|
Ardennes posted:No, I would say the IMF could do something positive but in reality they trap countries into failure. If the IMF disappeared you probably would see far more bilateral lending from individual countries. We're getting a bit outside the scope of the thread, but why in the world would the IMF "trap countries into failure" when it's the success of those countries that provide a return on their investment? I think they can be shortsighted at times and corrupt and money-grubbing at other times but in the best case scenario they are aiming for economic success and development within a country. I agree that too often that vision is corrupted by a desire for fast returns and privatization. I don't really see other countries stepping up to the plate, unless their goal is also to extract concessions and sovereignty. And the fact that few countries care to offer loans on better terms than the IMF (in these particular cases) suggest that maybe they couldn't fill the gap. In any case it was fun to talk about and made me think more but I'll stop now because this thread isn't about the IMF
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 06:34 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 04:41 |
|
Play posted:We're getting a bit outside the scope of the thread, but why in the world would the IMF "trap countries into failure" when it's the success of those countries that provide a return on their investment? I think they can be shortsighted at times and corrupt and money-grubbing at other times but in the best case scenario they are aiming for economic success and development within a country. I agree that too often that vision is corrupted by a desire for fast returns and privatization. Granted, I would say much of the future of MENA region is dependent on the IMF. As for why the IMF does what it does, it is a good question because if anything I think their policies are actually so detrimental in the long term that it does hit bottom lines. It is harder to make money when a country is in complete chaos. I think it is mostly strict ideological Orthodoxy that stems from the Cold War (it is ironic because the seeds of a second Cold War are born from it.) They may "aim" at success but they are so ideologically rigid that it is most of the time disastrous (sounds familiar?). As for other countries stepping up to the plate, actually China has been pretty steadily. They are lending quite a bit in the developing world for infrastructure projects and actually challenging the dominance of the US in quite a few regions. They mostly have stayed out of the Middle East and Europe though.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 07:11 |
|
Ghost of Mussolini posted:The fact that the Saudi's have proven to ha e very itchy trigger fingers is not, in my opinion, the main problem with supporting the Saudi state. It's hosed up, but the real answer to why the US has supported this is that SA has been the biggest purchaser of American arms in the world, since 2011. There's been an ongoing question of what specifically they are trying to buy all kinds of top-of-the-line American weaponry for, but the US has been happy to sell it as it has definitely kept the US arms industry alive and well, particularly at a time when pulling out of a recession was of extreme political importance. Of note, SA is 3rd globally for military spending (~80 billion, which puts them at 1/3-1/2 of Chinas military budget). They also spend 13+% of their GDP on military expenditures which is insane by any standards (US is 3.3, China is ~2 IIRC). Interestingly, it's been a shift in SA military aims: they now have an extremely well equipped military. All of that poo poo about having just enough military to put down protesters is 100% a thing of the past, they've been buying literally anything the US will authorize for export. The question of why they are buying the weapons is a bit hard to pin down insofar as SA is not very transparent. That said, SA rhetoric suggests a showdown with Iran is in the near (1-10 years) future. Similarly, SA has increased plans to play a greater role regionally (which Yemen obviously is a part of, though Yemen I think half appeals to SA as a means of getting their military some actual practice at war-fighting). Optimistically: SA plans to be the regional player, above Turkey, Iran, or Israel. Cynically: we're seeing a pre-war weapons buildup because SA is planning to start some serious loving wars in the region. Honestly my money is on #2. You don't spend 13% of your GDP without some seriously militaristic poo poo going on in your society. And besides, from a cynical pov, who can blame them? they've got the money to burn on the best weaponry in the world and the US is still an unflinching ally. At worst the US will disapprove, at best the US straight up has their back. If you've got the biggest bully on your side, yeah you're going to start some poo poo. Herstory Begins Now fucked around with this message at 10:09 on Oct 19, 2016 |
# ? Oct 19, 2016 10:06 |
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:It's hosed up, but the real answer to why the US has supported this is that SA has been the biggest purchaser of American arms in the world, since 2011. It's much older than 2011, and weapons aren't the main reason. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2016-05-30/the-untold-story-behind-saudi-arabia-s-41-year-u-s-debt-secret
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 11:12 |
|
Rebels with ATGMs still pretty good at destroying soviet relics. This coming a day after the same guy blew up that group of SAA infantry in that video posted a couple days ago. maybe a little ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYiPkmN-QQY I think they forgot to leave their hollywood pyrotechnics at home.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 14:05 |
|
I have not been paying attention much sorry but is the Mosul offensive the first time American and Iranian forces have worked in concert like this.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 14:23 |
Imapanda posted:Rebels with ATGMs still pretty good at destroying soviet relics. This coming a day after the same guy blew up that group of SAA infantry in that video posted a couple days ago. Probably filled with ammunition.
