In school I was taught that the reason we learned history was so that we'd remember the lessons of the past.
In 1953 we engineered a coup that brought down the elected leader of Iran. This led to the Shah who was by all accounts brutal in his punishments. That led to the revolution, hostages and nuclear fears. Does anybody wonder if we would be in the same place with Iran today had we just left them alone in the first place?
In the '80's we supported strong men and despots in Central America, which brought about political changes (less business-friendly and more populist - the horror!) that we did not want.
Lost in all the details and heroism of 9/11 was the hijackers' motivation. Bloomberg simplistically states that "they hated us for our freedoms." That is so disingenuous. They were violently protesting our support for their authoritarian, freedom-sapping, brutal leaders (The House of Saud for the most part - good thing we responded by attacking Afghanistan, and didn't that work?). They saw us as preventing their freedom, just like in Iran when we supported the Shah. They didn't hit us because of Rock & Roll, miniskirts or alcohol Mr. Bloomberg.
Recently we meddled in near-Russia politics during and after the fall of Yanukovych in Ukraine. Victoria Newland's tapped, "f___ the EU" phone call hinted at our involvement. And look what happened, when Russia lost their guy they went nuts out east.
American interventionism can be discussed to death, but don't you guys see an obvious, unlearned pattern here? I believe our interference has made this a much worse world (and is really expensive in so many ways). And I have a feeling that we still haven't learned anything.
The more we try to shape the world, the more it seems to fall apart.
In 1953 we engineered a coup that brought down the elected leader of Iran. This led to the Shah who was by all accounts brutal in his punishments. That led to the revolution, hostages and nuclear fears. Does anybody wonder if we would be in the same place with Iran today had we just left them alone in the first place?
In the '80's we supported strong men and despots in Central America, which brought about political changes (less business-friendly and more populist - the horror!) that we did not want.
Lost in all the details and heroism of 9/11 was the hijackers' motivation. Bloomberg simplistically states that "they hated us for our freedoms." That is so disingenuous. They were violently protesting our support for their authoritarian, freedom-sapping, brutal leaders (The House of Saud for the most part - good thing we responded by attacking Afghanistan, and didn't that work?). They saw us as preventing their freedom, just like in Iran when we supported the Shah. They didn't hit us because of Rock & Roll, miniskirts or alcohol Mr. Bloomberg.
Recently we meddled in near-Russia politics during and after the fall of Yanukovych in Ukraine. Victoria Newland's tapped, "f___ the EU" phone call hinted at our involvement. And look what happened, when Russia lost their guy they went nuts out east.
American interventionism can be discussed to death, but don't you guys see an obvious, unlearned pattern here? I believe our interference has made this a much worse world (and is really expensive in so many ways). And I have a feeling that we still haven't learned anything.
The more we try to shape the world, the more it seems to fall apart.
Last edited:
Facebook
Twitter