Saudi Arabia Is Scrubbing Hate Speech from School Books

1. No, of course they weren't lying who said they were?
2. That AQ/ISIS stole or bought the weapons from the Syrian democratic rebels, the US did not deliberately give them to them.
3. What do you call the SDF? The SDF control much of North and Eastern Syria, including Al-Hawl, Shaddadi, Tishrin Dam, Manbij, al-Tabqah, Tabqa Dam, Baath Dam, Raqqa and of course where they defeated ISIS in Bughuz

Come on, give it up, the SDF are dedicated to a free, democratic and secular Syria, why wouldn't you want that?

 

No, I celebrate the defeat of ISIS/AQ but why don't you want the Syrian democratic forces to defeat Assad?

 

Sure, Baghuz, Raqqa and Manbij, the US and Western powers back those who want democracy in Syria, do you deny this?

 

No, I made no such claim, what are you talking about? So, you're accepting that the pro-Western forces in Syrian DID defeat ISIS/AQ in Raqqa. The Kurds are fighting for an independent homeland, Assad opposes this so they are fighting him but don't actually want to overthrow him.

WHY do you have such a problem with the West arming the pro-democracy rebels? WHY do you want to pick fault with this policy? What do YOU want to happen?

 

1) You said they were lying - as the 15 in congress directly contradict your claim - Stating that the CIA was directly involved with El Saud and others in supplying weapons directly and indirectly to Al Qaeda/ISIS. So if your claim that Obama did not arm Al Qaeda /ISIS is true . .. then these 15 in congress are lying.

2) The Syrian Democratic Forces are the Kurds - and we did not give them sophisticated weapons until ISIS was defeated - and the Kurds did not give any of their weapons to ISIS .. You have no clue what you are talking about .. no numerous fronts.. Why are you even talking about the Kurds .. as they have nothing to do with this discussion.

3) The SDF did not Control Raqqa ? What on earth are you talking about - Raqqa was the main stronghold of ISIS - and why are you still talking about the Kurds - in a conversation about anti Assad forces ?



You also claim that Biden was lying in 2014 when he said there were no moderates in Syria - and that the Defense Intelligence agency was lying to the Obama administration when they stated that there was no significant moderate presence in 2013..

You have very little understanding of the conflict in Syria - which is fine - but, the problem is when you are corrected .. you completely ignore the correction .. not address what has been said .. and then go on repeating the same nonsense that has been refuted.

What part of "The Kurds were not part of the Anti Assad Rebels" do you not understand ?
What part of "We did not arm the Kurds with sophisticated US technology" do you not understand ?
What part of "What we did give to the Kurds - they sure as heck did not give it to the Anti Assad Rebels" do you not understand?

 

'
You have been the one Apologizing for ISIS/AQ - whether or not you realize it -

The SDF are the Kurds - and the Kurds were never trying to defeat Assad - they are in a battle with Turkey and ISIS at the same time - and Al Nusra as they have some stuff up there too...

You do not understand the sides of this conflict .. who was fighting who . The Kurds were not fighting Assad .. where did you get this idea from ?

and you are way way mixed up on your Time periods .. putting things from one time period into another where they don't belong. The mention of Raqqa as a Major city controlled by moderate anti Assad Forces will illustrate this confusion.

The claim is preposterous nonsense as demonstrated by from your favorite source. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Raqqa_(2013) The battle of Raqqa in 2013 was between the Assad Army .. and radical Islamists .. not "Moderates" as you claim.

Raqqa was then controlled by - and a stronghold of these radical Islamists - During the entire war - until 2017 - when it was the last ISIS stronghold .. Russia/Iran/Syrian Army having taken every other major city from ISIS/AL Qaeda - Al Nusra - such that "ISIS" is defeated everywhere but Raqqa which is in what in 2017 is the US controlled zone .. so the Syrian Army can not go there.

It is at this point -when the war with ISIS is over .. everywhere in Syria except what is now the US controlled zone .. remember we had spent a a few years defeating ISIS in Iraq - when our dog went off its leash) Russia/Iran/Syrian Army took care of Syria .. US/Kurds took care of Iraq..

So in 2017 The Kurds and US take out Raqqa - but the Kurds are not Anti Assad rebels - and we are not talking about Raqqa during this time period

So this is a complete fail .. You have yet to come up with one city that was either taken by - or controlled by - moderate anti Assad forces during the conflict from the start of the war Late 2011 until the end of the war Raqqa in 2017.

