• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Riots erupt in Egypt as protesters demand end to Mubarak regime

I doubt the current administration has the stones or inclination...but that was why i said earlier...we stand with our allies. All of them. And Allah start lining up the virgins because if they attacked our allies, I'd do them a favor and send him a WHOLE bunch of them.

But the question remains, will your Allies stand with you?

They have their own problems.
 
But the question remains, will your Allies stand with you?

They have their own problems.

I dont gauge my loyalty on how someone else 'might' act.

make no mistake...I HOPE it doesnt come to it. Just sayin...if...
 
I dont gauge my loyalty on how someone else 'might' act.

make no mistake...I HOPE it doesnt come to it. Just sayin...if...

That's admirable, VanceMack, and I mean that sincerely, but if we look around to who those Allies might be, particularly in the way BHO has proven to be less than reliable, who can the US really count on anymore?

Personally, I trust the Americans more than anyone else to try to do the right thing but I don't have the same faith in others. They don't even bother talking the talk.
 
That's admirable, VanceMack, and I mean that sincerely, but if we look around to who those Allies might be, particularly in the way BHO has proven to be less than reliable, who can the US really count on anymore?

Personally, I trust the Americans more than anyone else to try to do the right thing but I don't have the same faith in others. They don't even bother talking the talk.

For that matter...who can count on the US? Agreeing to disclose UK nuke info to the Russians? WTF???
 
That's admirable, VanceMack, and I mean that sincerely, but if we look around to who those Allies might be, particularly in the way BHO has proven to be less than reliable, who can the US really count on anymore?

Personally, I trust the Americans more than anyone else to try to do the right thing but I don't have the same faith in others. They don't even bother talking the talk.

Turkey




.
 
It takes time for a democratic society to mature. Saddam has only been gone for 7 years. It's took The United States 12 years to create a constitution, that would be ratified by the states and the colonists didn't have to worry about assassinations, or IED's every 15 minutes.

You can call Iraq a model once it actually gets to that stage of its Democracy then.
 
You can call Iraq a model once it actually gets to that stage of its Democracy then.

They are, for Christ's sake. They have a ratified constitution.
 
They are, for Christ's sake. They have a ratified constitution.

Ratified constitution does not make a country a democracy any more then the ability to speak makes one intelligent...

Even North Korea has a constitution.
 
Iraq's government type is not an Islamic Republic. It is a Parliamentary Democracy. Nor are they repressive. Your assumptions about Iraq are wrong. Here is a list of the political parties in Iraq.

I didn't say it was an Islamic Republic, but the figureheads of the coalition are ideologically conservative and there fundamental beliefs are against the ones America attempted to establish in Iraq. Maliki and his ilk have no interest in furthering Democracy. One of the important shiite members of the coalition are practicing to become an Ayatollah. It speaks volumes.

You keep calling it a C-grade Democracy with no supporting evidence. Rather it is a young democracy after decades of authoritarian rule. Your expectations are unrealistic.

Ive given you plenty of evidence. If my expectations are unrealistic, do you mean to say that it is a 3rd grade Democracy? You would do well to just accept the truth.

Judging from the members of the current coalition, dont expect leaps of faith in Democratic values or freedoms. I suspect it will get no better. It may change in terms of stability but fundamentally it will be no different to any other Arab democracy that works on pillars of superstition, taboos and religious beliefs that run counter to the beliefs of the minorities.


Yes...and? Read above. Ive emboldened it for you. Thats a pathetic excuse to label Iraq a model Democracy.

Compared the the US growth rate. Iraq has grown more than the US for the past three years and grew 4.5% last year in the midst of the global recession.

It also grew a huge amount in 2005. But the country is in financial ruin and with the massive stipends it relies on from the US it couldn't possibly shrink further, but the country is expected to experience a declining rate of growth that isnt suitable for a developing nation.

When you are wrong, you are wrong. You should man up to the fact that you have reached the wrong conclusion about Iraq.

I think its time you just accept America failed in Iraq and lives where lost and money spent in a war that could have been used in areas that they are needed more, like in Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan.
 
