Qatar Asks Trump to help end Gaza war
- Thread starter The truth seeker
- Start date
Qatar know what to do.
The alchemist
VIP
We'll see what Trump does. I don't trust him at all. He has a strong history of siding with Israeli interests at every turn. If Netanyahu says, "Sorry you felt disrespected and used" one time, Trump will go back to his lap like a dog.
Doubt trump will jeopardize economic ties with the gulf states by supporting Benjmans crazy plans but we will see
Bottom line is that Isreal is becoming somewhat of a rouge nation even China has been distancing themselves from Isreal
The alchemist
VIP
The Gulf states are going to stick around like they did throughout the genocide. They had mutual interests and favored that over the well-being of Palestinians. The question is, will Trump turn away from Israel when he has historically favored Israel like America has for decades? I doubt it.
The guy talked about making Gaza into a Las Vegas for Israeli interests while Palestinians lived in random Arab countries. That was his position not long ago. So excuse my skepticism. The guy facilitated Israeli interests and helped them renew diplomatic ties with the UAE without holding Israel accountable for their end of the condition. Then Hamas attacked Israel because they were circumvented and ignored completely, while their condition advanced for the worse.
I see your point but do you think Isreal is becoming somewhat of a rouge nation .?
Keep it a boqol
VIP
Have you seen how the israel media is painting qatar as the boogie man?
Saudi’s have accused Qatar of harboring terrorists
@The alchemist
www.newsweek.com
Saudi Arabia rolls out customized mobile McDonald's for Trump visit
As the Saudis work to impress Trump during his trip to Riyadh this week, they're focusing on even the smallest details—like his fondness for the Golden Arches.
www.newsweek.com
The alchemist
VIP
I have said this before, Israel is the liberal imperial child. It only becomes rogue the minute the West completely disowns it. That is not going to happen for many reasons.
Because:
1: The West is imperial in nature and origin.
2. Israel's entire existence is the phenomenological material formulation of that liberal Western expression.
When Theodor Herzl envisaged through literary description the Zionist proposition, he did in the back of an imperialist ideological context and projected ambition:
When Netanyahu went to Congress, he appealed, reifying these sentiments, as the Israeli Jew is well aware, through the speech interrupted every sentence by 5-minute clapping, from the reaction of his Western imperial slogans, saying, Iran is not a civilization, we (the West) are a civilization.
People who lack historical understanding will always be frustrated why the West sent bombs to a nuclear, well-armed, first-world country, against materially weak population, a large harm of which, directed on women and children, bombing them after taking their lands, as a means to ethnically cleanse them, increasingly. This is because Israel belongs, and is an offshoot of, the West and its social contract that the average Palestinian does not register in.
To highlight a general thematic undercurrent for what motivates these asymmetries, there is an in-group element that is racial in kind, laid on top of motivational foundations of Western civilization that is most potently exercised in Israeli expansion and inversely, Palestinian suffering.
Have you ever wondered why the West wants to project its influence through systemic coercion by making countries in the "Global South" liberal (define this as classical and progressive combined, as the historical literary traditions have sectioned) and Western, but does not accept them as Western? Does that seem like a symmetrical or fair contract? No. The key differentiator here is racial contract. A country like Botswana is entirely Western in its economic system; entailing nuances of institutional design, operation, mechanization, and philosophy -- all Western. Infrastructure, technology, behavioral and collective media diffusion, Western. Education, entirely Western. They have a Western legal system. They are Christian in the Western sense. They were colonized by the West, where diplomatic relations follow a continual chain, to preclude notions of lack of precedence. So why is Botswana not a Western country? When Rome acculturated central Europe economically, structurally, and socially, that region became Roman.
Do you know why Botswana, a country that enjoys the same GDP per capita as Montenegro, will never be part of the Western world? Because the Tswana and Kalanga are not white. The imperial colonial system that this current liberal Western cultural paradigm projects to others is largely predicated on a social contract that is racial, and it is a continuity of the colonial world order where the design imprint that exists beyond itself is merely cultural colonialism where it can expand wealth and influence without having to give something in return or engage with the people they transformed in any respectable or equal way; extractionary and influencial (to ease a top down dynamic) like in the colonial perid without bearing any burdens.