Where are these mystery moderates that no one can seem to find ? The one's you keep telling us about - and posting from your beloved source but not reading nor understanding your own links ..

So then please find me some "moderate" Anti Assad Rebels in this bunch - in this Major City you claim was controlled by moderates.

And do stay tuned for the next segment .. entitled "Life in Raqqa under what you have classified as Moderates"

 

correct - the Kurds did not want to overthrow Assad - which is what I have been trying to tell you - So quit pretending the Kurds were Anti Assad Rebels .. because they were not - The Syrian Army and the Kurds were not fighting battles against each other - sans perhaps some small interaction that might of occurred .. but this would be after 2016 or so .. which is not the period under discussion .

The period under discussion -- .is who armed the anti Assad rebels in the initial phases of the war to the time period say when Russia entered in Late 2015.

Moderates .. where are they ? and no the Kurds "SDF" in 2017 do not count

The US was refusing to arm the Kurds during most of the period prior to this .. and this is the period we are talking about.

Massive amounts of Arms .. being funneled through and /or financed and facilitated numerous Nation States .. Unless you want to claim the DIA is lying now too.

Who were these arms going to ? since you have yet to come up with a single moderate .. never mind a significant fighting force - never mind a major city controlled by moderates prior to the end of the Islamic State - .. the Fall of Raqqa

and yes .. the Kurds and the US defeated the last ISIS stronghold in Raqqa - but they defeated them in Iraq as well.

but we are talking Syria - find me some moderates Anti Assad forces - the one's we were arming prior to 2016 ?

Raqqa sure as heck was not controlled by Moderates - so big strike and a miss on that one ?

 

Up until now, their SCHOOL TEXTBOOKS have called for non-believers to be PUNISHED BY DEATH, and have predicted an apocalyptic final battle in which MUSLIMS WILL KILL ALL JEWS?!!!

 

No apologies needed; your post was very informative & well thought-out. Though I don't have your clear familiarity with Saudi politics, I would suggest for your first motivator-- waning trust in the U.S., leading to the desire to court new allies, beginning with becoming appealing for foreign investment-- that though this might be the LONG TERM plan, it wouldn't help them during the Biden Administration (which you cite as one of their concerns). It seems to me, rather, that the near-term intention of this move would be to shore up support, in the U.S., in the event that they do find themselves in a conflict w/, say, Iran, & wanted some U.S. assistance, even if only technical, or the accessibility of military hardware for their purchase. I would think the fact that Congress tried to block an arms sale to them, which they only recieved due to Trump (who, of course, won't be their Ace in the hole any more), would be more at the forefront of their thinking, here. It also explains the timing, right after our election.

The Saudi army is well-equipped w/ some of the best U.S. equipment; they're not looking to change that. I see this, on one level, as a recognition that these teachings, which are viewed so negatively in the West, might finally come to cost them w/ regard to access to U.S. technology & equipment, now that the U.S. Middle East alliance-model is beginning to shift.

Your second point, about the extremist views they fostered elsewhere in the region, being turned against them, seems a reasonable, if overdue, realization and concern.

I wonder, though, how much your 4th point comes into play, a fear that not changing will lead to the new spirit of change bringing their populace to rebellion. First, dictators tend not to see things this way but, rather, just focus on maintaining control within their borders. Perhaps MBS is the exception. He did begin w/ other reforms a while back, though most authorities seemed to attribute this to image-polishing for the West.

But it is also valid to wonder if this idea, that initiating limited reforms, is a strategy that even works. One can look at the example of other countries in which the taste of some freedom only led to a hunger for more, from the populace, which the ruling government was unable to satisfy. @Reasonablerob compared this to Gorbachev's Perestroika. Probably not a shining example, in the eyes of other dictators. Even in the region, weren't there some Arab countries which had begun a liberalization process, that were also affected by, perhaps even the origin of, the Arab Spring? Compare that with the model followed by Assad, Kim Jong-Un, Erdogan, etc., who still sit comfortably in power. (I'm just saying; from a dictator's perspective, #4 seems not the strongest argument).

Aside from Saudi Arabia, I'm curious about another country you brought up--

-- how has that worked out, so far?

