Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (273880)	2/2/2010 7:39:30 PM
From: Hawkmoon	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hawk the way the Middle East was divided was not in the interests of the locals... That's pretty evident if you look at the history.. It was more Imperialism.. different Imperialists.. Nope.. and sorry if I left the impression that I thought it did. It was DEFINITELY Imperialism. But Woodrow Wilson was critical in preventing the British and French from annexing the conquered remnants of the Ottoman Empire. Something about the "14 points" Wilson laid out for the post-WWI world: XII. The turkish portion of the present Ottoman Empire should be assured a secure sovereignty, but the other nationalities which are now under Turkish rule should be assured an undoubted security of life and an absolutely unmolested opportunity of autonomous development, and the Dardanelles should be permanently opened as a free passage to the ships and commerce of all nations under international guarantees. avalon.law.yale.edu I truly believe had Wilson not interjected with his 14 points (he didn't consult any other allies before delivering the speech.. sound familiar?) France and Britain would have carved up the Ottoman territories and made them part of their colonies. IMO, it has primarily been through the efforts of the US that decolonization was advanced throughout the last century. It hasn't been without mistakes, intrigues, and compromises (French-Indochina-Vietnam?), but I don't of many other global powers during the past 100 years who have been as adamant about helping indigenous people achieve autonomy. So long as the Arabs fight tribe against tribe, so long will they be a little people, a silly people - greedy, barbarous, and cruel, as you are. And Lawrence was correct. But then again, I wonder if advancing the cause of a Palestinian state under current conditions and government might just provide legitimacy to that greedy, barbarous, and cruel behavior? Hawk