Ratified constitution does not make a country a democracy any more then the ability to speak makes one intelligent...

Even North Korea has a constitution.

Sure, I know that, but that was the criteria he specified.

Of course, Iraq has much more than just a ratified constitution and have held independent and un-corrupted elections several times electing it's Parliamentarians. It also has established Ministries and a bureaucracy, civil servants, and are taking care of their people. Development is proceeding.

It is a Democracy.

Given Egypt's situation, it is valuable to look at how Iraq drafted and ratified it's constitution, by forming the Transitional Government

Articles 60 - 62 relate to the creation of the Constitution:
Article 60.

The National Assembly shall write a draft of the permanent constitution of Iraq. This Assembly shall carry out this responsibility in part by encouraging debate on the constitution through regular general public meetings in all parts of Iraq and through the media, and receiving proposals from the citizens of Iraq as it writes the constitution.

Article 61.

(A) The National Assembly shall write the draft of the permanent constitution by no later than 15 August 2005.

(B) The draft permanent constitution shall be presented to the Iraqi people for approval in a general referendum to be held no later than 15 October 2005. In the period leading up to the referendum, the draft constitution shall be published and widely distributed to encourage a public debate about it among the people.

(C) The general referendum will be successful and the draft constitution ratified if a majority of the voters in Iraq approve and if two-thirds of the voters in three or more governorates do not reject it.

(D) If the permanent constitution is approved in the referendum, elections for a permanent government shall be held no later than 15 December 2005 and the new government shall assume office no later than 31 December 2005.

(E) If the referendum rejects the draft permanent constitution, the National Assembly shall be dissolved. Elections for a new National Assembly shall be held no later than 15 December 2005. The new National Assembly and new Iraqi Transitional Government shall then assume office no later than 31 December 2005, and shall continue to operate under this Law, except that the final deadlines for preparing a new draft may be changed to make it possible to draft a permanent constitution within a period not to exceed one year. The new National Assembly shall be entrusted with writing another draft permanent constitution.

(F) If necessary, the president of the National Assembly, with the agreement of a majority of the members’ votes, may certify to the Presidency Council no later than 1 August 2005 that there is a need for additional time to complete the writing of the draft constitution. The Presidency Council shall then extend the deadline for writing the draft constitution for only six months. This deadline may not be extended again.

(G) If the National Assembly does not complete writing the draft permanent constitution by 15 August 2005 and does not request extension of the deadline in Article 61(D) above, the provisions of Article 61(E), above, shall be applied.

Article 62.

This law shall remain in effect until the permanent constitution is issued and the new Iraqi government is formed in accordance with it.
 
I didn't say it was an Islamic Republic, but the figureheads of the coalition are ideologically conservative and there fundamental beliefs are against the ones America attempted to establish in Iraq. Maliki and his ilk have no interest in furthering Democracy. One of the important shiite members of the coalition are practicing to become an Ayatollah. It speaks volumes.

ideologically conservative: so what? We've got kooks in America too, on both sides of the aisle.

[their] fundamental beliefs are against the ones America attempted to establish in Iraq: not at all. We established legal human rights in Iraq. Bill of Rights kinds of stuff. Are there violations? Sure. Just like here in the US.

Iraq's Democracy is not going to be like America's Democracy, but that does not mean it is not a successful Democracy.

Ive given you plenty of evidence.

Where is this evidence?

but the country is expected to experience a declining rate of growth that isnt suitable for a developing nation.

Are you pulling this out of your unwashed ass, too? Evidence?

I think its time you just accept America failed in Iraq and lives where lost and money spent in a war that could have been used in areas that they are needed more, like in Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Bollocks.
 
The most radical are not the poor.

The commonality is Islam.

You have a good point, but you have to consider something with this. The "intellectual" of Islam is the string puller who insists that Allah is the only way and they are the ones who continue to ratchet up the rhetoric. They were the original members of the Brotherhood in Egypt that leaned on Sayyid Qutb's wisdom and facilitated the assassination of Sadat. They were the mistaken supporters of Khomeini in Iran. They are the ones that developed the Mujahideen in Sunni schools so that they could combat Khomeini's Shia radicalism and later fight the Soviets in Afghanistan and then eventually call themselves "students" (Tali-ban).

