Can it be World Police Time now?

[Payne]

Firstly, WWI did end in large part because of the destruction and the sheer amount of carnage, but it would have continued if Germany had felt she could continue the war. Starvation, blockades and lack of materiel pretty much forced them to the negotiating table. The effects on "popular consciousness" had long lasting repercussions in the combatant nations. It could also be argued that the way peace was implemented after WWI actually led to a far more destructive and violent war in WWII.

Secondly, I don't think it's a question of westernising these places. Cultural imperialism is just as bad as any other form of it in many of these cultures eyes.

Yes, some form of liberalism would be good, but they would need to find some way to incorporate and implement that within the existing framework of their various cultures.

Generally speaking, Japan was never "westernised" as such, it was more industrialised, and had various economic    enclaves within which some Japanese were more "western" than the rest of their brethren in the interior. Japan as a nation was never truly westernised, and still in many respects isn't.

I think mostly, we should be looking at dialogue, compromise, diplomacy by usual means, economic relief and education in these problem areas and then there may be a dim chance of peace. Any other response will likely exacerbate the problem further.

[Adios]

Maybe if the West simply got off the arrogant horsie and realized that other people think differently and accept it then they wouldn't feel the need to name us enemy. Who gave us the authority to force our way of life on the rest of the world? I damn sure didn't vote for it.

[Payne]

That could be a good start.

Then the western powers need to start paying attention to people in the middle east and elsewhere who are saying "They need to be aware of the history of their foreign policy", and maybe making some restitution for some of the more egregious blunders that they're made.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

My second question is, in a larger sense, when do we finally decide to gang up on these backward Shariah Law-imposing theocracies throughout the Middle East and tell them, "We're terribly sorry, but you are not allowed to do this on our planet. Fuck off." And then blow them up with large bombs until they can crawl out of the 10th Century?

I'm kind of on board with this, to a point.

[tyrannosaurus vex]

I understand all the arguments that say the West is to blame, and it's true that in large part we are to blame, if not for the affinity of Islam for extremism then for creating cultural and economic conditions in the ME that make large numbers of people actually consider joining a bunch of suicidal maniacs bent on overtaking the world and imposing 7th Century theocratic rule on it.

But given the current situation, the West could from this point forward implement a 'hands off' approach to the ME, let them develop however they want, pay fair prices to honest sellers for the goods they produce that we need, and keep everything above-board, and there would still be a problem with extremism in the ME that would latch onto the cultures there, grow, expand, and continue to export bigotry, intolerance, and violence.

Any attempt to educate the people, liberalize their governments, subvert their grassroots movements or undermine their absurd Shariah law would be seen as trying to infiltrate and adulterate their pure culture, and would help terrorist organizations recruit new members just as well as bombing them does. So it looks like a "peaceful solution" is just as futile as the half-assed military solution we're trying now.

Personally, I think we need to redefine the "War on Terror," drop the surgically precise language, and make it clear that we are not just after terrorists, we are going to destroy the Middle East's capability to form cultures and movements that have no place in a civilized world. It isn't just terrorism. It's all the societal elements that makes terrorism so viable in the ME: Shariah Law, fundamentalist Islam in general, theocratic governments, and all the other things reduce humans to the status of drooling, obedient drones (not that we are necessarily against drooling, obedient drones, it's just that we'd prefer them to be the kind that sit in their basements and complain about popular kids on the Internet, rather than the kind that strap explosives to themselves and go to the mall). All these things should be declared internationally prohibited, and then any country that tries it out goes to the top of a list of exceptions to the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty.

In short, we can't keep saying "It's alright to be a crazy extremist as long as you don't act violently." Eventually, we're going to have to let them know that as long as they permit their societies to produce this kind of unsalvageable human filth, they are targets.

[Faust]

Personally, I think we need to redefine the "War on Terror," drop the surgically precise language, and make it clear that we are not just after terrorists, we are going to destroy the Middle East's capability to form cultures and movements that have no place in a civilized world.

