The Fallacy of Denouncing ‘Both Sides’ Of The U.S.-China Conflict
"A realistic examination of the facts at hand makes it clear that U.S.-China tensions aren’t a battle for hegemony, but a struggle between American imperialist dominance and Chinese sovereignty and multilateralism. Leftists must understand that American escalation is part of a centuries-long history of Western imperialist efforts to dominate, shape and control China for its own benefit."
I'm not a leftist but I'd be crazy to side with a model of a unipolar world dominated by the US versus a multipolar world where there is autonomy and self-determination for the different peoples.
How are you possibly going to implement the sharia if you're a US puppet or you've manuevered yourself into a position of total US dependency?
Being Muslim doesn't mean not being realistic. Look at the direction Turkey and Pakistan are going. I'm not inventing anything- I'm going with Pakistan. Pakistan had made itself independent of the West.
Meanwhile look at Saudi. So many of you want to attack Saudi but how many here are wanting to align with the West? I'm not willing to serve the interests of promoting US imperialism.
Even the people who claim they're against both- they attack China a thousand times harder than they will the US. It's very easy to jump on the anti-China bandwagon when you have NATO behind you.
People are upset at the 11-year-olds twerking on Netflix. What are they going to do about it? Refusing to cooperate with the West is a practical, feasible, strategically sound solution. Pakistan knows what it's doing. If others aren't willing to stand up to the West, someone has to do it. And not with idealistic responses that sound Islamic but aren't rooted in practical reality and thus amount to no actual response. Responses that are responses in theory but are meaningless in terms of actual practice. The aim is not theoretical, abstract purity at the expense of actual results- the aim is results.
When Saladin fought the West, when he planned his battles was he aiming at the display of piety- or was the ultimate aim to get results? Pakistan is getting results. Turkey is getting results. Others can sit back on the sidelines. I want results. Actual results. Not just talk. The aim in any conflict is to get results. That is the bottom line. Whoever forgets that is forgetting the bottom line. It's not just about performing rituals and studying aqeedah. It's about fighting and it's about winning.
"A realistic examination of the facts at hand makes it clear that U.S.-China tensions aren’t a battle for hegemony, but a struggle between American imperialist dominance and Chinese sovereignty and multilateralism. Leftists must understand that American escalation is part of a centuries-long history of Western imperialist efforts to dominate, shape and control China for its own benefit."
I'm not a leftist but I'd be crazy to side with a model of a unipolar world dominated by the US versus a multipolar world where there is autonomy and self-determination for the different peoples.
How are you possibly going to implement the sharia if you're a US puppet or you've manuevered yourself into a position of total US dependency?
Being Muslim doesn't mean not being realistic. Look at the direction Turkey and Pakistan are going. I'm not inventing anything- I'm going with Pakistan. Pakistan had made itself independent of the West.
Meanwhile look at Saudi. So many of you want to attack Saudi but how many here are wanting to align with the West? I'm not willing to serve the interests of promoting US imperialism.
Even the people who claim they're against both- they attack China a thousand times harder than they will the US. It's very easy to jump on the anti-China bandwagon when you have NATO behind you.
People are upset at the 11-year-olds twerking on Netflix. What are they going to do about it? Refusing to cooperate with the West is a practical, feasible, strategically sound solution. Pakistan knows what it's doing. If others aren't willing to stand up to the West, someone has to do it. And not with idealistic responses that sound Islamic but aren't rooted in practical reality and thus amount to no actual response. Responses that are responses in theory but are meaningless in terms of actual practice. The aim is not theoretical, abstract purity at the expense of actual results- the aim is results.
When Saladin fought the West, when he planned his battles was he aiming at the display of piety- or was the ultimate aim to get results? Pakistan is getting results. Turkey is getting results. Others can sit back on the sidelines. I want results. Actual results. Not just talk. The aim in any conflict is to get results. That is the bottom line. Whoever forgets that is forgetting the bottom line. It's not just about performing rituals and studying aqeedah. It's about fighting and it's about winning.