But none of the intellectuals use their wealth or religious education to strap bombs to their chests. They seek the poor to become the Mujahideen. They seek the poor in Palestine to commit murder/suicide. They seek the ignorant masses to gather moral support for his rhetoric. They seek the poor and convince them that salvation and glorified escape is just a violent act away.

Think about it in our local terms. The economic and educational situation in the South of our country is generally less than the North. It's in the South where you will find most of your religious nuts, hillbillies, and radical churches. The good 'ole country boy is generally from a southern state.

The poor in the Middle East are the ones who have no education, no opportunities, and no future. Give them a sermon and a bomb and they, all of a sudden, have a purpose. Of course, if the poor are ever given an opportunity to educate and prosper then the intellectual begins to lose his flock. No one, who has a life, is so willing to dispose of it so quickly.
 
Last edited:
For that matter...who can count on the US? Agreeing to disclose UK nuke info to the Russians? WTF???

And people pretend that Wikileaks isn't obsessed with tearing at America and thereby wrecking the free world. The man's a trader to the West.
 
Last edited:
I think the West (Britain, at least) can see who has been trading who to whom.

Maybe to the more simple of the West. To the more educated, I believe we can see the real world and have come to the conclusion that governments are like people. We all have secrets about each other. Just because someone might be a friend doesn't mean you don't hold private criticisms about him. In order to maintain your friendship, you keep those criticisms to yourself. Of course, if some jack ass comes along and decides that telling everyone about your criticisms in the name of "transparency" or "press freedom" you now have a damaged relationship. You now have to spend time hopefully reparing what should never have been a problem or public knowledge.

You don't think governments are the same? I would state that America has kept far more secrets about its allies than any other because we are the most loyal. It's the reason European governments are so quick to publicly criticize America for its every step while America mostly minds its own business. But sometimes, some piece of **** may release some information that should be simply kept private. And along comes a secret hunter called Wikileaks to ensure that the whole world gets to hear all about it. Notice how it's the English speaking nations that seem to be such a focus? Could it be because it's in the English speaking nations where you will find greater transparency and truer press freedom? He's a trader and uses the to the very ideals that the English speaking world holds dear against it. Or doesn't non-English speaking nations have secrets to expose in the name of his self-righteous irresponsible crusade?

Or you can be simple and excuse the general theme that has been going on for the last couple years with Wikileaks and simply accuse "America" of being a trader. I believe after the last two years of Carter-esque anti-Americanism and international groveling towards our obvious enemies, which has come out of the White House, most of America would call him a trader at this point. Bush wouldn't have done this to an ally like Britain. Neither would Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Johnson, Kennedy, Roosevelt, etc. Europeans and dimitted fools in America got the man they wanted in the White House didn't they? Americans want to hold out their criticisms about this Health Care agenda because of the humanitarian spirit of it and dismiss the fact that bankrupting the nation is its path. But now he has released weapon system secrets of a European ally (who happened to have stuck with us in Iraq, which was against Obama's ability to think beyond the shallow) to enemies? And this fence playing on whether or not to support the dictator in Egypt with meek microphone blurbs occassionally? I'm quickly starting to see what others have been stating all along.

Or he's just another fool member of the Global Left that is willing to destroy anything and everything to achieve the utopian impractical dream of one world unity by exposing weaknesses and trusting that evil and antagonizers will behave on their own accord.
 
Last edited:
Or maybe the British government knew about this all along and agreed to certain revelations in light of Russia's and America's nuclear transparency inspections with each other? It's easy to assume that you know everything because of released documents. It takes a bit of thinking to appreciate what unreleased documents may reveal in regards to further explanation.
 
