63 Canadians killed after civilian airliner shot down.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Bagor

This is no different to The American's behaviour when they shot 655 down.

And the Soviets behaviour when they shot down flight 007 and the UK's reaction after Bloody Sunday etc etc etc , its how all nations react when they screw up

[blankall]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

Iran's current regime was founded when the west was the enemy in some ways we still are, if we don't accept this then we will never stop screwing things up in the region.

And that isn't to say the Iranian regime isn't repugnant.

Western governments may be the enemy. Basic democratic principles never are.

Western involvement in the region is far from perfect. If they just pulled out entirely someone else would fill the void. You'd also see regimes like Iran and the Saudis run amock on a massive scale.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by blankall

Western governments may be the enemy. Basic democratic principles never are.

Western involvement in the region is far from perfect. If they just pulled out entirely someone else would fill the void. You'd also see regimes like Iran and the Saudis run amock on a massive scale.

The trouble is we aren't interested in bringing basic democracy to the region and never have been, the last thing in the world we want is a democratic Saudi Arabia, we still basically just want them to shut up and sell us cheap oil.

[nik-]

Oh brother

[blankall]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

The trouble is we aren't interested in bringing basic democracy to the region and never have been, the last thing in the world we want is a democratic Saudi Arabia, we still basically just want them to shut up and sell us cheap oil.

I disagree. They want a democratic Saudi government. The interest of maintaining an economic association for the purpose of getting oil outweighs that interest though. For that reason, and others such as counterbalancing Iran and Russian influence, the USA supports the Saudis.

Also it's not "we". Canada has no major interest in Saudi oil.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by blankall

I disagree. They want a democratic Saudi government. The interest of maintaining an economic association for the purpose of getting oil outweighs that interest though. For that reason, and others such as counterbalancing Iran and Russian influence, the USA supports the Saudis.

Also it's not "we". Canada has no major interest in Saudi oil.

I mean 'we' as in the west, and if 'we' getting our oil outweighs democracy then we don't give an eff about democracy in reality. 'we' provide Saudi with the weapons to crush any dissent within the country, in Yemen and any where else they want to screw with, 'we' do not attempt to moderate their behaviour in any way at all.

'We' provide one repugnant violent theocracy with the weapons to threaten another violent repugnant but (ironically) quite a bit more democratic theocracy.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Anyone who uses "the west" as a term to describe some dreamed-up monolithic entity isn't worth taking seriously. It's a comically simplistic view of the world.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Anyone who uses "the west" as a term to describe some dreamed-up monolithic entity isn't worth taking seriously. It's a comically simplistic view of the world.

certainly makes ignoring the uncomfortable reality of Canada's mostly lock step following of the US foreign policy in the region easier

[nik-]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

Anyone who uses "the west" as a term to describe some dreamed-up monolithic entity isn't worth taking seriously. It's a comically simplistic view of the world.

I mean he's also suggesting that the existence of oil as a consideration, even the primary, means it's the only consideration and that no other positive outcomes are considered.

His posts in this thread and the politics thread since the Iran situation has flared up is a good example of what happens when someone doesn't question the revisionist history they read in the same way they question "standard" history. There is no grey, western democracies are just greedy and evil.

[peter12]

afc still going on about oil I see. Did I get transported back to a Bill Maher episode in 2004?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by peter12

afc still going on about oil I see. Did I get transported back to a Bill Maher episode in 2004?

So you are suggesting that we don't choose to support a massively less democratic country than Iran, Saudi Arabia, because they have 1/3rd of the worlds oil? where as we choose to frame Iran as our enemy because they threaten our control of that supply?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

So you are suggesting that we don't choose to support a massively less democratic country than Iran, Saudi Arabia, because they have 1/3rd of the worlds oil? where as we choose to frame Iran as our enemy because they threaten our control of that supply?

What can I teach you about the Permian Basin?

[burn_this_city]

Oil is traded on a world market, North America is largely energy independent on total production, but it doesn’t mean insecure overseas oil is irrelevant.

[afc wimbledon]

We, the west, if you will castigate (and rightfully) Syria and Iran for holding elections that the ruling party tends to manipulate and yet we don't give a bolloxs that Saudi Arabia has no elections at all ever, but we pretend we are interested in Democracy in the region, we don't give an eff for democracy in reality, we just don't want to admit it.

[peter12]

Can you imagine the outrage from afc if America invaded a Middle Eastern country and then tried to hold fair and free elections?

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by peter12

What can I teach you about the Permian Basin?

Hopefully as much as you can teach me about US economic interdependence with Europe, South America and the Far East and their access to or dependence on either the Texas deposits or Saudi Arabia.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by peter12

Can you imagine the outrage from afc if America invaded a Middle Eastern country and then tried to hold fair and free elections?

How did that work out then?

[afc wimbledon]

So Peter, why do we massively arm Saudi Arabia, probably the least democratic regime in the region then?

[peter12]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

How did that work out then?

You are being obtuse. My point is can you imagine there may be some other motivations for American adventurism in the Middle East beyond your crude perception of mercantilism in the 20th/21st century?

No major country invades countries for resource gain anymore. This isn't the 18th century. Aa you pointed, free trade makes this a moot issue.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

So Peter, why do we massively arm Saudi Arabia, probably the least democratic regime in the region then?

Because if the Saudi Royal family falls, the theocratic nightmare that will take its place will make Iran look like a drum circle.