|
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 14:26 |
|
euphronius posted:I have not been paying attention much sorry but is the Mosul offensive the first time American and Iranian forces have worked in concert like this. The US has been indirectly aiding Iranian backed Shia militias for pretty much the duration of the fighting in Iraq since Mosul fell.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 15:06 |
|
Volkerball posted:The US has been indirectly aiding Iranian backed Shia militias for pretty much the duration of the fighting in Iraq since Mosul fell. Was it part of he nuke truce or separate. Probably all wrapped up together ?
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 15:07 |
|
The Sultan of the Ottoman Empire is saying crazy things again. https://twitter.com/EuphratesShield/status/788720442584346624
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 15:26 |
|
i um, feel like i fell behind. what master? is it Gulen? It's Gulen, isn't it.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 15:33 |
|
it's america, he's starting to spout the russian line
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 15:38 |
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:i um, feel like i fell behind. what master? is it Gulen? It's Gulen, isn't it. I think at this point the going conspiracy theory isn't that Gulen was behind the coup, it was that the CIA was using Gulen as a front for the coup. So I think he's talking about the US.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 15:40 |
|
TheDeadlyShoe posted:i um, feel like i fell behind. what master? is it Gulen? It's Gulen, isn't it. The nice thing about not spelling it out is that he gets to let people pick the conspiracy of their choice. Other likely targets are Israel and the US.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 15:40 |
|
euphronius posted:Was it part of he nuke truce or separate. Nah, nothing like that. The US has just determined that fighting ISIS is their top foreign policy priority, and in the "realist" security-centric view of the conflict, that encourages alliances with some unsavory types. Provided they are contributing militarily against ISIS (and aren't toxic as hell to Russia.) The US won't outright admit they have helped these groups, but they have provided air strikes on their behalf, and haven't exactly been up Iraq's rear end about weapons provided to the ISF finding their way into Shia militias hands.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 15:46 |
|
euphronius posted:I have not been paying attention much sorry but is the Mosul offensive the first time American and Iranian forces have worked in concert like this. We worked together early on in Afghanistan too. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001_uprising_in_Herat
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 15:48 |
|
Atrocious Joe posted:We worked together early on in Afghanistan too. It's really sad how the Axis of Evil speech wrecked any possibility for cooperation, and then the Iraq War strengthened Iran's position in the region (and showed that we were unable/unwilling to take on another major war), which gave them fewer reasons to care about better relations with the US.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 16:02 |
|
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 16:08 |
|
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 16:29 |
|
Cat Mattress posted:It's much older than 2011, and weapons aren't the main reason. I'd say their role in keeping the price of oil stable matters far more to the US than holding a lot of treasury bonds if we're talking long-term, though the two are connected. Stable oil prices (or at least a reliable bottom floor) means stable treasury bonds. My main point is that SA has undergone a major shift in policy in the last decade that is leading it towards some kind of major confrontation, which based on their rhetoric seems most likely aimed at Iran ultimately. That SA military spending has quietly blown up in the last 5 years should be alarming af.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 19:10 |
|
Haven't seen this covered in the thread - Today the Russians have accused the Belgian air force of having killed civilians in a bombing of the town Hassadjek. (Yes, really) The air force maintains it hasn't been near the town. General consensus on the TV-news, among the usual pundits etc. has of course been that this is just Russian disinformation with the aim of driving a wedge between the members of the coalition. Our Minister of Defence and Minister of Foreign Affairs have demanded an explanation. Links in English to the relevant articles, from national broadcast website: http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws.english/News/1.2797326 and http://deredactie.be/cm/vrtnieuws.english/Politics/1.2797544
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 19:48 |
|
Okay, I have no idea what the gently caress he's playing at at this point: https://twitter.com/evrenselgzt/status/788703108994138112 quote:Erdogan: We will lay siege on Manbij and Al-Bab
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 20:13 |
|