This kinda makes me feel a little sick.
I know people living under Shariah law who find the entire thing dispicable. You are assuming that there is no balance in these places. There are a great deal of liberal people in these countries who could well have come to power had the west not given the opposition such a firm grip through panic and fear.
Yes there are barbaric practices in the middle east, the stonings etc. But there are pleanty of barbaric practices in the cultures of the west as well. Were just more used to them at this stage.
Cultures do change over time through awareness and through the strenghth of people like MLK and such. Bombing the fuck out of a culture and keeping them in military rule doesn't give people time to think or question the practices of their culture. If anything it reinforces them.

[Payne]

I agree with Faust there.

And while I do say that the west has to shoulder a great deal of the blame, I agree with vex in that the extremist government and societal elements in the middle east and elswhere must shoulder a good chunk of that blame too.

Blame, however, isn't really the important thing here. One of the problems that Liberal Democracy has is that it seems obvious to proponents of it that others want to live under it. Its natural superiority is all the propaganda and justification Liberal Democrats need to effect the implementation of it in places were a standard western Liberal Democracy doesn't really work.

It also follows that anyone who doesn't want Liberal Democracy is an extremist, and anyone who fights against it is a terrorist. Of course there are other things these people disagree and fight against that can earn them these epithets, but at it's most basic level it comes down to their rejection of our patently superior ideology. And all the rhetoric, fear mongering and demonisation that follows serves to dehumanise The Terrorist and makes any kind of compromise or dialogue impossible.

Why should we be so sure that Liberal Democracy is The One True Way? Why shouldn't we listen to the people who believe something different, and find a way to improve things for everyone? Why is it so vitally important to defend our interests now at the expense of our interests in the future? And if we are so sure that Liberal Democracy is so great, why do some of us advocate throwing away those principles and engage in an actual genocide because we fear the people with smudgy skin?

That road leads to Fascism. Some of it is fully blown Fascism. And I can never agree to this as a solution to our problems.

~~~Payne: Got slightly idealistic there, and needs his first coffee of the day yet.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Idealism / Ideologies are 99% of the shit that's wrong with the world today.

The remaining 1% is a split between cancer and pop idol

[Payne]

As ideologies go though, I'd rather the guys with guns weren't Fascists.

[East Coast Hustle]

you guys are completely ignoring one of the MAJOR points of any discussion about a "middle east solution".

y'know, that whole "access to petroleum is VITAL to our national interests" thing.

It's for real, and no bullshit about "well we need to not be dependent on oil!" fucking DUH. But we are, and unless you have the solution sitting in your basement/garage/workshop, it's pointless wankery to have any discussion about solving the problems in the ME without discussing the impact of their massive oil reserves on both their internal politics and on our external foreign policies.

[P3nT4gR4m]

you guys are completely ignoring one of the MAJOR points of any discussion about a "middle east solution".

y'know, that whole "access to petroleum is VITAL to our national interests" thing.

It's for real, and no bullshit about "well we need to not be dependent on oil!" fucking DUH. But we are, and unless you have the solution sitting in your basement/garage/workshop, it's pointless wankery to have any discussion about solving the problems in the ME without discussing the impact of their massive oil reserves on both their internal politics and on our external foreign policies.

TITCM. Any other reason your government comes up with for having troops over there is just some complete bullshit they come up with to make them look more re-electable.

[Payne]

Yeah, I agree that oil is both the knife held to the western powers throats, and also the object of a great deal of greed and envy. It's probably the singular most important factor in our policy in the region.

Still, I'd rather that policy was dictated by more Liberal than Fascist ideals.

[P3nT4gR4m]

Unfortunately liberalism, by it's very nature, doesn't stand a chance against fascism.

Fascists seize power ruthlessly and often violently. Liberals whine about how unfair it all is. I know which one I'd be betting on.

[Payne]

Troof.

Liberalism is always getting fucked over by 'stronger' ideologies.

[P3nT4gR4m]

It's kinda cyclic tho - fascism can only hold power for so long before the whole thing collapses (usually from the inside as much as from external influence)

Then there is the opportunity for a spot of liberalism before the next bunch of jackbooted psychos show up.