foreign policy, a policy that ended with very little conflict over four years and a reestablishment of Western norms to foreign policy is about the only good thing his administration did, IMO. 

Charlie Steiner said:

Sadly, I don't have any alternative ideas that are anything more than wishful thinking; I just, like I said earlier, sadly wanted to call our attention to something that we seem to have become numb to, and now I'll add that it should be, no matter how precise, objectively horrifying, first because of the violence involved and second because of how quickly we can unleash such violence.

Click to expand...

This is because when faced with a death wish or kill the infidel mindset, there is no room for shades of grey. There is kill or be killed.

The latter should make you happy. It's the only thing keeping the world in a semblance of Enlightment. But for the Dark Ages are the Middle East without it. Should we let them have their Dark Ages? Possibly. I'd rather hold out hope for the few souls that see through the violence and killing, indoctrinated as they are in those arts.

rockaction said:

This is because when faced with a death wish or kill the infidel mindset, there is no room for shades of grey. There is kill or be killed.

The latter should make you happy. It's the only thing keeping the world in a semblance of Enlightment. But for the Dark Ages are the Middle East without it. Should we let them have their Dark Ages? Possibly. I'd rather hold out hope for the few souls that see through the violence and killing, indoctrinated as they are in those arts.

Click to expand...

No disagreement, but I will say that we're not helping ourselves over there. As long as we maintain strong ties with Israel and remove our loyalties to and turn on leaders (see: the Iran-Iraq War) in that region, we will always take two steps back for every step forward.  

As for the efficiency of our military, I am absolutely happy that we're getting more precise.

I don't know if there's even a 'better' course of action, but I know that so far, the bombing option hurts us in the long term more than it hurts them. I guess at least it's something both political parties agree on.

rockaction said:

It's really not as easy as that. Trump went into the Middle East with a totally different mindset than previous presidents. Instead of appealing to the Middle East countries with Western morality and Enlightenment thoughts about what they should do, he showed them what they would get out of the deal if they went along. He assuaged their own self-interest with his "peace process" overtures, which were largely previously based on purchased consent and promises or dependence on suspect authorities. He brokered a historic deal with the UAE and others, and pulled (wisely) out the Iranian deal that was a deal with no carrot, and more importantly, no stick. Biden's recent bombing in Syria, which targets Iranian proxies there, was a continuation of those policies that even those on the left -- even those that despise Trump -- considered somewhat remarkable. Trump had the NYT editorial board saying his accord in the Middle East was "good" through mightily clenched teeth. It was that impossible to deny the accomplish of getting Arabic and Abrahamic states to recognize Israel as a state.

Criticizing Trump's foreign policy, a policy that ended with very little conflict over four years and a reestablishment of Western norms to foreign policy is about the only good thing his administration did, IMO. 

Click to expand...

Yeah, running from our airbases in Syria to appease Putin was great foreign policy.  Letting innocent civilians be targeted and killed while we did nothing and embarrassed ourselves was great. Brokering more back room deals with the Saudis as we’re calling for sanctions was another high water mark.  

His policy was to stay out of Russia’s way.   I don’t see how any actual conservative would see it as a success.  

Sand said:

BTW, images of the airstrike.  If nothing else one can certainly say that this was a precision job.  They got the buildings they wanted and nothing else.

Click to expand...

The technology/capabilities of our military are just truly incredible.

So, based on the article, these are Iran-backed militias just over the border in Syria that attack Iraq? Such a tangled web in that part of the world. I wonder what happens when the rest of the world doesn't need so much oil...

the rover said:

Yeah, running from our airbases in Syria to appease Putin was great foreign policy.  Letting innocent civilians be targeted and killed while we did nothing and embarrassed ourselves was great. Brokering more back room deals with the Saudis as we’re calling for sanctions was another high water mark.  

His policy was to stay out of Russia’s way.   I don’t see how any actual conservative would see it as a success.  

Click to expand...

Don't forget about how the Kurds have fared over the last couple of years. To the point of the OP though, this is what we do. Ally with one regime and then turn on them later...usually when new admins have different priorities. Lob some rockets or launch some wars to protect our economic interests or keep the radicals more focused on each other.

rockaction said:

I'm speaking for him, but I don't think he's speaking anything but tongue planted firmly in cheek. He's saying that the average reaction to praise of President Trump is to call the speaker a far-right misogynist moron, which overlooks the policy accomplishments qua policy.

Click to expand...

Got it.  I definitely misread that.

the rover said:

His foreign policy was based on a pillar of Russian appeasement.  Other than his administration, our foreign policy since WWII has been to oppose Russian interests, particularly when it comes to control of oil, and we didn’t care who we had to get in bed with to do it.  Trump’s isolationism and Russian ties produced a blip on the radar, but it wasn’t a “success” in the long term.  

Click to expand...

I don’t know if it happened by accident or though interior motives, but a good argument can be made that our 70 year geopolitical strategy of opposing Russia in all instances needed a new look.  China is our clear and present danger, and Trump saw that. And I believe history will prove him correct, even if Biden mocked “China ain’t a threat to us - come on man”.