I say let him do it. There's far too few videos of poorly used Turkish M60's getting whacked by ATGM's e- bonus points if they use a TOW
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 20:22 |
|
Bonus points if the Turkish Air Force meets the S-400.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 20:34 |
|
Well the region south of Mare has exploded. The FSA and SDF are in open conflict and there are reports of Turkish and russian airstrikes in the area.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 20:37 |
|
Seems like the US needs to make it clear to Erdogan that he's on his own if he blunders into a shooting war with Russia because he couldn't stop killing the rebels we support. NATO's a defensive alliance, not a blank check to do whatever you want with unlimited backing.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 20:40 |
|
Erdogan is probably on the phone with Putin every step of the way. This is all stuff directed at the US.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 20:45 |
|
VikingSkull posted:Erdogan is probably on the phone with Putin every step of the way. This is all stuff directed at the US. They're definitely talking, but at least some FSA groups have made it pretty clear that Aleppo's their next stop after Al Bab, so I have to imagine Russia would prefer for the Efrin buffer to remain in place if possible. The only way their interests could really coincide is if Turkey's planning to backstab the rebels and occupy northern Syria as the country is partitioned so Assad has a more manageable rump state to manage, but that seems messy at best.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 20:50 |
|
Sinteres posted:They're definitely talking, but at least some FSA groups have made it pretty clear that Aleppo's their next stop after Al Bab, so I have to imagine Russia would prefer for the Efrin buffer to remain in place if possible. The only way their interests could really coincide is if Turkey's planning to backstab the rebels and occupy northern Syria as the country is partitioned so Assad has a more manageable rump state to manage, but that seems messy at best. I think Erdogan's desire at this point is more to drive a wedge between the two SDF forces then completely annihilate them. Also, I don't know how well Turkish backed FSA units are going to do without air support if they did make it to Aleppo, at a certain point those units can't fight both ISIS and the SDF as well as Pro-Assad forces unless the Turkish military actually goes all in. This probably has been spurred by the fact that SDF forces are pushing pretty strongly towards Al-Bab as well. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 21:01 on Oct 19, 2016 |
# ? Oct 19, 2016 20:58 |
|
Ardennes posted:I think Erdogan's desire at this point is more to drive a wedge between the two SDF forces then completely annihilate them. Also, I don't know how well Turkish backed FSA units are going to do without air support if they did make it to Aleppo, at a certain point those units can't fight both ISIS and the SDF as well as Pro-Assad forces unless the Turkish military actually goes all in. Even just opening a corridor to Aleppo allows weapons to start entering the city in a big way again though, including anti-air weaponry if Turkey feels like it. If I'm Putin, I'm definitely hoping the Kurds get to Al-Bab before the FSA.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 21:08 |
|
Sinteres posted:Even just opening a corridor to Aleppo allows weapons to start entering the city in a big way again though, including anti-air weaponry if Turkey feels like it. If I'm Putin, I'm definitely hoping the Kurds get to Al-Bab before the FSA. I think Putin probably hopes for them to "meet in the middle" and squabble over the city, distracting both from making any further advances south. Also, ironically enough SDF forces are inadvertently shielding the best route to Aleppo itself.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 21:14 |
|
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-jarablus-idUSKCN12J2CWquote:Two months after driving Islamic State from this Syrian border town, the young rebel fighters patrolling its streets nurse an ambition beyond the aims of their Turkish backers: to break the siege of Aleppo. Erdogan has hugged it out with Putin and is going to tell Nusra to leave Aleppo.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 21:19 |
|
Throatwarbler posted:http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-jarablus-idUSKCN12J2CW It's hard to imagine Nusra walking away at this point, but maybe they'll take the opportunity to withdraw from a fight they can't win, who knows. The US tried to separate the other rebels from Nusra during the last cease fire though, and instead we saw a bunch of them pledge their loyalty to Nusra.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 21:25 |
|
"...once Turkey's ambition of flushing Islamic State from its border is achieved." Yes Turkey really, really cared about this.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 21:27 |
|
Runaktla posted:"...once Turkey's ambition of flushing Islamic State from its border is achieved." but that's why they crossed to secure the border?
