Arab Spring?

[FriendlyFire]

Seems like the only real difference is that Iraq was stopped before they could start another war. Maybe it does sound crazy to say that, but Stapel, you've really nailed it.

NOTE: A re-armed Germany was seen as an effective Buffer/Counter to the emerging Bolshievick threat.

NOTE: Harsh Austeric measures, Humiliating Verhsias treaty and economic collapse resulted in rejection of democracy and embrace of Nationislm.

NOTE: Germany under direct threat of Bolshievick take over due to collapse of there government.

NOTE: NSPD was democraticly elected into Office

 

[CurtSibling]

@FearlessLeader2

I would not willingly give a penny to the ingrate Iraqis.
I want to see dead terrorists, not our troops stadning around in this vile nation,
waiting for some insurgent to shoot or blast them with an RPG...I fully support
Non-involvement, let the sub-intelligent fools take each other out.

Your justification is so hollow, I had to laugh...

Our men should be out, riding across that wretched hemisphere, killing bandit
terrorists and putting a steel-shod boot on the necks of the despotisms who
protect Osama, rather than Bush rubbing shoulders with them!

 

[Drewcifer]

Never mind the fact that under Kommissar Kerry we'd be under UN martial law in the US and any thoughts of an Iraq invasion would be moot, what sort of reaction to the elections in Iraq would be engendered had Kerry been in charge when they happened?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

Look hypocrites, I'm no Dubya fan myself, and I doubt his motives were anything but economic, but the fact remains that he may have accidentally dragged the ME kicking and screaming into the 21st century. If you can't say anything nice about that, just shut up about him entirely. Non-involvement is WRONG. Clinton ignored the massacres in Rwanda, hundreds of thousands died.

In the process of checking the dead body for loose change, we found it wasn't dead, and now the poor guy might recover. Instead of predicting the doctors unable to save him, why not take up a collection to pay for his care?

1/2 blah, blah, blah. 1/2 truth. We all see what we want to see.

 

[A'AbarachAmadan]

I would not willingly give a penny to the ingrate Iraqis.
I want to see dead terrorists, not our troops stadning around in this vile nation,...

How about no terrorists instead of dead terrorists? (Of course 0 is impossible, but a good goal.) The best way to reduce the pool of terrorists is for people to not want to be one. Nation building and democracy spreading help do this.

 

[CurtSibling]

How about no terrorists instead of dead terrorists? (Of course 0 is impossible, but a good goal.) The best way to reduce the pool of terrorists is for people to not want to be one. Nation building and democracy spreading help do this.

How about being realistic and not digesting the trite propaganda?
We can all see how 'democracy' is such a hit in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Daily deaths, nightmarish civilian situation, money falling into a black hole...

A total mess, our troops would be better employed hunting down AQ.

Tell you what, Mr Hero.
You pay for the Iraq peasants if it makes you feel better.

I prefer them to stew in their own cess pool.
Our troops should leave these despotic mullahs to rot.

 

[Bozo Erectus]

Hey dont look at me. I made a thread like two months ago called "Can Bush be right?" (or words to that effect) that dealt with this issue. At least Im willing to entertain the notion that when the smoke clears, Bush will have been proven right, and the ME will be more democratic.

 

[Jawz II]

arab spring, is that the title of Mel Brooks next movie?

what you see in the arab world:

an iraqi government with no real power (until american forces leave, and they have a military of their own, wihtout americans based anywhere on their soil)

saudis voting on which icecream flavour is the tastiest one (remember, saudi dictatorship, good friends of bush & co) are good for democracy how?


those syrians being dumb enough to blow that guy up in libanon, specialy considering americans are next door is a good thing, but it wasnt something bush planned or something thats gonna last, america cant keep the war in iraq going forever, it costs too much

and when the americans leave, all they have left in the long run is instability, lots of dead bodies, lots of hatred and paranoia towards the west and destroyed bulildings

i dont see bush taking responsibility (credit) for any of that

you cant bring peace with war!!

you can bring silence with violence, but thats just temporary, and when it blows up, its that much bigger


ps. i didnt mention afghanistan for obvious reasons

How about no terrorists instead of dead terrorists? (Of course 0 is impossible, but a good goal.) The best way to reduce the pool of terrorists is for people to not want to be one. Nation building and democracy spreading help do this.

my stocks in A'AbarachAmadan just went way up

i had totally missjudged you

makes me think maybe i missjudged all right wing people, heres an article from an online magazine called the american conservative, i was really surprised howmuch i agreed with the arguements made here

 

[Marla_Singer]

So the point of that article is that people from all the Arab world would ENVY the situation in Iraq right now ?

Sorry if this doesn't please the American dreamers totally disconnected from realities, but there's no success at all in Iraq. The insecurity is generalized, journalists can't go out of the green zone without being taken as hostage or killed by US troops, and Ali Sistani, a pro-Iranian shiite mollah, has won the absolute majority at last election.

If Iraq is a source of inspiration to other arab countries, it's more to make everything in order to avoid to fall in the same trap !


