Comments by "MarcosElMalo2" (@MarcosElMalo2) on "Why the Middle East Is So Aggravating (yet so difficult to leave) || Peter Zeihan" video.

@bryanreed1328 which is ironic because beer (or more accurately, ale) was a big part of pre-Islamic peasant culture in the grain growing areas of the Middle East.
59
And just leaving is a no-win situation. This is the dictionary definition of dilemma. A problem with two solutions (stay or leave), neither of which is good. Yes, it’s more complex than that, with a lot of moving parts, but the push and pull is between less engagement or more engagement. Long term, the U.S. wants to ease out, and has been easing out, getting our regional partners to take more responsibility and to start cooperating with each other in a meaningful way. The recent Iranian proxy attacks tells me that Iran doesn’t want the U.S. to leave. And that is a clue that Iran is a proxy for someone else.
35
@SkyRiver1 It’s the game that moves as you play. 😆 Actions very often have unforeseen consequences. Example: A powerful country intervenes in the politics of another country militarily and prevents a communist takeover, leaving a murderous and corrupt regime in its place. The people of that country flee political persecution (which doesn’t mean they’re politically motivated, it means that the corrupt regime finds their existence inconvenient). Those refugees of war flee to one of the big cities of the powerful country where they become part of the urban poor class. Some of their young people form into gangs because they are threatened by the pre-existing gangs. It turns out that the young people are quite good at it! They become a major gang, and one to be feared. About this time, the Caribbean drug trade is interdicted and narco traffickers must reroute through Central America. (And now I’ve given the game away, so I’ll just name names.) This presents big opportunities for Mara Salvatrucha XIII (MS-13) to return to Salvador, which in turn makes life untenable for the people of that country. Those that flee from the criminal gangs taking over their country head north. The Reagan administration had good reasons to intervene. We were still in the Cold War. As you point out, it’s a futile exercise to endlessly chew over counterfactuals. The point I am coming to is this: unforeseen consequences are unavoidable, always (given a long enough time scale). But one is blinding themselves when they do not accept consequences of their actions. History is the study of past actions and their consequences. We hope that we can learn from our mistakes. And (most of us) hope we can take responsibility for the consequences of our actions.
10
You got that mixed up in your first sentence, I think.
3
I think it’s awesome that people with learning disabilities like you are watching Pete’s videos. Don’t give up trying to understand the world with your limited intellectual capacity!
2
You’re an expectorant?
2
@hoilst265 If it were only that simple. Many of these regimes don’t want to improve infrastructure for the general welfare. They want cash. How do you propose to build schools in a country with leaders who have an eye on your building budget? (Not to mention, these leaders have their own patronage networks to tend.) They’ll rob you blind, and then repurpose the buildings as soon as you’ve moved on. Pretty much the only way to build schools and hospitals in a hostile or semi-hostile regime is to invade it first. That’s why we must think long and hard about either war or generous help.
1
True. It affects the entire world. And despite the wishes of the isolationists who think we can retreat into Fortress America, we are part of the world. The isolationists want a simple answer to a complicated problem, like the kid who takes the ball and goes home, yielding the playing field to others.
1
@NoPe-no4sn He has the audiovisual equivalent of dyslexia.
1
Whatever, Ivan.
1
@TransgirlsEnjoyer never
1