Bush wouldn't have done this [given the uk's nuclear secrets to putin] to an ally like Britain. Neither would Clinton, Bush, Reagan, Johnson, Kennedy, Roosevelt, etc.

undeniably correct

our current president is something entirely else

keep up the good work
 
ideologically conservative: so what? We've got kooks in America too, on both sides of the aisle.

Only these kooks are in power and they abuse it to get votes from the uneducated Iraqi majority.

We have all seen the effects and policies put in place by leaders of the Shiite conservative movement. Can you see Maliki and his ilk standing up for modernism and progressivism? These people do not believe in the values of secularism. They WILL impose a religious approach to the Iraqi democracy.

If its democracy is not formed from a secular and moderate viewpoint, how can you possibly say it is a model democracy? Without these basic principles, how can the Iraqi Democracy ever mature to a level that is acceptable and that respects the rights of all man?

[their] fundamental beliefs are against the ones America attempted to establish in Iraq: not at all. We established legal human rights in Iraq. Bill of Rights kinds of stuff. Are there violations? Sure. Just like here in the US.

Nothing to the extent of the US. Incomparable even.

Iraq's Democracy is not going to be like America's Democracy, but that does not mean it is not a successful Democracy.

Your judging a successful Democracy on the amount of newspapers there are in Iraq and the amount of political parties, which according to you, is evidence of free speech - a poor argument indeed. Media is censored just like it is in Jordan or Egypt and political dissent is handled just like it is in any other part of the Arab world. So how does it stand out? It doesnt.

Where is this evidence?

Please feel free to view our previous discussions.

Are you pulling this out of your unwashed ass, too? Evidence?

You may feel cornered or intimidated by me or whatever it is going through your mind right now, but there really is no need.
Already provided. I gave you a link to the necessary think-tank regarding growth in Iraq.
 
Last edited:
Breaking on Al Jazeera: Hosni Mubarak, Gamal Mubarak and Safwat El Sharif have all resigned from the Ruling leadership of the National Democratic Party as a gesture to the protesters.
 
Breaking on Al Jazeera: Hosni Mubarak, Gamal Mubarak and Safwat El Sharif have all resigned from the Ruling leadership of the National Democratic Party as a gesture to the protesters.

That doesn't mean they step down though, does it? Its meaningless BS.
 
You have a good point, but you have to consider something with this. The "intellectual" of Islam is the string puller who insists that Allah is the only way and they are the ones who continue to ratchet up the rhetoric. They were the original members of the Brotherhood in Egypt that leaned on Sayyid Qutb's wisdom and facilitated the assassination of Sadat. They were the mistaken supporters of Khomeini in Iran. They are the ones that developed the Mujahideen in Sunni schools so that they could combat Khomeini's Shia radicalism and later fight the Soviets in Afghanistan and then eventually call themselves "students" (Tali-ban).

But none of the intellectuals use their wealth or religious education to strap bombs to their chests. They seek the poor to become the Mujahideen. They seek the poor in Palestine to commit murder/suicide. They seek the ignorant masses to gather moral support for his rhetoric. They seek the poor and convince them that salvation and glorified escape is just a violent act away.

Think about it in our local terms. The economic and educational situation in the South of our country is generally less than the North. It's in the South where you will find most of your religious nuts, hillbillies, and radical churches. The good 'ole country boy is generally from a southern state.

The poor in the Middle East are the ones who have no education, no opportunities, and no future. Give them a sermon and a bomb and they, all of a sudden, have a purpose. Of course, if the poor are ever given an opportunity to educate and prosper then the intellectual begins to lose his flock. No one, who has a life, is so willing to dispose of it so quickly.

You raise several good points but we can see that the 9/11 bombers were middle class and well educted, as were those on 7/7 in the UK. I've no doubt that those recruited are as you describe but their commonality is still Islam, rich or poor.

As well, there appears to be a lack of intellectual leadership in the Muslim world, and I suspect fatwas might have something to do with that. There is little curiosity in a world where all human behaviour and thought is limited to the teachings of a single book and that book overwhelms their daily lives.

The Closing of the Muslim Mind – How Intellectual Suicide Created the Modern Islamist | God Discussion
 
Back
Top Bottom