Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
The diagram isn't intended to explain any one client state's policy formulation. It isn't intended to represent or evaluate any one client state's sovereign competencies.

It is a simplified "decision tree" model of US rules to evaluate any foreign event dependency on US imperial cooperation. Conditional tests (boolean results, Y/N) prescribe US action at any given point in time. But all event "branching" begins with one question (Is the country a client state?) and terminates at the US desired outcome: That is control of a state's domestic and foreign policies to serve "American Empire" (pink boxes).

Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Angola are all children of the US "enemy state" branch of so-called clients. All have entertained communist domestic and foreign policies since WWII. They didn't "move." US/NATO Cold War aggression repeated "foreign policy" events.

NODE N: Angola 1975, Afghanistan 1979-91, Syria 2011, (US) "support of insurgent forces"
NODE R: Afghanistan 2001 +17, Libya 2011 +7, Syria 2014 +4, (US) "aid to armed opposition forces"

All of them have attempted over the period to avert destruction --or appease the US-- by varying degrees of bribery, occupation, ingratiation, and "collaboration"  and have failed. a/o today. What's odd isn't US-designated "dictator" paranoia, it's the number of so-called clients like Lebanon that are missing.


Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Sat Jun 2nd, 2018 at 06:13:32 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Others have rated this comment as follows:

Display:

Occasional Series