[Archived] The arabs are revolting

[thenodrog]

Talk about biting the hand that feeds them.....

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2012/09/12/us-ambassador-chris-stevens-dead-benghazi-protests_n_1876456.html

Iraq / Egypt / Libya? Seems they had the leaders they deserved all the time.

[thenodrog]

Not just a nation though is it?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/yemen/9542014/Turmoil-spreads-across-Muslim-world-over-controversial-Mohammed-film.html

[adopted scouser]

Provocation, giving them 2 billion in cash every year. Million man march ? Massive over reaction as usual. Pull the cash.

[Jeru tha Damaja]

Was it not in England just over a year ago where a woman had to leap from a first floor window because rioters had set fire to the shop below her apartment?

Ah forget it, you're right, English people are way more civilised. It's not like the embassy workers in Libya died as a result of their building being set on fire...

Across the Atlantic you have the very civilised manner in which Americans keep shooting each other. The Colorado shooting, the university in Texas (I think) and the Empire State Building all within about 6 weeks. Only a couple of years ago an American citizen shot one of their own elected representatives, Gabby Giffords.

Most of the region we're talking about is still somewhat plagued by violence in any case, so the only breaking news is that Americans are being targeted. Libya hasn't settled down since last year, Egypt has continued to be a battlefield between various groups of protesters and police, Yemen is halfway through a civil war, Iraq had been quiet for a while until we decided our presence was needed, and 500 Iranians chanting "death to America" is hardly a rare event. In fact, at least the Iranians are only chanting, the US government has decided that sanctions are necessary which impose poverty and starvation on a lot of Iranians, and then there's the way that America just sort of stands quietly in the background while Israel talks about going to war with Iran. All in all, I can't blame Iranians for being a bit upset with the USA.

Then there's Libya and Egypt. Obviously it's terrible that people who have done nothing wrong have found themselves in the firing line, but the US only finally supported the Libyan rebels after how many years of turning a blind eye to the regime there? And in the case of Egypt, Obama's government failed to come out against Mubarak until almost the time when he was removed from power. So how grateful are these people really supposed to be?

The amazing thing is that so many people care about 4 US embassy staff in Benghazi, but nobody ever mentioned the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis left dead or injured by the "liberating" forces, no-one has noticed that Syria appears to have been abandoned to descend into a drawn-out civil war, it escaped everyone's notice that the "revolution" in Yemen saw Ali Abdullah Saleh ousted, only to be replaced by his former vice-president and minister of defence, who continues to be supported by American military strikes.

Glancing away from the Middle East, we have Guatemala and Nicaragua, which have both been subjected to air strikes and increased US military presence in the enduring cause of the War on Drugs. Now, when a nation feels that it has the right to act with impunity anywhere in the world, even when its interests would be better served taking domestic action, it is somewhat inevitable that that nation will be despised by people in the afflicted regions, even if they do manage to do the right thing once in a while.

At least Arab nations tend to keep their violence in-house. Britain and America have perfected the art to such an extent that death has been our biggest export in the modern era.

The stupid thing about the whole series of events is that the film that kicked it all off was designed to have exactly this effect, so they've reacted precisely the way the original idiots wanted. However, if YouTube had just taken the video down then we'd have had a quick discussion about freedom of speech and then the whole thing would have been forgotten, instead we've got this mess. I know people will object to that kind of censorship, but when Abu Hamza makes an inflammatory speech and someone uploads it they take it down, so why is this deliberately provocative video allowed to stand for over two months so far?

[ABBEY]

.

[jim mk2]

Was it not in England just over a year ago where a woman had to leap from a first floor window because rioters had set fire to the shop below her apartment?

Ah forget it, you're right, English people are way more civilised. It's not like the embassy workers in Libya died as a result of their building being set on fire...

You're right, we are more civilised. Capital punishment was abolished decades ago, non-Irish protest groups don't tend to go around blowing up innocent civilians and children and our government has not declared war on its own people like some of the more enlightened countries in the Middle East. Enjoy your next visit to Syria.

At least Arab nations tend to keep their violence in-house. Britain and America have perfected the art to such an extent that death has been our biggest export in the modern era.