Now, you might wonder why I delved into those things. The reason for my rerouting was to demonstrate, through an informed perspective, a firm substantiation that at the core of the conflict is the imperial colonial social contract. And Israel, rooted in Western expansionary creation, spearheaded by Western settlers, that is, the European Jew.
Put two and two together. The West colonized that region, Israel is a true Western country, and a Palestinian, as described by early colonial British officers such as Balfour, was inferior. Their lives are worth less, while the Jewish operations in Palestine were their reciprocal, synergistic design that reflected their interest and chokehold on a critical muslim geopolitical region. Concepts of international law and human rights, in this case, Israel can break all of them because, since the Palestinians are not in the Western social contract (and it is only truly valid among the West), they can kill them without it meaning much to the West. However, if one Jewish child is murdered, the West will treat it as if the injustice were done in their provincial cities because a Jew is the epitome of Western human life.
European Jews are Western civilizational peoples through and through. As such, part of the creation of Israel was to deal with Muslims, whom they saw as enemies and civilizational competitors that they wanted to suppress and control, in ways they could vicariously belligerently keep Muslims in perpetual mis-state. Israel was a concept for that directive as well. Representing Western interests in the "Orient."
Even a hypothetical perfect Islamic state is a disaster for the West. Palestine is a region that simply is too potent and needs to be in perpetual oppression, suppression and violent mistreatment, and deprivation, as not to grow into a core of a new political Islamic paradigm that naturally beats the West as an alternative civilization. Sending Jews there is not only for the reasons I mentioned, but to attempt to nip the Islamic rise in the bud, where Jews represent the Western civilizational story and their civilizational interests, a way for them to color the Islamic holyland with their domination.
You should read this important piece by an intelligent Somali sister:
Criminalizing the Caliphate: Transforming Remembrance into Resistance - Ummatics
Analyzing the years leading up to the caliphate’s abolition in 1924 and the post-9/11 period which saw the relentless securitization of Muslim subjectivity, this paper argues that the very act of remembering and imagining the caliphate as a potential political configuration in the Muslim world...
ummatics.org
Code words like "our greatest ally" then mean something much deeper than anything practical, since Israel never provides that much value for the US in an exchange-based way. No. It's the "greatest ally" in as much that these liberals, classical or otherwise, know the historical purpose of Israel, which is a frontier function of Western imperialism that legitimizes the last colonial legacy, peripheral in its spatio-power projection, yet very central to its civilizational value propagation. The central target being, their expansion and dominance must mean Muslim subjugation in both imagination and natural growth. They cannot say it outwardly, because that would be too revealingly grotesque within the language of a post-colonial world where Western liberalism cannot afford to taint its narcisstic image of being post-imperial, although that is very not true, as I described above in the interwoven elements that roots themselves in its continual historical fabrics, where imperial and colonial Western picture has a existing predominant legacy, the latter of which is fundamentally encoded in the exclusivist Western European social contract.
Is the petro dollar system real or is it a myth ?I have said this before, Israel is the liberal imperial child. It only becomes rogue the minute the West completely disowns it. That is not going to happen for many reasons.
Because:
1: The West is imperial in nature and origin.
2. Israel's entire existence is the phenomenological material formulation of that liberal Western expression.
When Theodor Herzl envisaged through literary description the Zionist proposition, he did in the back of an imperialist ideological context and projected ambition:
View attachment 361844
When Netanyahu went to Congress, he appealed, reifying these sentiments, as the Israeli Jew is well aware, through the speech interrupted every sentence by 5-minute clapping, from the reaction of his Western imperial slogans, saying, Iran is not a civilization, we (the West) are a civilization.
People who lack historical understanding will always be frustrated why the West sent bombs to a nuclear, well-armed, first-world country, against materially weak population, a large harm of which, directed on women and children, bombing them after taking their lands, as a means to ethnically cleanse them, increasingly. This is because Israel belongs, and is an offshoot of, the West and its social contract that the average Palestinian does not register in.
To highlight a general thematic undercurrent for what motivates these asymmetries, there is an in-group element that is racial in kind, laid on top of motivational foundations of Western civilization that is most potently exercised in Israeli expansion and inversely, Palestinian suffering.
