Scary Situation Brewing in the Middle East...

I assume anyone who speaks of our country hopes to provoke the generation of new and better proposals.
So whats it called when its done?..... hardman?.. are you sure this is in the right discussion here? :lol:

 

i don't buy that. Look at Eastern Europe and how fast that transformed. What was the democratic history of eastern europe? You mention only two democracies in the middle east, adn yet don't see the 'domino theory' as likely? If democracy takes hold in Iraq for even five years, I predict revolution in Iran, then Syria. There is a huge pro-western poulation in Iran that is trying to bubble to the surface and get out from under the cloud of radical Islam.

 

Malorn, the "domino effect" you are describing is impossible to happen. You clearly don't understand the cultural and political climate in which these countries are. The social progress is far behind and not even near the Turkish example of secularity, even though Turkey is a secular state it has a hard time to keep it the way it is. How do you in your right mind envision the population of Saudi Arabians, Yemenis or Iranians to prescribe to the western style democracies is beyond me. You need a serious cultural understanding of these nations. You are honestly very naive about the significance of religious connotations within those nations. As an example, look at the ongoing debacle about recent election in
Iraq. Sunni vs. Shiite. You are talking about democracy? First and foremost the fundamental extreme religious beliefs contrary to your expectations are on the rise within the entire Middle East, including Turkey, which is facing a serious problem with religious fanaticism.
How in the world such followers would want democracy? Granted, they might topple regimes here and there but certainly not prescribe themselves to a notion of democracy as we see it. Unless we are about to invent a new definitions for "democracy" that will suit situation in the Middle East, for propagandistic measures.

You must be kidding about that one right? Did anyone taught you in school? Prior to 1945 all the Eastern European countries within the exception of Moldavia, Ukraine, Belarus, Lithuania, Armenia, Georgia, and Azerbaijan were independent nations, and pretty much democratic for its period of time. And you probably have never heard of the Hungarian Revolution in 1956, a major step against totalitarian regime. You can follow up reading on upraising of Eastern Germany of 1953. Czechoslovakia in 1968. First major events in Poland in 1970. All of these were igniting points that brought Solidarity Movement in the early '80s. The rest you probably heard, have you Malorn?
So, the "domino effect" of yours has no merits whatsoever, simply because the Soviet Union collapsed has nothing to do with the straggle of individual nations. Your analogy of "domino effect" is completely invalid in the context of the Middle East. Please enlighten me if I am mistaken.


How are your calculations going? Anything constructive coming out soon?

 

Your smugness is amusing. There is a huge difference between a country being independent and democratic. The fact is the history of Eastern Europe until very recently could hardly be recognized as one which included freedom for all. There were various attempts at political and social reform which have been historically destroyed by brutal dictators or rulers of one form or another. So if the domino effect played no part would Eastern Europe be in its current state without the collapse of the soviet Union?

What calculations are you talking about?

 

I've found the perfect bi-partisan candidate, running for governor now but has his eyes on the White House, that has all the answers for this war on terror!
Squid, Evan, LaughingMan, Jayman, malorn, maggieddd...how could you not support this guy?
Come on, he even has a soft spot for children.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/wonkette/20060117/...e/tohellandback

 

Actually as a vampire he gathers his nourishment from other folks blood, a parasite if you will. I think that is a far better fit for one of the parties than the other.....it was only a joke!

 

:lol: If you could get that disparate group to agree on something like that, you should run for office yourself :lol:

 

Malron, huge difference pertaining exactly what? What are you implying a "domino effect" for independence or democracy? I'm completely aware of differentiation in between Independence Vs Democracy.

And how is this negating what I've just mentioned in my previous post.

Can you back this up, which brutal dictators in Eastern Europe? Whom are you talking about other than Soviet leaders (Stalin, etc), Ceausescu could have been the only one that dified Moscow, others where pretty much puppets controlled from Kremlin.