 

Seems to me that becoming more appealing to foreign investments is the short term plan. The Saudis understand that economic interests are the driving force behind Europe's - and China's - opposition to sanctions against Iran. If Saudi Arabia can become at least as attractive for Europeans and China as Iran is, economically speaking, they'll win half the battle against Iran. The Saudis must show the world that the country is safe and willing.

This is not the first time the Saudis have to turn against a monster they unleashed. The Saudi tribe conquered Najd and Hejaz in early 20th century with the help of Ikhwan, the Muslim Brotherhood in the Arabian Peninsula, a military and religious organization. After the conquest, the Ikhwan tried to depose the Saudi ruling family for introducing to the kingdom automobiles and telephones. The Saudis destroyed the rebel faction of Ikhwan with British help.

Took the Saudis a century to learn the lesson.

Except for Assad, who's being kept in power by outside forces, all the other dictators you mentioned have something the Saudis don't: nations.

Dictators like Kim Jong-Un and Erdogan are exploiting national sentiments by identifying themselves with the nation and the country, demanding loyalty on the grounds that they are doing what's best for the nation. Betraying such a dictator is packaged as a betrayal of the whole nation. The Saudis can't do that.

Arab countries are, in fact, confederations of tribes and extended families that accept the authority of a ruler. There are no Arab nations. Some Arab countries - Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria - are closer to nationhood than others. That's why Egypt didn't fall apart following the Arab Spring, while Syria went into chaos. That's why Libya and Iraq turned into quagmires when their dictators fell. The loyalty is to the tribe or extended family first and foremost, the state be damned.

The Saudis are well aware that some other tribes, with or without outside help (members of the same tribe or extended family live in several Arab countries), might one day decide that it's in their best interest to either replace the Saudis as rulers, or support another claimant to the throne. In such a scenario, the Saudis can't count on popular support, being just one tribe among many, not the representatives of a nation (plus I'm sure there are still some who hold grudges over family members slaughtered by Ikhwan in Najd and Hejaz for the Saudis). Improving living conditions is one way to appease the tribes.

However, me thinks that the most important players, the main force behind popular movements for social and political change, are the intellectuals. By changing school curricula and enacting social reforms, the Saudis are trying to lure intellectuals to their side, among other things. The changes are painfully slow, because the Saudis can't afford to antagonize the still-in-the-dark-ages part of their population.

That seems to be the long term plan.

Well...judge for yourself.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...medium=social&utm_campaign=socialflow-organic

I'd say it worked out nicely.

 

First off, I think that wanting to get back to the NUCLEAR DEAL is much more the reason that Europe is against Iranian sanctions, rather than, "economic interests." Perhaps we just have different opinions, there.

But my main point in that part of my post was that the expunging of exhortations to kill the infidels from textbooks today, is not going to be sufficient to encourage Western companies to move in tomorrow, or even in the next year. What year did Egypt do this? And when was the last mass-killing of foreigners, there? I recall an incident w/ 50 foreigners shot down, that doesn't seem that far in the past. (But if Saudi Arabia only has to compete with Iran, in your view, I think they were already considered, "safer.")

I'd hoped you would show my question about Egypt the same attention you gave to the overall issue of the thread. Being in the forefront (w/ Tunisia, & Libya) of the Arab Spring, & with the ascension of the Muslim Brotherhood, Western business would not, in retrospect, have wanted to be invested in Egypt. And since then, wasn't there something like a military coup that occurred?

Again, I think it takes time for a country to go from official societal institutions teaching the youth that it is good to kill non-Muslims, until non-Muslims will feel safe in that country, after that text is removed. Are the Saudis replacing it with text that says it is a bad thing to kill non-Muslims, or anyone, over religious differences?

Corporations, I believe, are more concerned with the stability of the government, and their trust in it not to reneg on its agreements with them. The examples of companies willing to work with authoritarian regimes & strongmen, provided they meet these conditions, are vast in number.

So this image-cleaning will take time to yield the kind of fruit that would provide the Saudis with another military patron. But I still doubt that would even be their primary objective. With all the consternation in our Congress over what's been described as a genocidal war in Yemen, along with the Khashoggi murder, a good part of the calculus of MBS must include the recognition of what an undesirable position it would be for him to, even unintentionally, get into a hot war with Iran, and not to be able to count on the U.S., at least for spare parts & troubleshooting expertise regarding our hardware, upon which they've built their military. How could this not be a factor?