Conveniently forgetting 9/11 and 7/7.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

The minute religous fundimentalists hold sway you're in big trouble irrespective of whatever nation we're talking about.

[Jeru tha Damaja]

You're right, we are more civilised. Capital punishment was abolished decades ago, non-Irish protest groups don't tend to go around blowing up innocent civilians and children and our government has not declared war on its own people like some of the more enlightened countries in the Middle East. Enjoy your next visit to Syria.

Conveniently forgetting 9/11 and 7/7.

What the government does in reaction to civil disorder doesn't really tell you how civilised a society is, only how heavy handed it's leaders are prepared to be.

I'm not forgetting 9/11 and 7/7, but 3 of the 4 bombers on 7/7 were born and raised in England, and they were of Pakistani descent, which makes them irrelevant to a discussion about Arabs. The other was born in Jamaica and raised in Leeds.

Also, are you really telling me that a three terrorist attacks (I'll include Madrid, too) that killed 3,239 people is worse than the "collateral damage" that the military action in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Iraq, Haiti, Somalia, Libya, Guatemala and Nicaragua has caused since 2001?

The UK lost 191 people in the London bombings, but at least three times that number of our armed forces have died because of the ill-advised wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wars which had nothing to do with any attack or threat on our security. Wars which have only brought more instability and fundamentalism to the afflicted countries, and one of which amounts to a terror campaign since it was unsanctioned by the international community.

Here's the kicker, bin Laden knew that his group couldn't defeat the West in a war, but his stated strategy was to draw America into a war that would cost them money and men, and stir up hatred for the US in the Muslim world to the point where the war would be unwinnable and to continue fighting would be to guarantee defeat. Looks like he wasn't too far off the mark.

[Rover Down Under]

What the government does in reaction to civil disorder doesn't really tell you how civilised a society is, only how heavy handed it's leaders are prepared to be.

I'm not forgetting 9/11 and 7/7, but 3 of the 4 bombers on 7/7 were born and raised in England, and they were of Pakistani descent, which makes them irrelevant to a discussion about Arabs. The other was born in Jamaica and raised in Leeds.

Also, are you really telling me that a three terrorist attacks (I'll include Madrid, too) that killed 3,239 people is worse than the "collateral damage" that the military action in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Yemen, Iraq, Haiti, Somalia, Libya, Guatemala and Nicaragua has caused since 2001?

The UK lost 191 people in the London bombings, but at least three times that number of our armed forces have died because of the ill-advised wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Wars which had nothing to do with any attack or threat on our security. Wars which have only brought more instability and fundamentalism to the afflicted countries, and one of which amounts to a terror campaign since it was unsanctioned by the international community.

Here's the kicker, bin Laden knew that his group couldn't defeat the West in a war, but his stated strategy was to draw America into a war that would cost them money and men, and stir up hatred for the US in the Muslim world to the point where the war would be unwinnable and to continue fighting would be to guarantee defeat. Looks like he wasn't too far off the mark.

I was looking for some half-time entertainment and find a competition for the most absurdly stupid post ever.

No need to post further Jeru, you've won hands-down.

[Miker]

Been watching the news reports of what was happening in Sydney and it's got me really angry. I'm an immigrant to this country, as is my family, but never in a million years would I dream of taking to the streets to protest angrily and violently like this and cause harm to other Australian citizens. They can do what they like in the countries they're from and are born in, but to do this over here is just ludicrous.

I've taken part in some marches around the city in the past few years. Ironically, one of the marches I took part in was a multi-culturalist pride rally. It wasn't about the fractitious nature of different cultures attempting to co-exist in a single place, but the fact that in Melbourne we have people from all walks of life living and working together peacefully with respect for each other's background and respect for the country we live in and the laws we have to abide by.

I felt exactly the same about the people who took part in the London riots last year. Completely despicable behaviour. People are going completely mad...

My family came here with nothing, just like many families I know, and made a life for themselves working 12 hour days, 6 days a week, carving out a future for their kids. That's all they came here to do. If outdated ideologies are more important than that to some people then they shouldn't be here in the first place.

