• 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!

Iraq Ministries Targeted in Car Bombings; Over 130 Dead

How exactly has Syria progressed? Its no less totalitarian than Saddam was. Eygpt is hardly switzerland either

Well, gee. Germany is hardly Switzerland. But who called anything Switzerland? Do things have to be "Switzerland" before they show progress? The problem people have in the west is that if it doesn't reflect Vermont or London it isn't progressed. Hell even a 4 year old has progressed.

Syria was one of our biggest supporters during the Gulf War. They have steadily moved forward in national development and sought closer ties with America. Their political system was becoming more and more lenient and tolerant towards expression. ...Then President Bush called them all terrorists (a minor temporary bruising).

And Egypt? Egypt is the most advanced and modern Arab state in the region. They host Operation: Brightstar every two years so that western and Arab militaries can "play." Their politicial system continues to push forward and the most outspoken critics for Islamic reform in the region come from here. Anwar Sadat was even expelled from the Arab League for his determination to propell Egypt forward and beyond Saudi Arabia's wishes for the region.
 
Well, gee. Germany is hardly Switzerland. But who called anything Switzerland? Do things have to be "Switzerland" before they show progress? The problem people have in the west is that if it doesn't reflect Vermont or London it isn't progressed. Hell even a 4 year old has progressed.

Syria was one of our biggest supporters during the Gulf War. They have steadily moved forward in national development and sought closer ties with America. Their political system was becoming more and more lenient and tolerant towards expression. ...Then President Bush called them all terrorists (a minor temporary bruising).

And Egypt? Egypt is the most advanced and modern Arab state in the region. They host Operation: Brightstar every two years so that western and Arab militaries can "play." Their politicial system continues to push forward and the most outspoken critics for Islamic reform in the region come from here. Anwar Sadat was even expelled from the Arab League for his determination to propell Egypt forward and beyond Saudi Arabia's wishes for the region.

And both are run by Dictatorships. So as I said earlier if Iraq is to end up "stable" and "friendly" they will need to do what works in the ME: run the govt. via a Dictatorship backed by a loyal military. The only way to get a loyal military in Iraq is to fill it with "one's own cultural/religious group." That means the Kurds will go theer own way, and the Sunnis/Shia will be in a civil war, and the Persians and Arabs will be backing sides.
 
And both are run by Dictatorships.

So as I said earlier if Iraq is to end up "stable" and "friendly" they will need to do what works in the ME: run the govt. via a Dictatorship backed by a loyal military. The only way to get a loyal military in Iraq is to fill it with "one's own cultural/religious group." That means the Kurds will go theer own way, and the Sunnis/Shia will be in a civil war, and the Persians and Arabs will be backing sides.

Unfortunately, what you just stated should be obvious to all. But despite the dictatorships in Egypt and Syria, there is a sense of democracy on lower levels and on bureacratic systems. For this culture, it seems to have to start this way. Lebanon started out acknowledging their tribal differences and tried to create a government where power and government position was shared and sisrtibuted amongst the tribe's representation. They wound up slaughtering each other and today seek a democratic form of governance. There is a process to go through. Ours is not the only way. But we have to consider that the U.S. came from a region that very much consisted of kings, kaisers, and czars - dictatorships. Even Europe had a process.

The greatest problem and hinderance towards peace in this region is the unnatural European drawn borders that divide and smash together tribes. After that it is a matter of reform.
 
Last edited:
I sort of agree, but I think they started out as religious nationalists, by which I mean they were pro Islam/anti west. They saw their own govts as faux islam and pro west. This led them to use religious nationalism as their driving force, but they knew that emphasizing the Islam part would sell better to the masses. When their own govts cut them off at the knees they focused more on the anti west aspect, which forced them to spin an: " our way is the only way" mantra. The sunni insurgency in Iraq is simply after power, but they recruit their cannon fodder through religious mendacity.
I would argue that it's only a facade that their bound together under the flag of Islam. Their hatred of Westernization is the only glue that is holding them together. You usually find people together because of similar dislikes, and not similar likes.
But under it all is a deep wish to return to the "glory days" of Empire Islam, which is a power issue at the core of a religious belief: "we were briliant because we followed the proper path, and the way back is to do so again." Which sells better than: "we can get powerful again if we just learn from the Jews.":mrgreen:

The schematics of this modern Islamic Empire requires much more than repelling the American intruders within it's borders, much more than exterminating the Jewish state. The Islamic Empire requires a large-scale extermination of opposing views; pretty much the 99% of the Muslim world that does not share the view of A.Q. and Taliban will have to go.
--- It's almost mental illness that those who truly believe in this theory suffer from. It would truly require the powers of God to make it happen.

I personally don't think that Bin Laden and his Goons believe it. But, the Pashtuns whom they have recruited over the years, and have only left their village to shoot at Americans, may well believe it-- they don't know what's on the other side of the Hindu Kush (so to speak). It's a paradigm you find in the conquerors of antiquity. However, the difference is that what's on the other-side of the mountain is much more powerful and much more robust than your tribe.
 
Back
Top Bottom