 

Iran has already signed, ratified, and violated the Non Proliferation Treaty, so why would anyone think that Iran will respect another (non-binding by the way) nuclear deal is a complete mystery to me. I don't think European politicians are so damn naive as to believe in the fabled Nuclear Deal. They're just using it as a backdoor to resume economic relations with the Islamic republic.

Here's a report on the major changes in the Saudi schoolbooks:
https://www.impact-se.org/wp-content/uploads/Review-of-Selected-Saudi-Textbooks-2020-21.pdf

Of course changes in curriculum will not be sufficient by themselves to attract foreign investment, but this is just one small part of the Saudi Vision 2030 ambitious plan.
https://vision2030.gov.sa/en

Egypt changed the curriculum in 2015.

Five to ten years is short term, me thinks. One or more generations is long term.

No Muslim country is completely safe for foreigners, given both the local Sharia-inspired laws and the terrorist threat. Egypt is now safer than most, except for the Sinai Peninsula. But attracting foreign investments doesn't necessarily involve foreign presence on site. The personnel employed by foreign companies is mostly native, not foreign.

There are other factors beside political stability, like infrastructure, transportation, access to raw materials, local market, labor skill, tax rates. Saudi Arabia's infrastructure is oil-oriented, making it not so attractive for investments in other areas.

Your Congress, with all due respect, is often clueless in Middle Eastern matters. The main reason for American support for some Arab countries is to counter the Russian and Chinese influence.

Of course Arab leaders are worried that the US could let them down. That's one good reason to try and become attractive for other political players on the international scene.

 

1. Vert simple, the Kurds did not seek to topple Assad, they just wanted their Kurdish enclave, they did make up some of the moderate forces in Syria but that's now changed and increasingly the SDF are multi-ethnic.
2. Very likely, problem was the Kurds could take that and use it against our Iraqi and Turkish allies, like when they tried to create a Kurdish state around Mosul and the Iraqis had to crush them.
3. Here's the fundamental, the US did not deliberately give weapons and other backing to ISIS/AQ, they gave it to the moderate groups where it was then stolen (or just plain sold) to the extremists, do you deny this?

 

Err, when did I back AQ and ISIS? Rather that we backed the moderate Iraqi opposition who defeated them, in 2017 not 2013 (guess Assad's boys didn't do that good a job if the SDF had to go in and retake it, huh?)

Sure;

Syrian Democratic Forces - Wikipedia

Autonomous Administration of North and East Syria - Wikipedia

Syrian Democratic Council - Wikipedia

 

Are you honestly saying you believe the US and other Western powers are deliberately giving support to ISIS/AQ? Don't try to weasel out of it, yes or nor? Why would they?

 

The Kurds in Iraq have nothing to do with Obama leading a global coalition to arm, supply and support Al Qaeda/ISIS right from the beginning of the war.

The "moderates" trained by Obama in 2015 - gave their weapons to ISIS - but this has nothing to do with what the massive multi national effort to arm the rebels that was going on covertly - This was a propaganda stunt .. to prop up Obama's Moderate Rebel Lie - and we are talking less than 100 Rebels.

So far you are the one who is in denial ..

1) Denial of the 15 in Congress -- who told you that Obama and your beloved El Saud - were knowingly arming Al Nusra /Al Qaeda and affiliates.
2) Denial of Biden telling you there were no moderates
3) Denial of the DIA who said there were no moderates

Here is a summary - very early on - when Obama's "Covert" program to arm the Islamist Jihadists in their Holy War to rid Syria of Secularism and instill Sharia Theocracy. was supposed to be a secret...

In the beginning of the war this stuff was being reported .. It was only later in 2014 - after our proxy dog in Syria had gone off leash and into Iraq - that the Moderate Rebel Lie hit full pitch .. and the media forgot their previous reporting.

This is from 2013 -

publicly.https://wjla.com/news/videos/syria-cia-sending-weapons-to-syrian-rebels-93913

So Obama is arming the rebels - when the DIA has told him .. way back in 2012 - the anti Assad Forces are Islamist Jihadists.

You are completely ignoring the volume of weapons that went over to Syria.

Obviously this fellow is not going to admit to what is supposed to be a Covert CIA program ... albeit one that everyone knows about ..

But we know now that at the time - the rebels already had sophisticated weaponry from classified DIA documents released later.