[thenodrog]

Don't know if this is the right thread but I fear the current unrest in Egypt might prove to be a major tipping point in modern history. Egypt is the big player in the middle east and there are sure to be muslims travelling to Egypt to fight for the Brotherhood which will naturally escalate to other parts. It seems to me that arab nations need a dictator to permanently keep his foot on the neck on the political ambition of Islamic fundamentalsim. We've seen those nasties Hussein, Mubarak and Ghaddaffi removed but have we seen any improvement? I'm pretty certain all that has caused is more unrest and division.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

It certainly is a very depressing state of affairs. It would be a disaster if the Brotherhood got back in with the fascist way they conducted themselves when first in power and their continued victimisation and hate-attacks on the Copts. But the Brotherhood seem to represent the slight majority of the Egyptian people and how can the will of the majority be opposed in the long-term?

[thenodrog]

'Will of the majority' only happens in a perfect democracy SKH. And I cannot think of one of those. One third or thereabouts of votes are enough to elect a govt here...... and that is of votes actually cast! Factor in the turnout %age and it's usually between 20% and 25% of qualifying votes that is enough to elect a PM to No10.

Personally I think democratic government is coming to a timely end. Nice in principle but the world cannot afford to exist on principles anymore.

[Audax]

My friend from Egypt did not mind Mubarak

It certainly is a very depressing state of affairs. It would be a disaster if the Brotherhood got back in with the fascist way they conducted themselves when first in power and their continued victimisation and hate-attacks on the Copts. But the Brotherhood seem to represent the slight majority of the Egyptian people and how can the will of the majority be opposed in the long-term?

That's well-said and I've heard it stated before. We want to export democracy to these countries and when they have that democracy, right to vote they often vote for a dictatorship or the Muslim extremists.

I have a friend from Egypt, he didn't really think Mubarak was so bad. He's Muslim and actually got along with most everyone over there, Christian, Coptic, Israeli and he did not like the Extremist types.

Also, when the people were protesting in the streets of Iran a few years ago, the West should have voiced more support for those protestors but did not.

[Audax]

My opinion is that the American governments are usually the provokers and that provocation will always return this type of reaction from some people somewhere. The reactions aren't excusable in our society but this is not our society we're dealing with.

I missed the invasions of Egypt by America. Other countries urged action in Libya.

Nigeria doesn't have Western powers there and Boko Haram shoots up the northern part of the country. Often aimed at Christians but they killed a whole lot of people in a Mosque in the last 2 weeks as well.

[Steve Kean's Hypnotoad]

'Will of the majority' only happens in a perfect democracy SKH. And I cannot think of one of those. One third or thereabouts of votes are enough to elect a govt here...... and that is of votes actually cast! Factor in the turnout %age and it's usually between 20% and 25% of qualifying votes that is enough to elect a PM to No10.

Personally I think democratic government is coming to a timely end. Nice in principle but the world cannot afford to exist on principles anymore.

I would argue it happens everywhere (sooner or later) that the majority actually have a will to impose.

Over here the majority seems to have no political will regarding anything. In fact the last time it did have one, it was in opposition to the Iraq war which I would argue had the desired effect in the long-term. It didn't stop the war, but it made sure one couldn't be started on the same premise in the future. In situations where the majority has very little political will, I would argue its because that majority is fairly satisfied. Fair enough we've got plenty of minor things to have a gripe about over here, but the issues that make people take to the streets, like the issues in Egypt, we don't have.

I disagree regarding democracy, to me democratic government is the only acceptable form. I suppose the sticky point, which is what happened with the Brotherhood, is when the people democratically decide to scrap democracy. I suppose that's one of the principles the UAF was founded on in their harassment campaign against the EDL. Even though the EDL is a party which represents some people on the principles of democracy, the UAF refuse to respect it as such because they think it wouldn't uphold that democracy if it ever got into power. Be interesting to hear its members views on the Muslim Brotherhood and whether they see the obvious similarities.

