Right-Wing Discussion Thread XVI: Making Things Right Again

[Novus America]

Whether or not you think it is a good idea is different than if it is a feasible one.
They are not going to agree to such a thing. Plus Saudi/Qatar conflict goes deeper than just the Muslim Brotherhood problem.
Autocratic unions rarely work well, because well autocrats rarely enjoy sharing true power.

It actually doesn't go deeper, that is when they become enemies. Muslim states need support, right now they rely mostly on America for it, even autocrats agree to that arrangement and allow American bases. This is an alternative

Qatar’s friendly ties to Iran is another issue. Ambitious autocrats hate to share power.
And actually sharing power and consensus are required. Something most Muslim leaders besides the King of Jordan know little about.

Saudi Turkey relations are bad too.

Sure standing together in a true alliance (there actually is one on paper but it does not work well) would make them stronger (although they still do not produce real weapons of their own) but again is not going to happen. Too many conflicts and too many egos.

[Al Mumtahanah]

It actually doesn't go deeper, that is when they become enemies. Muslim states need support, right now they rely mostly on America for it, even autocrats agree to that arrangement and allow American bases. This is an alternative

Qatar’s friendly ties to Iran is another issue. Ambitious autocrats hate to share power.
And actually sharing power and consensus are required. Something most Muslim leaders besides the King of Jordan know little about.

Saudi Turkey relations are bad too.

Sure standing together in a true alliance (there actually is one on paper but it does not work well) would make them stronger (although they still do not produce real weapons of their own) but again is not going to happen. Too many conflicts and too many egos.

Qatar is friendly to Iran solely because their relationship with Saudi Arabia and the UAE deteriorated. Turkey is along with Qatar the biggest supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood.

[Novus America]

Qatar’s friendly ties to Iran is another issue. Ambitious autocrats hate to share power.
And actually sharing power and consensus are required. Something most Muslim leaders besides the King of Jordan know little about.

Saudi Turkey relations are bad too.

Sure standing together in a true alliance (there actually is one on paper but it does not work well) would make them stronger (although they still do not produce real weapons of their own) but again is not going to happen. Too many conflicts and too many egos.

Qatar is friendly to Iran solely because their relationship with Saudi Arabia and the UAE deteriorated. Turkey is along with Qatar the biggest supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Not solely because of that, again it is also about egos.
Their monarch and the Saudi monarch want to be more powerful than the other.

But yes Turkey and Qatar supporting the Brotherhood really puts them at odds with many other states.

And such autocratic regimes will not willingly share power with an outside organization.

Regardless of what you might think is good or not.

[Al Mumtahanah]

Qatar is friendly to Iran solely because their relationship with Saudi Arabia and the UAE deteriorated. Turkey is along with Qatar the biggest supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Not solely because of that, again it is also about egos.
Their monarch and the Saudi monarch want to be more powerful than the other.

But yes Turkey and Qatar supporting the Brotherhood really puts them at odds with many other states.

And such autocratic regimes will not willingly share power with an outside organization.

Regardless of what you might think is good or not.

They willingly share power with the U.S.

[Jolthig]

Not solely because of that, again it is also about egos.
Their monarch and the Saudi monarch want to be more powerful than the other.

But yes Turkey and Qatar supporting the Brotherhood really puts them at odds with many other states.

And such autocratic regimes will not willingly share power with an outside organization.

Regardless of what you might think is good or not.

They willingly share power with the U.S.

So they can be protected from Iran

[Novus America]

Not solely because of that, again it is also about egos.
Their monarch and the Saudi monarch want to be more powerful than the other.

But yes Turkey and Qatar supporting the Brotherhood really puts them at odds with many other states.

And such autocratic regimes will not willingly share power with an outside organization.

Regardless of what you might think is good or not.

They willingly share power with the U.S.

Not really. They are not in any formal alliance or union with the US.
Plus the US President is an outsider who is term limited, so is not involved in their monarch ego games as much.
They trust the US more than they trust each other.

Also the US has the military technology they lack. Muslim states have very little defense industry.

[Al Mumtahanah]

They willingly share power with the U.S.

So they can be protected from Iran

Actually no, it started due to Russia and then Iraq

[Al Mumtahanah]

They willingly share power with the U.S.

Not really. They are not in any formal alliance or union with the US.
Plus the US President is an outsider who is term limited, so is not involved in their monarch ego games as much.

Also the US has the military technology they lack. Muslim states have very little defense industry.

The U.S. has a major presence there, that is what turned Bin Laden against America and Saudi Arabia.

[Jolthig]

So they can be protected from Iran

Actually no, it started due to Russia and then Iraq

Right now its Iran

[Novus America]

Not really. They are not in any formal alliance or union with the US.
Plus the US President is an outsider who is term limited, so is not involved in their monarch ego games as much.

Also the US has the military technology they lack. Muslim states have very little defense industry.

The U.S. has a major presence there, that is what turned Bin Laden against America and Saudi Arabia.

But having a presence based on bilateral contracts is quite different than a formal alliance, let alone union.

The US actually closed down our bases in Saudi Arabia though.

[Novus America]

Actually no, it started due to Russia and then Iraq

Right now its Iran

And it goes back a ways. Actually before the Iranian Revolution the US was much closer with Iran, closer relations with the Gulf Arabs mostly came after the Revolution, when Iran became a common enemy.

The US was not greatly involved in the Gulf until the 80s.
CENTCOM was only created in 83.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

So you're saying Islam should have been banned?

Ask me that a couple months ago.

Tell your past self that banning religion violates the first amendment.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Ask me that a couple months ago.

Tell your past self that banning religion violates the first amendment.

Time to amend it.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

The issue isn't effeminacy, it is infantilism and amorality.

Amorality is fine if motivated by sound logic. Not if done so by sociopathy.

Is psychopathy bad?

[Salus Maior]

Tell your past self that banning religion violates the first amendment.

Time to amend it.

Let's not.

[Jack Thomas Lang]

Amorality is fine if motivated by sound logic. Not if done so by sociopathy.

You're going to have to explain this arbitrary difference. Why does the motive matter if the end results are the same?

[Northern Davincia]

Tell your past self that banning religion violates the first amendment.

Time to amend it.

Sadly I cannot include the Constitution as scripture, but your legal blasphemy has been noted.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Tell your past self that banning religion violates the first amendment.

Time to amend it.

Amend which clause in particular?

[Kernen]

Time to amend it.

Amend which clause in particular?

Strike out "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

[Kowani]

Ask me that a couple months ago.

Tell your past self that banning religion violates the first amendment.

You’ll remember that I’m not American.

Amorality is fine if motivated by sound logic. Not if done so by sociopathy.

You're going to have to explain this arbitrary difference. Why does the motive matter if the end results are the same?

If motivated by logic, you’re a lot less likely to end up killing someone else and then getting yourself thrown in prison.

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Amend which clause in particular?

Strike out "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

Is that what you want to do, or what you believe WRA wants to do?

[Jack Thomas Lang]

If motivated by logic, you’re a lot less likely to end up killing someone else and then getting yourself thrown in prison.

Excluding extremes, what difference does it make if two people have a similarly amoral lifestyle, only one is a sociopath and the other is "logical"?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Tell your past self that banning religion violates the first amendment.

You’ll remember that I’m not American.

Nor am I. I just really like the 1A. What's your opinion on it?

[Kernen]

Strike out "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof".

Is that what you want to do, or what you believe WRA wants to do?

Both?

[The Xenopolis Confederation]

Is that what you want to do, or what you believe WRA wants to do?

Both?

Why do you want to remove that clause?