Stas Bush wrote:Simon_Jester wrote:Do you assert that the Pakistani government was keeping bin Laden protected because of fear about what would happen if he were extradited?
No, I said before I don't think it was (and it never granted OBL formal asylum). Although you could, technically, understand why they wouldn't do so - granting asylum to OBL would make them a damn pariah state. America would unleash heaps of dung on 'em. On the other hand, America's public refusal to extradict Posada only makes people angry in Venezuela and Cuba - god-forsaken places most people in the First World can't give two shits about. So giving him public asylum was far easier - the toothless wrath of Cuba and Venezuela is... I don't know, it is deeply sad how pathetic and futile their attempts to get that guy
look.
Notably, bin Laden's reputation as a terrorist extends across international borders- he's killed people in many countries, all of which had cause to want him dead, not just in the US. This might affect the character of how trying to extradite him would be viewed, and how people sheltering him would be viewed. Sheltering a man who has committed terrorist acts in one country as a part of guerilla activities against the regime is quite common. The local-political incentives to do this can be very strong, in all countries who have enemies.
Sheltering a man who has committed terrorist acts in numerous countries, as part of a strategy only loosely connected to his opposition to any particular regime, is perhaps a bit more... extreme? Likely to provoke anger? Harder to get away with? Something like that.
Simon_Jester wrote:Is it worthy of mockery to be upset at another nation, or individual, for refusing (or merely failing very very badly) to help you when they said they would?
Maybe not. But "failing very badly" means they simply failed. As opposed to openly saying FUCK YOU! to America. And sure, America may be a bit irritated they couldn't get OBL in 10 years. But Pakistan may be irritated that America simply killed him off behind their backs, even though they could've tried to get him. A failure to capture someone is bad enough, but open refusal and fuck-you gestures are a bit worse if you ask me.[/quote]We don't know enough of the context to say whether Pakistan "could've tried to get him," I think.
I understand why the Pakistanis are upset about the issue. No nation is going to take foreign commandos roaming its soil lightly or happily. I do not expect that. But I think it does not take a genius, or an unusually understanding person, to grasp why
Americans are upset about this, when an avowed ally of ten years' duration has been sheltering their country's worst enemy. Not because said enemy is hiding in a cave in a region of the country they can't control, and not because they fear what Americans would do to said enemy if he were extradited to them, but because their government does not or cannot police its own ranks efficiently enough to prevent its intelligence organs from
actively working to frustrate their supposed ally's aims.
Outbursts of irritation are justified at this point, I would think.
But I'm willing to drop the issue. Turns out my counteraccusations and sarcasm stifle debate, though I see nothing but reasonable debate over Pakistan's and US actions here. *walks away*
Stas, speaking as an American, I find that it
does stifle debate when every discussion that is either about America or about some other country that Americans start talking about becomes a recitation of the Standard Litany of American Crimes.
Or rather, debate is not stifled, but we wind up having
the same debate every time, in varying degrees of intellectual sophistication and the degree to which America is condemned as a hypocritical nation that has no right to do X, Y, and Z because of its terrible policies of A, B, and C.
But the basic problem is there, I think. So many threads in N&P turns into any American who comments on the thing being lectured about how terrible their country is. Most of the other threads are simple announcements, too, about some development so unambiguous that no one who can remain dealing with this forum would disagree with it- subjects on which debate has often already been suppressed.
So coming in here, I find that the only political diversity of any consequence is between members of the American left (who are almost without exception to the left of the Democratic Party) and members of the non-American left (who range from social democrat to communist in leanings, and avidly condemn the American left for insufficient leftism and for living in America, a country which does many things which are anathema to the left).
There are exceptions, but very few of them, and often the quality of debate they're capable of sustaining is low, so that they don't really affect the dynamic by posting except insofar as doing so gets them dogpiled by the hive mind.
Two lefts don't make a right, three lefts do... and four lefts make a circle, if you will. We've spent a lot of time in the past year chasing each other in circles, and it's gotten repetitive and tiresome.
You at least are one of the better-based participants in this, because you have a clear, well-defined ideological reason for despising not just the US but all sorts of other countries, including some of those held up by other members of the non-American left on the board as ideals. And you're willing to apply this consistently to all governments, insisting that
all are bad and
all ought to do better, and to go deeply into the moral and practical reasons why you believe this to be true. I'll say that much for you; your criticisms are not facile or inane, there is real thought going into them beyond anti-Americanism.
However, they do get kind of repetitive, especially when combined with many other threads that have come up in the last several months, the bulk of which you are admittedly not responsible for. This is a growing issue with N&P, that we wind up refighting essentially the same battle on a hundred fronts, with the range of socially acceptable opinions within N&P getting steadily narrower and with serious problems with low-quality debaters who shield themselves from criticism for their bad debating by wrapping themselves in the general sentiment of "condemn the US for its fascism!"
And so anyone who doesn't occupy this narrow sliver of idea-space, or who doesn't want to read repetitive condemnations of the US for the same set of imperialist and reactionary policies
every damn day, winds up finding N&P a useless place to talk about news and politics.
