• 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

:rofl

The Mubarak-supporters have charged into the square riding on freaking camels.
This is the stuff they make movies from.
 
snilloctjc said:
I am as as patriotic and proud of the USA as the next guy, but I think we need to stay out of this (in any active sense) and simply repeat our stance that we support the will of the people within Eygpt.

I would say this no matter where these events were taking place.
Click to expand...

The prefect example of creating a functioning democracy was when the Americans helped Japan create theirs. This was certainly as important as the Marshal Plan, if not more so.

With this history in mind the Americans, in working in conjunction with Arab scholars and politicians, might possibly do the same thing.

However this will never happen. The Japanese had been completely defeated and were a more advanced culture then than the Arabs are today.

My feeling is the same as yours. Just watch the whole mess unfold and then keep a wary eye on whoever comes out on top. But it's not worth any American lives to get involved in there again.
 
Apocalypse said:
:rofl

The Mubarak-supporters have charged into the square riding on freaking camels.
This is the stuff they make movies from.
Click to expand...

Yeah I couldn't believe that either.

Did you see the guy on the camel get dragged off the camel and beaten by the Anti Protesters? :lol:

Edit: Pro Mubarak protesters have taken over security vehicle and firing! :shock::shock:
 
Last edited:
reefedjib said:
Lebanon is the only one and it's history of civil war and external powers involving themselves in their affairs made it no model for other autocracies to follow. Furthermore, Iraq is certainly a "democratic" democracy and not an autocracy with the fig leaf of elections.



The Tunisians and the Egyptians will absolutely use Iraq as a model for how peacefully transform from an autocracy to a healthy democracy. Of course the demonstrations are a result of their condition, like the Iraqis before them. 7 years of watching the political sphere develop in Iraq, through Al Jazeera for instance, has had a profound impact on the development of popular political will through the rest of the ME. This has translated directly into these demonstrations.

Iraq is a model of democratization for the ME and has kicked off current events.
Click to expand...

The Economist rates Iraq a 4.00 on their 10-point "Democracy Index." That's not considered a full democracy or even a flawed democracy. It's the bare minimum score that can even be considered a democratic-autocratic hybrid state. Iraq scores lower than Russia and just barely above Cuba on the Democracy Index.

Iraq may have a Parliament and Prime Minister (finally), but it's hardly a "democratic democracy" which serves as a good role model for other Arab states. Furthermore, Iraq is sitting on top of oil whereas Tunisia and Egypt are not. I cannot overemphasize how important oil is, as a retarding force on democratic development. Tunisia and Egypt should be able to do far better than Iraq.
 
Last edited:
kaya'08 said:
Mubarak said he plans to "die on Egyptian soil".

I think it can be arranged. :lamo
Click to expand...

Yeah...He's going to get himself executed if he isn't careful. His speech last night looked a lot like Nicolae Ceasescu's address to the Romanian people from his balcony.
 
Kandahar said:
The Economist rates Iraq a 4.00 on their 10-point "Democracy Index." That's not considered a full democracy or even a flawed democracy. It's the bare minimum score that can even be considered a democratic-autocratic hybrid state. Iraq scores lower than Russia and just barely above Cuba on the Democracy Index.

Iraq may have a Parliament and Prime Minister (finally), but it's hardly a "democratic democracy" which serves as a good role model for other Arab states. Furthermore, Iraq is sitting on top of oil whereas Tunisia and Egypt are not. I cannot overemphasize how important oil is, as a retarding force on democratic development. Tunisia and Egypt should be able to do far better than Iraq.
Click to expand...

Iraq does serve as a valuable object lesson of "what not to do." The middle eastern states hardly need to look to Iraq as an example of a secular democracy. They have Turkey and Indonesia, both of which are far better case studies in how a nation can be both Islamic and democractic.

Our nation building efforts in Iraq were hugely flawed and have yet to pay off. They were well-intentioned, but in retrospect, have not succeeded, perhaps because of flaws in execution and planning, as well as flaws in the expectation of what would happen, on the ground, when we arrived, along with flaws in our treatment of the Iraqi army.
 