This is what is being reported in 2013 ..
Who is supplying weapons to the warring sides in Syria?

and we now know this reporting was all true - That the amount of weapons shipped into Syria was Massive - involving many nations - many more than listed above .. in this supposedly "Covert Program" that was not covert at all. It is a little tough to hide moving all the stuff from the war in Yugoslavia over to Syria.

So who were was all this massive amount of arms going to - if there were no "moderate" rebels in 2013 - According to the DIA - NY-Times - Biden and so on..

Or will you once again infer that these people and the 15 in congress are lying - and that there really were moderates .. even though you have not managed to find one city in Syria taken by your supposed moderates ..

Where was the front line of these moderates - to which these weapons were being shipped to .. you are completely without evidence for your nonsense claim ... and are in Raging denial. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-22906965

 

No, I'm not saying they're lying but that things have changed. Now answer my question.

 

Why are you posting links of the SDF - when you have been told 5 times now - that the SDF is the Kurds ? - and that we are not talking about that time period ?

Those are not the "Moderates" Obama was arming from 2011 - 2014 - We are not talking about those guys.

Obama armed the groups that took Raqqa - and every other major city in Syria - for the first time - creating a new Islamic State which was declared in Late 2013.

These are the anti Assad forces being referred to -- not the Kurds - who are not anti Assad forces to begin with .. something told to you 5 times now . yet you keep returning to the same vomit .. pretending not to understand .. in a vicious circle of self delusion.

Where was this moderate rebel force you are claiming existed at this time - one that was taking cities fighting battles against Assad

Your Claim has been demonstrated false - numerous times - in numerous ways .. and you know it.

Obama led a large coalition of nations to arm the anti Assad rebels who went on to form a new Islamic State.

 

OK ... Good - so you agree that Obama led a global coalition to arm, support and supply Al Qaeda in Syria- as per the 15 Bipartisan in Congress - Rand Paul - the DIA and so on.

Finally you get it. Now what was the question I did not answer ?

 

Some good points - and would be nice if the long term plan was to secularize and turn from the extremist ideology El Saud has been pumping all over the world for decades.

I do not however think that some switch was turned on - and the power structure in Saudi Arabia are all magically in love with Israel - despite hating Jews and infidels as one of their number 1 credo's - for their entire lives - and the same if not worse for all the other folks in Saudi Arabia indoctrinated in this horrific ideology.

I think it would be naive to think this gesture means that attitudes in general have changed significantly - and certainly not for the short term.

We should keep in mind that such naivity is going to be coupled with desperate desire to apologize for El Saud in western MSM - so one must find outside sources.

 

I never rely on MSM, or the so-called "alternative" media sources, for anything Middle Eastern. I know too well how, and why, their correspondents distort facts to fit agendas. I choose my sources carefully, and always try to separate bias from facts.

One source I trust, for instance, is the journalist Khaled Abu Toameh, former writer for the Palestinian media, currently at the Gatestone Institute. That doesn't mean that I automatically trust every word of other journalists at Gatestone Institute. Other sources I trust are The Clarion Project (despite pronounced anti-Muslim pro-Christian bias), Elder of Ziyon , Harry's Place (R.I.P - seems the blog has disappeared, but it's still on Twitter), the Iranian dissident Potkin Azarmehr (Twitter), MEMRI, Palestinian Media Watch, Honest Reporting, and a few others.

I harbor no illusions regarding the Saudis, but the prospect of a military alliance with Israel (Arabs want our missile defense technologies) against two powerful enemies, both former empires (the Saudi tribe has fought bitter wars in the past against - and lost to - Ottomans), might be enough of an incentive to help reshaping the popular views of Israel and Jews. Not holding my breath, but there's hoping.

 

Good as the propaganda these days is so think one can cut it with a knife - not that there was not this before .. but its more now - and different ..a slightly different animal .. like the puppet masters have found something - like some kind of chaos pill you might see in the latest batman tv serious a few years back - which was dark and dystopian .. a chaos pill into the water.

Talking pre-covid above .. - post covid - what we see as all kinds of interests using the opportunity created by Covid to experiment in new directions of social control. This is the natural tendency of Gov't - and Publicly traded corporations when they get really big . Working for GE for example was very similar to working for the Gov't in many respects.. but I digress.

Had someone post a link quoting the State Department - in a conversation about how the President Lied. Was referring to Obama in this case .. the "Moderate Rebel Lie" in particular. Might as well be asking a Mother if her 20yr old son is bad seed ..