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 21:56 |
|
Descar posted:but that's why they crossed to secure the border? They crossed the border to prevent the Kurds from capturing that territory from ISIS, though continual ISIS attacks in Turkey also began to play a role once the targets stopped being Turkish Kurds.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 22:05 |
|
Herstory Begins Now posted:I'd say their role in keeping the price of oil stable matters far more to the US than holding a lot of treasury bonds if we're talking long-term, though the two are connected. Stable oil prices (or at least a reliable bottom floor) means stable treasury bonds. My main point is that SA has undergone a major shift in policy in the last decade that is leading it towards some kind of major confrontation, which based on their rhetoric seems most likely aimed at Iran ultimately. It's alarming to me because they just borrowed $10 billion and are looking for another $15 billion from new foreign investors. They cut govt worker salaries by a quarter (slave workers are now literally slaves because they haven't been paid or fed for months). Lamborghini money, I mean "allowances" are being held back. They seem to be completely ruined if oil doesn't go back up to the $60-80 range. They are dependent on a 31 year old Prince to figure out how to make their economy not reliant on oil by 2030.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 22:56 |
|
Ardennes posted:That policy has not changed at all, actual IMF recommendations really have no change drastically since the 1990s. In Tunisia they are demanding the government cut back on public salaries, one of the few sources of public stability the country has. It has not backed away from privatization either. The IMF has always recommended cutting back food subsides in Egypt. The terms of the IMF "economic stability" means cutting back government spending until there is a surplus, thats it. quote:Mati: First, let me say that reforming the civil service is the number one priority listed by all the key stakeholders we talked to, and not surprisingly is at the top of the authorities’ list in their economic vision. All stakeholders recognize both weaknesses in the quality of public services and the unsustainability of the current wage bill path, which represent 65 percent of tax revenue, 14 percent of GDP, and 45 percent of total spending. Civil service wages in Tunisia are unsustainably high. And the IMF isn't saying "reduce civil service wages to pay your loans", they're saying "reduce civil service wages and invest in poverty-reduction, also raise taxes on the rich and lower taxes on the poor."
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 23:40 |
|
US Reporting that ISIS' leaders are currently fleeing Mosul.
|
# ? Oct 19, 2016 23:54 |
|
|
# ? Jun 5, 2024 04:41 |
|
Throatwarbler posted:http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-jarablus-idUSKCN12J2CW I feel like we're getting close to the point where we really have to wonder what the end game in Syria could possibly be. Not like this hasn't already been a concern, but with all the opposing groups getting to a point where they're really butting up against each other...is there any option that doesn't result in one group getting full on genocided? I mean, it's become pretty clear that Assad gives no fucks and is not going to leave willingly...and no one (besides Turkey and whatever FSA group is up there, I think) wants the Kurds to get completely hosed. It's completely breaking my brain trying to think of a way where fighting doesn't continue into infinity.
|
# ? Oct 20, 2016 00:00 |