Last edited:
kaya'08 said:
Oh, they all fought for it. But you seem to be of the opinion that it would take the US to invade in order to create a Democracy hence your stupid comment about letting the Americans in.
Click to expand...

Seem to be of the opinion?

You make a very foolish statement and then have to guess at my opinion, despite them being right out there?

HAving the US invade anywhere in the Middle East is a non-starter.

The only way anythng could possible improve in the ME would be to ask for some ouutside help and advice, which will also never happen.

So we will therefore see more killings, like the ones Laila is calling for, more political upheavals, and more deaths.

And no democracy.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Iraq does serve as a valuable object lesson of "what not to do." The middle eastern states hardly need to look to Iraq as an example of a secular democracy. They have Turkey and Indonesia, both of which are far better case studies in how a nation can be both Islamic and democractic.

Our nation building efforts in Iraq were hugely flawed and have yet to pay off. They were well-intentioned, but in retrospect, have not succeeded, perhaps because of flaws in execution and planning, as well as flaws in the expectation of what would happen, on the ground, when we arrived, along with flaws in our treatment of the Iraqi army.
Click to expand...

You seem to be assuming that changing from an absolute dictatorship to qa functional and thriving democracy is a rapid process, if only because it seems so natural to you.

But there are stops and starts, all sorts of problems along the way, just as there has been in many European nations.

Another poster gave Iraq a rating of 4 earlier on the democratic scale which is not so bad. It's a start from Zero and probably one of the higher numbers in the region.
 
Grant said:
You seem to be assuming that changing from an absolute dictatorship to qa functional and thriving democracy is a rapid process, if only because it seems so natural to you.
Click to expand...

I don't assume that at all. I understand that it took almost 9 years from the end of the Revolutionary War for the new United States of America to successfully create and implement a constitution.

However, you can't force democracy on other people. The Iraqi people have to WANT IT. They have to want it so badly that they will kill or die for it. Democracy can't be handed to someone like a beautifully wrapped gift. They have to earn it, they have to build it, and they have to continually sacrifice to maintain it.

Iraq probably will never get there, because we (America) attempted to force the process without even understanding what they wanted and who they are. And, if they do get there, it won't be because of our stupidity and interference.
 
reefedjib said:
You think not? It was the WHOLE POINT of us doing so. To democratize the Middle East. It is working.
Click to expand...

I agree, but we still have to wait and see if the new governments are actually democracies and not just more of the same-ol- same-ol.

I'm not as optimistic as some folks on this thread.
 
kaya'08 said:
In other words, they where Democracies but flawed in nature. And Thank you.
Click to expand...

Except you didn't say they were "flawed". And of curse a struggling democracy is always better than an efficiecient dictatorship.

.And your comment about Western Europe shows a lack of political knowledge on your behalf. No room for unsubstantiated garbage here.
Click to expand...

Excuse me??? Are you saying the European nations went directly from monarchies and dictatorships to democracies without lives being lost? Or the struggle against Communism and Fascism?

Do they not teach you French history in the UK anymore?


And i didnt say i preferred Saddam. Just dont try and sell Iraq as a regional role model.
Click to expand...

Do you see any riots going on in Baghdad? In fact it is a good role model for other ME nations. Which other would serve better?

The bulk of the operations have, and the war there has more or less come to an end. Americans are there to support the security situation, you know what i mean.
Click to expand...

But that's not what you said though, was it? You said the Americans have left, which shows you know as much about that area of the world as you do about European history. It's not smart to guess at history or current events.



My news source is the CNN among many others.
Click to expand...

You might want to consider an upgrade.
Click to expand...
 
Laila said:
Al Jazeera live! Go go.

Pro/Anti Mubarak protesters are fighting and it's getting violent and the army is not intervening! Many injured :shock:
Click to expand...

Wait! You mean that not everyone in Egypt wants Mubarack out?
 
Grant said:
You seem to be assuming that changing from an absolute dictatorship to qa functional and thriving democracy is a rapid process, if only because it seems so natural to you.

But there are stops and starts, all sorts of problems along the way, just as there has been in many European nations.

Another poster gave Iraq a rating of 4 earlier on the democratic scale which is not so bad. It's a start from Zero and probably one of the higher numbers in the region.
Click to expand...

It is one of the higher numbers in the region...but not by much. Certainly not by enough to justify a war to promote it there. If we merely wanted to help democratize a country to serve as a shining example of Arab democracy, Iraq was just about the worst choice: It has large oil reserves, a low GDP per capita, and sectarian conflicts. We would have been far better off picking one of the ones that is revolting now: Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan.

Here are the Democracy Index scores for all Arab states:

Lebanon 5.82
Palestine 5.44
Iraq 4.00
Kuwait 3.88
Mauritania 3.86
Morocco 3.79
Jordan 3.74
Bahrain 3.49
Algeria 3.44
Qatar 3.09
Egypt 3.07
Oman 2.86
Tunisia 2.79
Yemen 2.64
United Arab Emirates 2.52
Sudan 2.42
Syria 2.31
Libya 1.94
Saudi Arabia 1.84


And here are the Democracy Indices of some non-Arab states for comparison:

Denmark 9.52
United States 8.18
India 7.28
Turkey 5.73
Russia 4.26
China 3.14
North Korea 1.08
 
Last edited:
In order to have any real merit, the middle east needs to be liberalized, and THEN democratized.

The process of democratization without liberalization only results in the power being reinvested in the traditional structures.
 
Gardener said:
In order to have any real merit, the middle east needs to be liberalized, and THEN democratized.

The process of democratization without liberalization only results in the power being reinvested in the traditional structures.
Click to expand...

Oh, so they should have rights, but only when you fully approve of their beliefs?

Does this mean, then, that social and religious conservatives in the U.S. should be deprived of the right to vote until they begin to vote in ways that you agree with?

That seems rather hypocritical.

"I believe in Democracy, but only for the people whose views are the same as my own."

Lulz.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Oh, so they should have rights, but only when you fully approve of their beliefs?

Does this mean, then, that social and religious conservatives in the U.S. should be deprived of the right to vote until they begin to vote in ways that you agree with?

That seems rather hypocritical.

"I believe in Democracy, but only for the people whose views are the same as my own."

Lulz.
Click to expand...

It means I am smart enough to realize that true democracy is predicated upon various precepts that go beyond mere tyranny of the majority.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
However, you can't force democracy on other people. The Iraqi people have to WANT IT. They have to want it so badly that they will kill or die for it. Democracy can't be handed to someone like a beautifully wrapped gift. They have to earn it, they have to build it, and they have to continually sacrifice to maintain it.
Click to expand...

I agree, but Democracy was not forced on the Iraqi people, they were just given the opportunity for democracy. And there are Islamists fighting against the democracy in Iraq who want to create a theocracy based on Sharia law and the Koran. These are the enemy of those Iraqis who do want Democracy, and of course they are the enemy of free people everywhere, which is why we have international terrorism.

Iraq probably will never get there, because we (America) attempted to force the process without even understanding what they wanted and who they are. And, if they do get there, it won't be because of our stupidity and interference.
Click to expand...

Two operations were very successful in Iraq, which was the introduction of democracy and the elimination of Saddam Hussein.

What happened in Iraq has been very successful and at one time few on the left would have predicted even a 4 on the democratic scale. They were all about 'quagmires' and Vietnam. Those who are critical of what happened in Iraq had either unrealistic expectations or who were against any action in Iraq right from the beginning and are now all sour grapes.
Click to expand...
 
Kandahar said:
It is one of the higher numbers in the region...but not by much. Certainly not by enough to justify a war to promote it there. If we merely wanted to help democratize a country to serve as a shining example of Arab democracy, Iraq was just about the worst choice: It has large oil reserves, a low GDP per capita, and sectarian conflicts. We would have been far better off picking one of the ones that is revolting now: Tunisia, Egypt, Jordan.

Here are the Democracy Index scores for all Arab states:


Lebanon 5.82
Palestine 5.44
Iraq 4.00
Kuwait 3.88
Mauritania 3.86
Morocco 3.79
Jordan 3.74
Bahrain 3.49
Algeria 3.44
Qatar 3.09
Egypt 3.07
Oman 2.86
Tunisia 2.79
Yemen 2.64
United Arab Emirates 2.52
Sudan 2.42
Syria 2.31
Libya 1.94
Saudi Arabia 1.84


And here are the Democracy Indices of some non-Arab states for comparison:

Denmark 9.52
United States 8.18
India 7.28
Turkey 5.73
Russia 4.26
China 3.14
North Korea 1.08
Click to expand...


Thanks for that, Kandahar.

So, all in all, Iraq isn't doing too badly, and doesn't seem to justify all the criticisms it receives.
 
Grant said:
Thanks for that, Kandahar.

So, all in all, Iraq isn't doing too badly, and doesn't seem to justify all the criticisms it receives.
Click to expand...

I note that the Palestinians are doing even better. Imagine, Hamas and Fatah getting something right!
 
Andalublue said:
I note that the Palestinians are doing even better. Imagine, Hamas and Fatah getting something right!
Click to expand...

Well they live next door to one of the greatest democracies in the world. They should have gained a few tips.

In fact all the peoples of the Middle East should have been paying attention to see the benefits democracy brings..
 
kaya'08 said:
Something Iraq currently is not.
Click to expand...

Of course it is. They have independent institutions to secure the democracy. It is not a fig leaf covering an authoritarian regime. All people of Iraq has representation and deals and negotiation is occurring.


Yes?
Click to expand...

Proves there is a free press, which you claimed was not the case.


Wait, so now your saying Iraq didn't influence the need for protests but the Arabs will look to Iraq as a political model? Do you mean parliamentary democracy?
Click to expand...

This is what I have been saying. But even more, Iraq will be a model for political transformation to a democracy. Other instances of democracies do not provide a recent example of transition. There are more than one cause for this. It is not black and white. Events in Iraq, and very importantly to the region, the coverage of these events by Al Jazeera, provide this model of transformation.

What do you think of Al Jazeera? It is in a VERY UNIQUE position within the region. Can you say PsyOps?

Turkey has also influenced them, arguably more. The protests where started because of the economic situation specific to there nation. They look at Iraq and see a nation with far more economic problems then them. I could say Turkey on the other hand, did. It is economically stable, and expanding. Democracy was domestically achieved there, not imported. Its foreign policy is far reaching, its military is strong, its judiciary independent.
Click to expand...

Turkey is non-Arab and does not provide a recent example of transformation.

But im merely speculating, as you are. Only you talk with a flawed conviction.
Click to expand...

Then is it your position that events in Iraq over the past 7 years have had NO IMPACT on events in the region or the protests within Tunisia and Egypt? How do we evaluate that impact? The only thing that comes to my mind is opinion surveys of folks in the Arab world.

If Iraq inspired them, why protest now?

There own plight inspired them.
Click to expand...

As I said, both Iraq as a model and internal, local conditions and example of protests in Tunisia all fomented the current protests in Egypt.


Are you not aware of what is happening?
Click to expand...

Explain the connection to Turkey, with the protests in Egypt.

The impact of Turkey will be to help democratization of ME countries as Turkey's influence grows over the region to counter Iran and re-establish a pseudo-Ottoman Empire again. The economy, literacy, and diplomacy will dominate the ME over the next 30 years. Turkey unequivocally supports the opposition to these dictatorships.


It took egyptians to topple the interior ministers fascism, not an external power.
Click to expand...

I don't understand your point. Please explain.
 
Grant said:
Seem to be of the opinion?

You make a very foolish statement and then have to guess at my opinion, despite them being right out there?

HAving the US invade anywhere in the Middle East is a non-starter.

The only way anythng could possible improve in the ME would be to ask for some ouutside help and advice, which will also never happen.

So we will therefore see more killings, like the ones Laila is calling for, more political upheavals, and more deaths.

And no democracy.
Click to expand...

Thats your personal opinion....even though history would tell us what your saying is wrong.

The nations the US has meddled in the most are actually by and far everything but democratic. Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan....and the list goes on.

The only way anything has ever changed is when the people demand it. The people are currently demanding Democracy in Tunisia and Egypt. And when you pull your patriotism aside, you will see it was done entirely on their own merit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom