Please tell me what bombing campaign has been completely discriminate. Our missile are more precise than chemical weapons sure, but it only takes a quick look at how many civilians were killed in Iraq to know nothing is perfect. Remember when that train was hit by our missile? Human errors cause problems too, such as the CIA having civilian targets on their list, which we wound up blowing up. Oops, our intel was wrong.
The problem is that you are defending our past policies in the middle east, and no one, I mean no one, as much nice shit to say about it. Hindsight is 20/20, errors can be admitted, but to continue down the same path and justify the past is just being blind. You make false presumptions that if we leave there will be some huge power vacuum, because shit could get so much worse there as it is, or that our presence has improved anything. What little knowledge you fail at structuring into a cohesive and coherent argument. You frame the debate all wrong, set up situations where it's us or them, typical ignorant American who has never once thought outside the box. I can already tell you'd be a realist if you ever read any theory, probably the most criticized, austere, dumb, but prevalent perception of how to order world politics. Fail, fail, fail. I suggest you try your hand at something besides IR theory sir Daldolma.
| 
09-06-2013, 06:53 PM
Threaded Mode