Have you ever wondered why the West wants to project its influence through systemic coercion by making countries in the "Global South" liberal (define this as classical and progressive combined, as the historical literary traditions have sectioned) and Western, but does not accept them as Western? Does that seem like a symmetrical or fair contract? No. The key differentiator here is racial contract. A country like Botswana is entirely Western in its economic system; entailing nuances of institutional design, operation, mechanization, and philosophy -- all Western. Infrastructure, technology, behavioral and collective media diffusion, Western. Education, entirely Western. They have a Western legal system. They are Christian in the Western sense. They were colonized by the West, where diplomatic relations follow a continual chain, to preclude notions of lack of precedence. So why is Botswana not a Western country? When Rome acculturated central Europe economically, structurally, and socially, that region became Roman.
Do you know why Botswana, a country that enjoys the same GDP per capita as Montenegro, will never be part of the Western world? Because the Tswana and Kalanga are not white. The imperial colonial system that this current liberal Western cultural paradigm projects to others is largely predicated on a social contract that is racial, and it is a continuity of the colonial world order where the design imprint that exists beyond itself is merely cultural colonialism where it can expand wealth and influence without having to give something in return or engage with the people they transformed in any respectable or equal way; extractionary and influencial (to ease a top down dynamic) like in the colonial perid without bearing any burdens.
Now, you might wonder why I delved into those things. The reason for my rerouting was to demonstrate, through an informed perspective, a firm substantiation that at the core of the conflict is the imperial colonial social contract. And Israel, rooted in Western expansionary creation, spearheaded by Western settlers, that is, the European Jew.
Put two and two together. The West colonized that region, Israel is a true Western country, and a Palestinian, as described by early colonial British officers such as Balfour, was inferior. Their lives are worth less, while the Jewish operations in Palestine were their reciprocal, synergistic design that reflected their interest and chokehold on a critical muslim geopolitical region. Concepts of international law and human rights, in this case, Israel can break all of them because, since the Palestinians are not in the Western social contract (and it is only truly valid among the West), they can kill them without it meaning much to the West. However, if one Jewish child is murdered, the West will treat it as if the injustice were done in their provincial cities because a Jew is the epitome of Western human life.
European Jews are Western civilizational peoples through and through. As such, part of the creation of Israel was to deal with Muslims, whom they saw as enemies and civilizational competitors that they wanted to suppress and control, in ways they could vicariously belligerently keep Muslims in perpetual mis-state. Israel was a concept for that directive as well. Representing Western interests in the "Orient."
Even a hypothetical perfect Islamic state is a disaster for the West. Palestine is a region that simply is too potent and needs to be in perpetual oppression, suppression and violent mistreatment, and deprivation, as not to grow into a core of a new political Islamic paradigm that naturally beats the West as an alternative civilization. Sending Jews there is not only for the reasons I mentioned, but to attempt to nip the Islamic rise in the bud, where Jews represent the Western civilizational story and their civilizational interests, a way for them to color the Islamic holyland with their domination.
You should read this important piece by an intelligent Somali sister:
Criminalizing the Caliphate: Transforming Remembrance into Resistance - Ummatics
Analyzing the years leading up to the caliphate’s abolition in 1924 and the post-9/11 period which saw the relentless securitization of Muslim subjectivity, this paper argues that the very act of remembering and imagining the caliphate as a potential political configuration in the Muslim world...
Code words like "our greatest ally" then mean something much deeper than anything practical, since Israel never provides that much value for the US in an exchange-based way. No. It's the "greatest ally" in as much that these liberals, classical or otherwise, know the historical purpose of Israel, which is a frontier function of Western imperialism that legitimizes the last colonial legacy, peripheral in its spatio-power projection, yet very central to its civilizational value propagation. The central target being, their expansion and dominance must mean Muslim subjugation in both imagination and natural growth. They cannot say it outwardly, because that would be too revealingly grotesque within the language of a post-colonial world where Western liberalism cannot afford to taint its narcisstic image of being post-imperial, although that is very not true, as I described above in the interwoven elements that roots themselves in its continual historical fabrics, where imperial and colonial Western picture has a existing predominant legacy, the latter of which is fundamentally encoded in the exclusivist Western European social contract.
Also is the legend of Jacques de Molay true ?
Last edited:
The alchemist
VIP
I don't know what to you're referring to in the second question, but the petrodollar as a bilateral geopolitical glue is real. As oil is a strong global resource, the medium gives USD relevance beyond currency value. That interdependence alone gives America its domination since other nations have vested interest in keeping things in balance that favors the US. To what degree the petrodollar is the cause of many foreign policy issues is another topic.
