• 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!

Arab Revolution in Syria - What takes so long?

I

icencrime

New member
Joined
Oct 23, 2011
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Other
we saw revolution in egypt, tunisia and recently in libya.

Hosni Mubarak's and Gaddafi's falls didn't took so long.

but in syria still not a result.

what did take so long?

what helps Bashar al-Assad to still survive his power?

what different in Syria?
 
Just a guess, but it might be Bashar al-Assad's tanks and soldiers...
 
icencrime said:
we saw revolution in egypt, tunisia and recently in libya.

Hosni Mubarak's and Gaddafi's falls didn't took so long.

but in syria still not a result.

what did take so long?

what helps Bashar al-Assad to still survive his power?

what different in Syria?
Click to expand...
Ya know, your writing style looks awfully familiar.
 
Disputatious71 said:
Just a guess, but it might be Bashar al-Assad's tanks and soldiers...
Click to expand...

other dictators has soldiers too. but they can't survive it? there must be something else in syria.

Tashah said:
Ya know, your writing style looks awfully familiar.
Click to expand...

english is not my mother language so i'm not too good at it but this is my first day in this forum (as you can see) so we are not familiar
 
Last edited:
icencrime said:
english is not my mother language so i'm not too good at it but this is my first day in this forum (as you can see) so we are not familiar
Click to expand...
Welcome to Debate Politics :)

Snap. Now I remember who you remind me of.

(You're doing well with English. Your usage of "too" rather than "to" is excellent)
 
Last edited:
Has the UN been helping the uprising in Syria, like they did in Libya?
 
icencrime said:
we saw revolution in egypt, tunisia and recently in libya.

Hosni Mubarak's and Gaddafi's falls didn't took so long.

but in syria still not a result.

what did take so long?

what helps Bashar al-Assad to still survive his power?

what different in Syria?
Click to expand...

The timing. The Syrian uprising started late, when NATO resources were already committed to other places, notably Libya.
In addition, Bashar wisely used his armed forces, not underusing them like Hosni or overusing them like Gaddafi. That way, the public wouldn't have been too outraged (the casualties from the Syrian uprising is relatively small, considering the time the uprising is continuing, or the protest wouldn't have gotten too big.
Syria is also a small country, much smaller than Egypt or Libya, so it's easier to suppress those protests.

There are a variety of other factors, but these are what I think the main ones.

You also mentioned that English is not your first language (like me), but you're using English properly, which is a good thing
 
Binary_Digit said:
Has the UN been helping the uprising in Syria, like they did in Libya?
Click to expand...

It's NATO, not the UN. The UN is too weak and powerless, all it can do is commend and condemn. It condemned Syria, but nothing changed
 
It think the Syrian protesters are trying to force the government out with just the pressure of protests in the same manner of Egypt. At the same time Bashar al-Assad can read the writing on the wall and is having none of it. It may be that he also thinks he'll get, or is guaranteed, support from Hezbollah and Iran.
 
Proud South Korean said:
It's NATO, not the UN. The UN is too weak and powerless, all it can do is commend and condemn. It condemned Syria, but nothing changed
Click to expand...
You're right, my mistake. I was trying to point out that Syrian rebels haven't been receiving foreign military aid, so that could be part of the reason why they haven't made as much progress as the Libyan rebels have.
 
icencrime why dont you deal with turkish revolution.??
 
icencrime said:
we saw revolution in egypt, tunisia and recently in libya.

Hosni Mubarak's and Gaddafi's falls didn't took so long.

but in syria still not a result.

what did take so long?

what helps Bashar al-Assad to still survive his power?

what different in Syria?
Click to expand...

1st of all, till now Syria is being protected by China and Russia who veto any security concil resolution forming up.
2nd of all, Syria has lots of chemical weapons, I don't think NATO is keen to get involved there by force.
3rd of all, Syria isn't a notable oil exporter as Lybia is so the world leaders doesn't really give a ****...
 
ido_ said:
1st of all, till now Syria is being protected by China and Russia who veto any security concil resolution forming up.
2nd of all, Syria has lots of chemical weapons, I don't think NATO is keen to get involved there by force.
3rd of all, Syria isn't a notable oil exporter as Lybia is so the world leaders doesn't really give a ****...
Click to expand...

After NATO helped out Libya, it looks like the new government there will be based in Sharia law. It may be that they'll thank NATO but move away from solid contact with the Western nations. "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss." Seeing that, NATO may not be interested in expending the effort if the the new boss turns out the same as the old boss in Syria. And that possibility is very likely.
 
EagleAye said:
After NATO helped out Libya, it looks like the new government there will be based in Sharia law. It may be that they'll thank NATO but move away from solid contact with the Western nations. "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss." Seeing that, NATO may not be interested in expending the effort if the the new boss turns out the same as the old boss in Syria. And that possibility is very likely.
Click to expand...

yup, who gurentees us that after all of those revolutions we'll see democracies emerging? Its very likely that in the vaccuum created with these goverments fall that we'll see anarchy and radical groups will flourish.
 