I just assume the Pentagon is Lying or spinning when foreign policy is part of the Topic - and Orwellian Doublespeak is everywhere.

There is lots of good journalism out there .. Not saying Fareed on CNN is "Good" - but, you can tell he wants to be - he gets as close to the line as he is allowed. Had the incoming national security dude on today - discussing Solimanin "Jake Sullivan" if memory serves - the nuclear deal issue .. and so on.

Jake seems an interesting choice on the surface - Catholic Boy who went to Public School System - but rose up the food chain - YALE - and ended up in high society .. defending himself against accusations of being too much of an insider..

Note how Fareed managed to at least get the idea in there .. that there was such an elitist society of sorts - in Washington .. I hate the word "Deep State" .. but those who think - or post like there is some kind of power vacuum at the top ... such that no one group - or groups- is in control more or less - simply does not have the slightest clue about Washington .. or political power structures in General.

but - yes .. there is good journalism out there .. sometimes in Strange Places. If I want the alternate version of some narrative that one side is promoting .. I will go to read what the other side is saying .. RT being a good example. .. and then post the link which often immediately elicits the ad hom fallacy ... "Russian Propaganda" - which of course exists on RT - but, it is not all "Propaganda" just like CNN is not all "Propaganda"

My response is then - "Where else am I supposed to go to get the Other side of the story" ? - and this ends that conversation

This is complicated stuff Pisa - and I would be fooling myself - if I thought I had things even half figured out - what these goblins are doing.

Bibi is not just figurehead for Israel - some small nation in the ME - famous for having been an important religious site over the years - to 3 of the worlds major religions ...

Bibi also represents the worlds biggest cartel - and unabashedly so - and so he can do the fk what he wants. How much is 95 Trillion dollars - in Cash/Securities/Assets ? Answer - "All the money in the world"

Now of course this is not "All" - all might be something like 300 Trillion - but you get my drift .. this is one of the major actors in the economic Geopolitical Equation.

El Saud represents another actor on the stage - Not as powerful - but an important player in this game - making moves.

Sometimes the players in this game act as individuals - and sometimes group together. One of the other main players is China - but in the ME it is more like "China/Russia" same in Venezuela

India is a very interesting player in this game -

but the board itself is chaos right now - with shifting alliances - India/Turkey buying the S-400 system was a statement and a half. This was a way bigger deal than most people recognize.

Glad you mentioned Missiles because this is a game changing technology on the board - a huge equalizer making it much more difficult and way more expensive to project power militarily .. which is now limited anyway as you can not attack a significant nuclear power - in general terms.

As in .. we will not be attacking the Russian Homeland anytime soon - so our Military hegemony is useless. It is not useless however against a non nuclear nation ..we are not allowed to use nukes in such conflicts .. but we can use conventional - and we used to have a massive advantage. Missiles Technology has reduced this advantage dramatically. - hence why you see the US carrier high tailing it out of the ME - due to increased Iran Tensions.

El Saud probably wants to try out the S-400 - after its experience with the Patriot System .. but - to be fair - there is no good defense against modern cruise missile technology - now combined with drone stuff. but there hasn't been since the introduction of the Sunburn in the mid 90s by Russia - super sonic anti ship sea skimming cruise missile - the missile that basically started this whole "movement".

One can build a whole lot of missiles - 1 million a pop - for the price of an Aircraft Carrier Group - op costs - and so on.
Our ships can not defend against a few sorte's of these missiles - but this matters not because even if they could - they run out of ammo very quickly -and so are vulnerable to saturation .. which makes near impossible to get close to the homeland of some nation you want to attack.

Defending against such technologies over Sea is near impossible - Over Land ? how are you doing to do that .. You don't know they are coming .. skimming along the surface contours at a relatively slow rate - and then go super sonic a short distance prior to impact - taking evasive maneuvers and so on.

We are not even close to being able to defend against this - Israel has some of the best technology but is still less than 90% against extremely slow moving rockets travelling on a predictable trajectory - These home made fireworks - and a cruise missile - are a different universe.

and these missiles just keep getting better and better - at a rate way faster than our ability to defend - an ability we have yet to have on a level other than "extremely poor" .

How many years do you think we are away - from these missiles thinking for themselves ?

