The other day I talked about American role during the Bangladesh liberation movement. Given the American policies in various matters, could it really act otherwise? Whatever it did, it expected a positive outcome of nullifying Soviet influence in the region.
Could America act otherwise in Afghanistan to frustrate the Soviet intervention in that country? Would you be really happy if America allowed USSR to do whatever it wanted to do?
During the Cold War era people were obsessed with 'communism-fobia'. Now USSR is gone, but super power Russia is still there. Moreover to this has been added a new phenomenon named 'Islamist-fobia'. Now people are weighing between these two
and feeling frustrated when either of the two is unmanageable.
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 3, 2015, at 3:20 PM, ANISUR RAHMAN anisur.rahman1@btinternet.com [mukto-mona] <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
I tend to agree with Shah Deeldar's allusion that Jews are probably running the show in America now. In that respect, America today is in similar position to Germany of the 1930s. But whereas in Germany extreme nationalism arose as backlash of excessive stranglehold of the nation by the Jews, in America such extreme nationalism is unlikely to arise as America is more interested in money than the national interests. In America you give enough money, you can buy anything. Saudis give enough money and they can get away taking down the twin-towers!- AROn Saturday, 3 October 2015, 20:04, "Shah Deeldar shahdeeldar@yahoo.com [mukto-mona]" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Ironically, not much short or long term gains have been made from these disastrous US policies. My blunt question would be whether the Israelis running the show? I see some parallel with 1930's Germany? Another great power in decline?On Saturday, October 3, 2015 10:51 AM, "Kamal Das kamalctgu@gmail.com [mukto-mona]" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
Watching wild west movie and looking for new frontiers to steal money could not produce better leaders. Short term gain always get priority over long term calculations.On Fri, Oct 2, 2015 at 2:36 AM, Shah Deeldar shahdeeldar@yahoo.com [mukto-mona] <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> wrote:Well said! Just disastrous policy one after another as it has been for the last six decades. A great power did not know how to project power prudently and win all the great games. Jefferson and Adam must be fretting in their graves. What a shame!Saddam, Khaddafi, Mubarak and Assads were/are simply great for their region. With the djinni out, Saudis have killed two birds with one stone, Radicals are on the move and Europe/US will face the music in another two decades when chicks will come home to...........On Wednesday, September 30, 2015 8:37 PM, "Jiten Roy jnrsr53@yahoo.com [mukto-mona]" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
It is so unfortunate that US politicians do not have any leader, who knows the world history and culture to make educated and wise foreign policy decisions.McCain has visited Syria a few times, and some people over there told him a few stories and showed him some strategic places to prove their points, and, now, he thinks he knows much more about Syria than people from there. The same goes with Bush/Obama/Hillary/Kerry etc.When George Bush attacked Iraq more than 10 years ago, these people had no idea about Shia and Sunni ideologies, and had no idea about the group that is the danger to the Western way of life. Even today, they have no clue.Also, they have no clue about what keeps Middle-East safe. To them, medicine for peace anywhere is – the freedom and democracy. Bush gave democracy in Iraq, and Barak Obama gave freedom in Egypt and Libya. The result speaks the truth.Once again, they are making another mistake in Syria. American politicians think - if Asad is gone, as Mubarak and Gaddafi, peace will prevail in Syria. Just think about it; they have not learned anything from their past actions.The difference between 'smart' and 'dumb' people is that smart people learn from the past mistakes, but the dumb people fail to do so.Asad killed his own people; that's true, but, it is also true that those people revolted against his regime. Also, the truth is - Asad is a secular/westernized autocratic ruler, and he was never a direct threat to the Western World, just like Mubarak and Gaddafi. Now, who's the real foe, Asad or ISIS? Don't you think Asad will be a reliable force against ISIS? Then, why American politicians are hell-bent on bringing down Asad's regime now.Only fight for ages in the Middle East has been between Shia and Sunni ideologies; outside force or ideology cannot solve this conflict. It seems that – smart Western politicians are unable to grasp it.I hope, drunken politicians in the West will not dare to go against Putin. US has filed, it's Russia's turn now; let him try.Jiten Roy
From: "Shah DeEldar shahdeeldar@gmail.com [mukto-mona]" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
To: mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 3:59 PM
Subject: [mukto-mona] McCain carries water for whom?
One Syrian lady puts him on spot! And, she is so right. Can Russians solve this with blunt force?
__._,_.___