[thenodrog]

I disagree regarding democracy, to me democratic government is the only acceptable form. I suppose the sticky point, which is what happened with the Brotherhood, is when the people democratically decide to scrap democracy. I suppose that's one of the principles the UAF was founded on in their harassment campaign against the EDL. Even though the EDL is a party which represents some people on the principles of democracy, the UAF refuse to respect it as such because they think it wouldn't uphold that democracy if it ever got into power. Be interesting to hear its members views on the Muslim Brotherhood and whether they see the obvious similarities.

I wouldn't hold your breath Steve.

[Guest Norbert]

'Will of the majority' only happens in a perfect democracy SKH. And I cannot think of one of those. One third or thereabouts of votes are enough to elect a govt here...... and that is of votes actually cast! Factor in the turnout %age and it's usually between 20% and 25% of qualifying votes that is enough to elect a PM to No10.

Personally I think democratic government is coming to a timely end. Nice in principle but the world cannot afford to exist on principles anymore.

Nice for you to admit you are an out-and-out Facsist. Let me guess your perfect government-you......and Norman Tebbit.

[Amo]

Nice for you to admit you are an out-and-out Facsist. Let me guess your perfect government-you......and Norman Tebbit.

In this defence, dictatorships can be the best form of government. On the flipside, they can also be the worst.

Democracy simply doesn't work.

[Guest Norbert]

I agree with him that our current democracy is crap, for the reasons he stated, and the fact that the main parties are all similarly uninspiring and have the same people leading them. Dictatorships are universally bad as there are often nothing to stop the leader if/when they go completely bonkers. The Roman Empire had many crazy Emperors, many civil wars and gave us the Catholic Church which is hardly dynamic and forward thinking. Then we've had Napoleon, Pol Pot, Stalin Idi Amin, Hitler, Mao Zedong and so on. Strong leaders, but all mental mass murderers who were all consumed by megalomania and hubris.

Perhaps a proper attempt at Rousseau's ideas might be worth a go. Not sure how it would work with a modern state though.

[thenodrog]

Nice for you to admit you are an out-and-out Facsist. Let me guess your perfect government-you......and Norman Tebbit.

Fascist eh? Interesting that whilst you hurl it as an accusation at the drop of a hat that you cannot even spell it. The fact that the likes of you have the same voting power as your elders and betters validates my point precisely. Thank you Norbert.

btw

Nice for you to admit you are an out-and-out Facsist. Let me guess your perfect government-you......and Norman Tebbit.

I agree with him that our current democracy is crap, for the reasons he stated, and the fact that the main parties are all similarly uninspiring and have the same people leading them.

Your second post makes me wonder why you made your first one. They are completely at odds with each other. Have you left your compter unattended?

[Guest Norbert]

No, I was making the point that our current system of electing people needs reform, and not scrapping for some sort of unelected boardroom of CEOs of Amazon, Wonga.com and a few pet politicans or whatever you envisage. Surely that was quite clear to most people.

Anyway, the title of this thread makes me think of that famous family fortunes question.

[thenodrog]

No, I was making the point that our current system of electing people needs reform, and not scrapping for some sort of unelected boardroom of CEOs of Amazon, Wonga.com and a few pet politicans or whatever you envisage. Surely that was quite clear to most people.

Not a whole lot different to the point that I was making. Did it warrant your reply?

[Audax]

Hindsight is 20/20 but a lot of people in the West supported the protesters in Tahir Square, it was on TV all the time, the "Arab Spring". Some people were very sceptic and see? This has turned out horribly.

[Guest Norbert]

Not a whole lot different to the point that I was making. Did it warrant your reply?

With all the posts you have posted in the past you come across as someone who would have loved Thatcher to have done away with elections, been Dictator for life and deported all ethnic minorities, sent in the tanks at any strike and revelled in any little bit of power you could grab so you can push people around. From what I can see is that you don't want to reform the system, but get rid of it completely and replace it with a system that means only people 100% like you can have a say in how the country is run. Those who are different will be sidelined, ridiculed and spat on. Workers, darkies, and anyone centreist/left wing will know their place-the gutter.

That is what I guess would be your ideal form of society, and that is not reform but a counter revolution of all the changes that have happened in Europe over the last 300 years.