Finally, it's great that things are getting better in Israel since the death of Arafat, and that people in Lebanon have reacted in that way after the death of Hariri. Of course, the support from Europe and the US has been very important in both cases. However, you're very short-sighted if this is enough for you to be called an "Arab spring". Iraq is far to be as democratic as is Algeria today. And Algeria is not what we could call an example of democracy knowing how widespread are corruption and nepotism.

To summarize, the situation in the Middle East is more unstable than ever, and it would be better for us to remain cautious towards the good news coming from the Near East. And finally, if Iraq has helped to this, it's more as a repeller than as a seducer.

 

[Shadylookin]

Thank you for proving him right. I'm sure that if you lived in the years before WW2, you would have been a big fan of Neville Chamberlain.

I am far from liberal at least in the American sense of the word. and I don't know anything about Neville.

The spreading of Democracy to Iraq had two big bennies for the American taxpayer.

#1: We've proven we're not afraid to beat the crap out of other nations.

This improves American security in several ways, such as foreign governments being less willing to harbor anti-American elements. Harboring such elements is likely to draw attention--followed by airstrikes--from Washington.

not really terrorists act independantly of their governments. Saudi Arabia acts friends to the US, but most of the terrorist that attack us were saudis

#2: The existence of Democracy in Middle Eastern nations will make it more difficult for radical elements to influence local politics. Democracy is very good at sidelining radicals. While radical parties do exist in the U.S., Germany, and France (among other nations), those elements are relegated to the fringes. Where they belong.

not when they form an underground terrorist society.

 

[Damnyankee]

I am far from liberal at least in the American sense of the word. and I don't know anything about Neville.

Stapel put it the best way.

Yet, this thread has mentioned Chamberlain.
What if he would have invaded Germany in 1938 (not possible imho, but that doesn't matter now).
Even today, the Germans would have said it was wrong. What could we have said in reply? You were about to kill millions of innocent people?

Pre-emptive war is just like scientific research:
Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

 

[amadeus]

you cant bring peace with war!!

Too bad Osama and Saddam disagree.

 

[Shadylookin]

Stapel put it the best way.

I don't mind pre-emptive warfare. I just don't care for pointless warfare. There doesn't seem to have been any reason to have invaded Iraq.

 

[Damnyankee]

I don't mind pre-emptive warfare. I just don't care for pointless warfare. There doesn't seem to have been any reason to have invaded Iraq.

Moderator Action: Images removed. Such images are not allowed here.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Would you like more photos?

 

[Shadylookin]

Moderator Action: Images removed from quote

Would you like more photos?

interesting, but none of them are American citizens so I fail to see how he was a threat to America

 

[andrewgprv]

The way I see it the Neo-Cons are pounding their chests at the moment because of their percieved victory in Iraq. They did this a few years ago. We of course have the sunnis who refused to participate in the election, showing the world that they do not recognise this new goverenment. If Iraq gets to the point where it is a stable democracy then I will congradulate Bush and admit I am wrong. But it seems the neo-cons are so anxious to have their mission accomplished that they refuse to wait for the full results and instead jump at any good sign and declare mission accomplished. But if they are wrong then this will bite them in the ass............again.

 

[Damnyankee]

interesting, but none of them are American citizens so I fail to see how he was a threat to America

I'm sure your holocaust views will prove... interesting.

 

[Shadylookin]

I'm sure your holocaust views will prove... interesting.

oh since I dont believe America should play world police, I must support the extermination of 6 million jews. and I don't know why you would think Bush and his advisors care about those dead people, conservatives supported saddam right up till 1991 even though he used chemical weapons on the iranians. I'm not entirely sure why we invaded Iraq, but I doubt that it was because we cared about the poor iraqis.

 

[Damnyankee]

oh since I dont believe America should play world police, I must support the extermination of 6 million jews. and I don't know why you would think Bush and his advisors care about those dead people, conservatives supported saddam right up till 1991 even though he used chemical weapons on the iranians. I'm not entirely sure why we invaded Iraq, but I doubt that it was because we cared about the poor iraqis.

And i doubt that we went to war in ww2 because of german jews, what is your point?

 

[Shadylookin]

And i doubt that we went to war in ww2 because of german jews, what is your point?

you seem to think we went to war because of the dead iraqis, otherwise why give me 3 pictures filled with them?

 

[Alvaro da Luna]

It doesn't make any sense that the war is good because Iraqis had it bad under Saddam. It's not a logical ethical arguement because America doesn't itself care about the state of the Iraqi citizens. Its presence is economic and ultimately antithetical to the status of the general Iraqi. Comparing the holocaust with this war is wrong as well, because they're two different things. In one case, America allowed the Germans to rebuild their society. In this case, America has displaced Iraqi infrastructure, and replaced it with its own economic initiative. That is, it has opened the floodgate for multinational companies, where before, Iraq had the slow potential to develop its own national economy.

In reality, America very successfully maneuvered itself into a situtation, that by supporting a dictator, it could gain ground to overthrow him later on in an effort to fortify its interests.