EagleAye said:
After NATO helped out Libya, it looks like the new government there will be based in Sharia law. It may be that they'll thank NATO but move away from solid contact with the Western nations. "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss." Seeing that, NATO may not be interested in expending the effort if the the new boss turns out the same as the old boss in Syria. And that possibility is very likely.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why everyone is so surprised about this. I heard the spokesman say when they took over Tripoli that they would have democracy but go by Islamic Law. What we need to see is how they implement Sharia Law. Will these use it harshly like Saudi Arabia and I heard there were a lot of Al Qaeda in Libya, or will they use it in a more modern way. Wahhabism is not native to Libya. They have many different tribes. Although I have had doubts about this entire Libya regime change from the beginning, I think we need to wait and see. They may surprise us. They have a heck of a lot of work to do to try and find a way which brings the whole country together.

Remember also that the Church in Europe was involved in early Democracy. Hence parties like Christian Democrats. Whether we like it or not we have to let them find their way. They may use a version of Sharia and then change or simply continue to change Sharia or they may decide after a couple of elections they want to change. Their country, up to them.
 
Last edited:
alexa said:
I'm not sure why everyone is so surprised about this...I think we need to wait and see. They may surprise us. They have a heck of a lot of work to do to try and find a way which brings the whole country together.
Click to expand...

They may indeed surprise us. I'm hoping that we have a new friend/partner in North Africa. That would be very cool. I think they'll tell us to piss off to be honest, but I hope they don't.
 
even that what happend in Sirya was so much worse then in Libya, still NATO didn't cared at all for civilians being killed daily.

West and USA will get more benefits in Libya rather than in Syria. Syria don't have resources that Libya have.

Indeed an attack was most necessary in Sirya where there are really being civilians killed and not like Libyan's story where in true almost 90% of Libyan people wanted their leader. 1 July of 2011 at Green square in Tripoli proved it. Gaddaff didn't killed civilians, he was just fighting against some rebels being helped out with money and weapons by USA, CIA, France and UK.

Look what happend and is happening in Sirya. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AJ_bu5cGLaQ

They choosed to destroy Libya instead of helping Sirya.
 
EagleAye said:
They may indeed surprise us. I'm hoping that we have a new friend/partner in North Africa. That would be very cool. I think they'll tell us to piss off to be honest, but I hope they don't.
Click to expand...

I have to admit that Libya is where I have the greatest concern. I would not mind at all if they told us to piss off provided they showed integrity for the stated aim of the revolution which was democracy. I don't have a problem understanding that it may take time for these countries to find their own democracy. I think I was being over optimistic yesterday because I had heard they were going to be have an Islamic State some time previously and because I was more thinking of Tunisia where I am more hopeful.

I don't know if we know yet why we really went in to get rid of Gaddafi.

This is an interesting conversation between Galloway and Patric Mercer a UK Conservative MP and ex army officer

At the end Mercer says

We would be foolish to think that whatever we were going to get would be some kind of Western Model and that in the short term stability was going to return and in the long term what we get is really what we ordered because I doubt if it will be”
Click to expand...



One thing though is true, whatever the outcome here, we have only ourselves to thank....but who knows, they may yet surprise us. ;)
 
Last edited:
icencrime said:
we saw revolution in egypt, tunisia and recently in libya.

Hosni Mubarak's and Gaddafi's falls didn't took so long.

but in syria still not a result.

what did take so long?

what helps Bashar al-Assad to still survive his power?

what different in Syria?
Click to expand...

The Libyans where armed.

Another factor is that those in the government/militarily/security services are primarily Alawite (or comprised of those from other minority religious groups) and these people form a bedrock of support for the regime (whereas very few Libyan tribes sided with Gadaffi) given the potential consequences for them after the regime ends they may well continue to support it.
 
Last edited:
icencrime started this topic then disappeared :))
 
Proud South Korean said:
It's NATO, not the UN. The UN is too weak and powerless, all it can do is commend and condemn. It condemned Syria, but nothing changed
Click to expand...

I'd kinda have to disagree. In Libya, due to US pressure, the UN passed the resolution which would allow NATO its "humanitarian intervention." (MASSIVE air quotes) In doing so it legitimized NATO's bombardment of Libya and aided in the destruction of Libya as well as allowing Western oil corporations to move in (Libya end-game pulls down oil prices | euronews, corporate) while kicking out those from China, Brazil, and Russia. At the end of the day, the West is going to play a major role in the formation of a new Libyan regime (http://blogs.wsj.com/brussels/2011/...e-in-post-gadhafi-libya/?mod=google_news_blog).

EDIT: Grammar
 
Last edited:
Mr. Invisible said:
I'd kinda have to disagree. In Libya, due to US pressure, the UN passed the resolution which would allow NATO its "humanitarian intervention." (MASSIVE air quotes) In doing so it legitimized NATO's bombardment of Libya and aided in the destruction of Libya as well as allowing Western oil corporations to move in (Libya end-game pulls down oil prices | euronews, corporate) while kicking out those from China, Brazil, and Russia. At the end of the day, the West is going to play a major role in the formation of a new Libyan regime (EU, NATO Set for Major Libya Role - Real Time Brussels - WSJ).

EDIT: Grammar
Click to expand...

You do realize that second link is two months old. Gadafi hadn't been overthrown when that was written. Do you see any signs that NATO is having a "major role" now?

I do see that al-Queda is showing signs of a "major role" here, but not NATO
http://defensetech.org/2011/10/28/al-qaeda-in-the-new-libya/#ixzz1cBeL8z1S
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom