The Barbary Coast was today’s Libya, and this was us paying them off to stop raiding our merchant ships... in 1786. And people think us being involved in Middle Eastern affairs is something new, lol.
Just don’t read Article 11 unless you want to be pissed.
The difference is with the Barbary pirates we just made them stop taking US merchant ships. We didn't invade the Barbary states, overthrow their governments, and stay for 20+ years trying to install western democracies.
Let them be backwards countries just don't fuck with our boats.
Yup and America draws a ton of hostility specifically because we do all of the above since WWII. Liberalism is an active relic of foreign enemy Cold War tactics to curb global expansion of the American Empire.
We effectively held influence and capable military presence around the entire world less than a generation after every other world power lost large fractions of their population and infrastructure. The only tactics left were political intrigue, subterfuge, cultural poisoning, appearing threatening (nukes, space race, military proximity), and structural infiltration. Everyone else allied, appeased, got invaded, or sanctioned.
Every time we the people have tried to reign in this military industrial complex it only seems to follow with generations of it getting worse. I think when the USSR fell so did the Russia connections, and it left a vacuum for China and others to fill. Procedural technicalities that can be abused but were never addressed because they’ve been abused since inception. Like the fucking CIA.
Taking the necessary precautions against piracy along trade routes is not “involvement” in the sense of what we mean today by involvement in the Middle East, which is to say kicking a wasps nest over and over while deliberately leaving all of the windows to your house open for the swarm to do maximum retaliatory damage to your fellow “countrymen”. Although that does put into focus the fact that islamistan had been “involving” itself with Europe and the west for good while before neocons started all of their mischief. And article 11 is quite odd, is that 18th century cuckery or just diplomatic white lies to make these fellas think they had the upper hand in the negotiation?
Article 11 shows that the authors of the Barbary Treaties either had a lack of understanding of the fundamentals of islam or they agreed with their religious doctrine.
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/bar1796t.asp
The Barbary Coast was today’s Libya, and this was us paying them off to stop raiding our merchant ships... in 1786. And people think us being involved in Middle Eastern affairs is something new, lol.
Just don’t read Article 11 unless you want to be pissed.
The difference is with the Barbary pirates we just made them stop taking US merchant ships. We didn't invade the Barbary states, overthrow their governments, and stay for 20+ years trying to install western democracies. Let them be backwards countries just don't fuck with our boats.
Yup and America draws a ton of hostility specifically because we do all of the above since WWII. Liberalism is an active relic of foreign enemy Cold War tactics to curb global expansion of the American Empire.
We effectively held influence and capable military presence around the entire world less than a generation after every other world power lost large fractions of their population and infrastructure. The only tactics left were political intrigue, subterfuge, cultural poisoning, appearing threatening (nukes, space race, military proximity), and structural infiltration. Everyone else allied, appeased, got invaded, or sanctioned.
Every time we the people have tried to reign in this military industrial complex it only seems to follow with generations of it getting worse. I think when the USSR fell so did the Russia connections, and it left a vacuum for China and others to fill. Procedural technicalities that can be abused but were never addressed because they’ve been abused since inception. Like the fucking CIA.
Jefferson bought a Koran to understand his enemy, and yet dumbass Rashida Tlaib was sworn in on that same Koran, not understanding its history.
I always pegged her for a dummy.
Taking the necessary precautions against piracy along trade routes is not “involvement” in the sense of what we mean today by involvement in the Middle East, which is to say kicking a wasps nest over and over while deliberately leaving all of the windows to your house open for the swarm to do maximum retaliatory damage to your fellow “countrymen”. Although that does put into focus the fact that islamistan had been “involving” itself with Europe and the west for good while before neocons started all of their mischief. And article 11 is quite odd, is that 18th century cuckery or just diplomatic white lies to make these fellas think they had the upper hand in the negotiation?
Article 11 shows that the authors of the Barbary Treaties either had a lack of understanding of the fundamentals of islam or they agreed with their religious doctrine.