SYRIA thread

[Strike For The South]

I would say it depends on the issue. In domestic issues, American government is much more trustworthy than the Russian one, but the reason for that isn't that American politicians are inherently more honest than Russian ones. US has an effective system of checks and balances in place. There are different interest groups that wield a lot of influence and have a rather loud voice.
It is quite hard to push through an outright lie. Chances are, it's gonna be caught by some of them.

The checks and balances certainly help, as does the devolution to the states. However, there are also issues that simply don't get brought up. Like the fact that no one has enforced firearm regulation in 25 years. That can be a topic for later.

Foreign policy and intelligence organizations are different. They aren't as transparent, they largely fall under the influence of a small group of people. We rarely see original intelligence reports, and if we do, it's years or decades after they are relevant, at a time when nobody cares.

I agree but I also think this is true for all nation states. I think America should hold itself to a higher, more transparent standard. The core problem would still remain though, certain things can't be totally transparent. This is compounded by the fact that Americas "main" adversaries (China and Russia) tend to be a lot more secretive. Being able to hold your cards closer to your vest is a positive in international relations.

The media and politicians are much less divided. News anchors from CNN to Fox sounded as if they were masturbating to missiles being fired. It's not so much about issues but about rooting for the home team. In foreign policy, there are no checks and balances and mainstream media tends to go along, sometimes even run ahead. That is also evident when media omits US allies' crimes, like the Israeli or Saudis you mentioned. That's not a "one off". That's been going on for decades. Hundreds of editors were changed in mainstream media over the years, it can't be a coincidence. In this case, it's not just not rooting for the home team, it's rooting against it. You're making America look bad.

The cheerleading is disgusting. Brian Williams behavior in particular was akin to a 5 year old watching fireworks. 6 companies own 90% of the media in America. The people at the top of these companies are very much Neo-Liberal interventionists. It is not really a shock that they stock their companies with like minded individuals. It's not some grand conspiracy so much as symptom of unfettered global capitalism. It's why I donate to PBS.

Why was Snowden vilified? Did he lie about something? There was a guy who exposed that American government and intelligence constitution are breaking the US constitution on a daily basis. Instead of being lauded as a hero, he was vilified. Why was it so easy to do that? Because he made America look bad.

He made America look bad but also put America at a real disadvantage in the public relations sphere of the grand political game. The only countries that don't do things Snowden exposed are either are unable to do it or allow America to do it for them. Germany is the most notable example of this. I think it's telling the German people howled about it and Merkel sort of brushed it off as the price of doing business.

I think what he did was treasonous. In my perfect world, he is tried by his fellow citizens, found guilty, stripped of his citizenship, and exiled. However, the government would probably railroad him and execute him. He does not deserve to die for what he exposed, nor does he deserve permanent solitary in Levanworth. So I suppose I must make my peace with his self imposed punishment.

So, I both agree and disagree with you in this particular case. When it comes to domestic issues, I feel the American government is much more trustworthy. In foreign policy, I don't think there's a difference.

My first reaction to this was indignation. How could someone even begin to equate the Americans and the Russians? But as I thought about it more, a Serb probably has the most reason to question NATO motives. To take a step back and make it less about me and you, I think Americas greatest blind spot is its lack of personal skin in the game.

America is in its own corner of the world. I will only be bombed in some sort of over in an instant nuclear holocaust. I don't think we have ever really felt a national tragedy. This, of course, is a blessing and yet it sort of hamstrings us in the wider world.

To further illustrate my point. I grew up listening to stories about Cowboys and Indians. More specifically I grew up listenting to the stories about the Comanche, the Kiowa, and The Apache. The plains Indians loom in the Texas psyche to this day. Stories About how they took blue eyed babies and drug them threw the cactus plants, About how they raided white homesteads and took the redheaded women as sex slaves, about how they were the toughest sons of bitches this side of the Pecos. We would point to our scars and imagine they were given to us by some proud Comanche warrior (maybe even Quanah Parker himself). The Cowboys were American knights, defending us from evil.

Now Granted, the Comanche were a salty people who did do those things and did carve out an empire through subjugation. However they also only numbered about 20,000 people total and they were ruthlessly hunted by the Texas Rangers. The Rangers killed indiscriminately, burned whole bands, and when there was nothing left to destroy, they crossed the border to burn loot and rape various Mexicans villages. I guess because Mexicans kind of look like Indians.

The few Comanche left now live hundreds of miles to the East in Oklahoma. We named an attack helicopter them. As if our vanquished enemies give us power.

Now everyone grows up with stories about their national heroes and at the risk of rambling, I will get to my point. The national mythos is usually tempered by national tragedy. America doesn't have a national tragedy. There are no scars on our psyche and I think that is to our detriment. In our minds, we are good and pure. In our minds, force is a tool for a good cause. Force has given us our nation. Force freed the slaves. Force defeated the NAZIs. Force whipped the Japanese. Force never bombed out San Fransisco. Force never occupied New England. Force was never Mexican ranger raids into Texas. Force is not Pakistan violating our sovereignty killing someone in one of our cities.

Im not sure I have a wider point here beyond my own reflection I am sharing. I should make this more concise. I just feel America is too quick to use force and our own detachment is a big driver of that. If that makes sense.

That is a valid point. Counter point is that there are a lot of methods to strike fear into population, why would he choose the one that practically guarantees an international outrage?

What are their other options that don't involve mass infrastructure damage?


edit: it should be noted Pancho Villa did raid the American southwest. The Americans were fully prepared to invade and subjugate the entirety of Mexico over a Mexican rebel until cooler heads prevailed. That kind of encapsulates my point.