Without its collapse it wouldn't have happened, I'm not arguing about that, it was a given, you've claimed that there wasn't historical evidence for democratic movements till actual collapse of Soviet Union, I've listed several major events within Soviet Block countries that such struggles did happen and those where manifestations of it's citizens toward democratic changes. Simply because they weren't independent doesn't mean that societies at large don't prescribe toward democratic discourse.


Malron, sorry that you render my posts with smugness on my part, but the feeling is mutual.
Let's try to avoid it.

Here is one I've asked previously among others:

"And where is the coalition of the willing? Few thousand Brits, some Australians, few South Koreans, twenty from Salvador, few Danes, few Dutch, few hundred Poles, all together if I am not mistaken 16 countries, so Malorn, take a calculator out again, and add all the population of all the countries of the willing and come up with this massive global support you seem to be informed about."


I'm trying very hard to follow up on your points sometimes with questions asked, you choose to avoid them. I wish you would respond to all of them instead of picking just the ones that suit you.

 

Maybe y'all could agree to disagree...naw, one of you characters would just agree to be disagreeable or is it disagree to be disagreeable? :huh:

 

Squid, can you substantiate that Cheney "kindly" or unkindly could back up his claims with some empirical data to prove it. Or was he relying on rumors, guesses, rough estimates that Iraqis are wholeheartedly and desperately wanted for us to remove Saddam. I find it hard to believe that Iraqis at large are very fond of the situation they are in. What I gather from ongoing reports they seem to show quite a disdain to the whole conflict. Certain Iraqis who reap the benefits from us splurging surly are happy and I'm curious for how long. Will this be another example of appeasing via monetary expenditures a la Egypt? Honestly would you please link a a study or a poll, I genuinely be interested to see it.

One can find solid data in many press editorials within the countries you mention including Spain that "willing" comes rather out of courtesy and possible political gains and fear of potential retribution rather than solidarity.
Could you please name the countries that at least 50% general population is backing its government quietly supporting us in the Iraqi conflict?

 

Squid, may I point to you that one can hardy find you seeing in multiple dimensions in your rebuttals.

 

I don't see why he wouldn't rely on rumors, guesses and rough estimates. After all, that's what he relied on with that spurious weapons of mass destruction idea.

 

i am sure 'most' of the Iraqi people loved living under a brutal regime led by a dictator who would gas his own people. You find it hard to believe that Iraqis are very fond of the situation you are in? Is that because you see the United States only as the worlds bully? Were all of the votes cast in the Iraqi elections a show of anger at the united states for removing their brutal dictator and giving them a chance to pick their own leaders? Remember many of those who voted were risking their lives by doing so.

I find it hard to believe that you take your freedom so lightly. What would you be willing to trade for the chance to have freedom and to pick your leaders? Maybe you don't care? Maybe that is a major difference between you and I.

 

I have never said anything about any troops, I was debating the so called "global support" with Malron. Where does one find the connection in your interjections beats me? If one finds the questioning of its leaders as crucification than one has serious problems period. For the record I do AGREE with many things that the administration is doing, but that doesn't mean that I will BLINDY FOLLOW everything what administration does. Whereas you seem to trust unequivocally in everything that is fed into you via whatever news sources you rely upon.

Clearly if one might have a different opinion than for you it becomes suddenly a "RANT". You’ve initiated this diminutive stance, simply because you can't engage nor find answers to anyone's questions that might present different opinion than yours.

Even iota matters and counts as it is an indicative of something, clearly you missed my point 50% was an arbitrary number for the sake of ease pinpointing one.
As usually your rebuttal has nothing to offer of any substance than confrontational zilch. One has to learn that you simply cannot just answer the questions that suit you.
According to you, a debate is only meaningful when someone agrees with you on all fronts.

Please enlighten me with your wisdom and knowledge, I will be glad to stand corrected only if you could substantiate any of your claims in reality or something else.