 

Yes, editorial policies are ruining quality journalism. Everything these days is about what ought to be, in some editor's opinion, not what is, what people should see, not what's in front of the eyes. I'm afraid it will get worse before it gets better.

Regarding the Middle East, these editorial policies are intertwined with a poisonous mix of freelance journalism from biased local reporters, heavy pressure from local authorities to distort the truth under threat of expulsion of journalists or even death threats, abandonment of journalistic ethics in favor of narratives favored by advertisers, and a willingness to lie on ideological grounds.

I'm not against exploiting opportunities per se, don't see it as something inherently wrong. Besides, trial and error is the basic blueprint of life, this is how evolution works. Social experiments is what brought the Americans their precious individual freedoms granted by the Constitution. Don't underestimate the value of social experiments. Some might turn out to be ineffective, or even harmful, but they're an essential, necessary, and unavoidable component of life in a human society.

The different tendencies in, and views of, social life, are not a threat unless one side is taking over. As long as the different sides are compromising amid a healthy public debate, there's nothing wrong or threatening about differing opinions.

Not sure what GE is - General Electric?

Don't get me started on "Deep State" conspiracies....

Of course there are all kinds of interests driving all kinds of groups at the top. It's in our nature to pursue interests, and the more power one has, the greater the probability that one will abuse that power. It's not proof of a conspiracy, it's proof that governments are made of humans. Unveiling the interests behind politicians' public statements and actions is a fascinating endeavor; sadly, imagining some dark conspiracies is way easier, and more pleasant I'd guess, than working hard to uncover the prosaic truth. I'm not against fantasies, just against mistaking those for reality.

Don't know about Fareed, but at the end of the day, his job depends on rating more than anything else, and as you say he must abide by some editorial guidelines. If you follow his show, after a while you should be able to discern a pattern, some recurrent ideas. I wonder, will these guidelines change once Biden becomes president?

I wouldn't use RT as toilet paper (if it was on paper, that is). Everything there is distorted in such a way as to demonize the US, democracy, all political ideologies except the far right. I know very well - triple well, as a former resident of a communist country, a Jewess, and an Israeli - what ideological monsters the Russian propaganda machine is capable of producing, extracting a heavy price from the targets of Kremlin's wrath. A good part of the hatred for Jews and Israel in Saudi Arabia, by the way, is the consequence of Russian propaganda, aggressively disseminated in the 60s throughout the Arab and Muslim world.

To get the other side of the story, I ask google who else wrote about the subject. I go to blogs (not too far left or too far right, not to mention conspiracy nuts), think-tanks like Gatestone, local media (for international news). I spend hours checking bits and pieces of information, inconsistencies in the story (even pictures without captions, or with captions missing the name of the photographer, make the article suspect) , sources for the story. Takes time and patience. I like doing research, but time is a problem. Sometimes I don't reply to posts due to lack of time for research, and I won't settle for a knee-jerk reaction.

One big mistake people make when trying to figure out the Middle East is judging people and their actions by American or European standards. Like your "there are no moderates in Syria" mantra. There are, by Middle Eastern standards. They wouldn't be moderates in the US, granted, but in the social, political, and religious climate of the Middle East, they are moderates. Just like Bin Salman, the crown prince who probably ordered the murder - or at least the (botched) kidnapping - of Kashoggi, is a progressive, a civilizing factor by Saudi standards.

Think "Robespierre". How many atrocities have been done during his rule? Can you imagine the western civilization without Robespierre? Would you repudiate the beneficial consequences of the French Revolution because of the atrocities committed by its leaders?

I don't like Bibi, but there's no denying that he's done some good also. His time has passed though, he's obsolete, old and dictatorial, he has to go.

I don't know what the "world's biggest cartel" is supposed to be.

Israeli ships have anti-missile systems.

You forget that those slow moving rockets are fired from very close range. There are places where people have seconds to get to shelters.

The biggest problem with anti-missile defense is not the success rate. Even if the missile is intercepted in flight, what remains of both missiles still falls on people's heads. The remainders can be quite big and heavy.

A missile thinking for itself wouldn't want to explode, would it?

 

President Obama did not deliberately supply AQ/ISIS with weapons. I don't think some Confederate flag waving Proud Boy would make THAT claim!

 

Because it's not true, all of the moderate forces fighting Assad are not Kurds and they certainly are not AQ/ISIS. The US is not deliberately providing weapons to Islamic extremists.