Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Banjax on 22 March 2011, 14:55:51
-
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12815687
and i thought Glenn Beck was nuts ;D
-
;D ;D ;D Splendid. 8-)
-
:-? :-?
but more important what he says is correct.. if a tyrant doesnt trust his people , he will not give fire arms ;)
-
:-? :-?
but more important what he says is correct.. if a tyrant doesnt trust his people , he will not give fire arms ;)
Hitler did! In those last few months and weeks in Berlin during March and April 1945 he (his commanders) were issuing any kind of weapon they could find to old men, young boys, and girls, in fact anyone who was prepared to defend Berlin. At the time he was ranting over how the German people had let him down, betrayed him, were cowards, and deserved the fight to the death! >:( >:( >:(
I am very afraid that Gaddafi could go the same way, as he and his sons have already threatened. A fight to the death until everyone is dead. He is of course using the now classic dictators 'weapon' of the human shield. He will fight to the end no matter the cost as Hitler did, and Stalin would have done also if the situation had been reversed in Moscow >:( >:( >:( :'( :'( :'( :'(
God help the Libyans!
-
Reminds me of comical Ali
-
:-? :-?
but more important what he says is correct.. if a tyrant doesnt trust his people , he will not give fire arms ;)
Hitler did! In those last few months and weeks in Berlin during March and April 1945 he (his commanders) were issuing any kind of weapon they could find to old men, young boys, and girls, in fact anyone who was prepared to defend Berlin. At the time he was ranting over how the German people had let him down, betrayed him, were cowards, and deserved the fight to the death! >:( >:( >:(
I am very afraid that Gaddafi could go the same way, as he and his sons have already threatened. A fight to the death until everyone is dead. He is of course using the now classic dictators 'weapon' of the human shield. He will fight to the end no matter the cost as Hitler did, and Stalin would have done also if the situation had been reversed in Moscow >:( >:( >:( :'( :'( :'( :'(
God help the Libyans!
no need for God.. dont bomb them ;D :y
-
no need for God.. dont bomb them ;D :y
I must agree with that. :y
-
no need for God.. dont bomb them ;D :y
I must agree with that. :y
:y :y :y
-
no need for God.. dont bomb them ;D :y
I must agree with that. :y
But Gaddafi is doing that himself!! ::) ::) ::) :'( :'(
-
no need for God.. dont bomb them ;D :y
I must agree with that. :y
But Gaddafi is doing that himself!! ::) ::) ::) :'( :'(
that bloody idiot was sitting on his arse for last 40 years.. guess who provoke him ;D ;D
-
no need for God.. dont bomb them ;D :y
I must agree with that. :y
But Gaddafi is doing that himself!! ::) ::) ::) :'( :'(
Without doubt Lizzie but in this age I think we have to face the fact that there doesn’t any longer seem to be a 'Western' answer to problems in that region.
The 'West' was able to exploit the region (and, by extension, its peoples) quite successfully in the past when a fair proportion of the native peoples were, for the most part, uneducated and led by pro-Western regimes.
We have our current standard of living partly because of this - and we should be thankful for it of course, but in this new age I don't think it can be a case of business as usual any longer.
People out there are becoming better educated and less inclined to accept the status quo and, as a result, must be allowed to seek their own solutions to the many problems they're experiencing.
This will not be without difficulty for us (in the strategic sense) but I don't see any other realistic answer to it.
The military card has been well and truly played in the region and unless we wish to engage in a protracted total war(s) to eradicate to most vociferous opposition to our goals (which is all but impossible) we will have to re-assess our approach in dealing with the Arab world and its vast supply of the substance we all depend upon so much (for the time being) for our ability to survive and prosper in this neck of the woods.
-
no need for God.. dont bomb them ;D :y
I must agree with that. :y
But Gaddafi is doing that himself!! ::) ::) ::) :'( :'(
Without doubt Lizzie but in this age I think we have to face the fact that there doesn’t any longer seem to be a 'Western' answer to problems in that region.
The 'West' was able to exploit the region (and, by extension, its peoples) quite successfully in the past when a fair proportion of the native peoples were, for the most part, uneducated and led by pro-Western regimes.
We have our current standard of living partly because of this - and we should be thankful for it of course, but in this new age I don't think it can be a case of business as usual any longer.
People out there are becoming better educated and less inclined to accept the status quo and, as a result, must be allowed to seek their own solutions to the many problems they're experiencing.
This will not be without difficulty for us (in the strategic sense) but I don't see any other realistic answer to it.
The military card has been well and truly played in the region and unless we wish to engage in a protracted total war(s) to eradicate to most vociferous opposition to our goals (which is all but impossible) we will have to re-assess our approach in dealing with the Arab world and its vast supply of the substance we all depend upon so much (for the time being) for our ability to survive and prosper in this neck of the woods.
I agree with all that you say Z, but we must not forget that in this instance, and a real change to past policy apart from possibly with Kuwait, we are only in the skies above Libya because Libyans out there who want freedom and protection from Gaddafi have asked the international community for help. The well educated Libyans you correctly mention, but who are also here in the UK, have also pleaded for international assistance.
There is not a Libyan or Arab generally, nor a country within the UN who does not understand that when you ask for international military assistance you are really asking for USA and major European military power help. No one else can or wants to provide it, so they know what they are asking for.
It is right and proper that we are giving them what they want, but it is very interesting to note that all the political leaders of the countries giving that assistance, the USA in particular, are being very cautious and continually discussing the rights and wrongs of what they can do. That includes stating that there could be a point when Gaddafi's forces are no longer in a position to attack "the rebels", and the latter are gaining significant ground, for the Allies to withdraw their air power.
So lessons have been learnt from the Iraqi situation. :y :y
-
I agree with all that you say Z, but we must not forget that in this instance, and a real change to past policy apart from possibly with Kuwait, we are only in the skies above Libya because Libyans out there who want freedom and protection from Gaddafi have asked the international community for help. The well educated Libyans you correctly mention, but who are also here in the UK, have also pleaded for international assistance.
There is not a Libyan or Arab generally, nor a country within the UN who does not understand that when you ask for international military assistance you are really asking for USA and major European military power help. No one else can or wants to provide it, so they know what they are asking for.
It is right and proper that we are giving them what they want, but it is very interesting to note that all the political leaders of the countries giving that assistance, the USA in particular, are being very cautious and continually discussing the rights and wrongs of what they can do. That includes stating that there could be a point when Gaddafi's forces are no longer in a position to attack "the rebels", and the latter are gaining significant ground, for the Allies to withdraw their air power.
So lessons have been learnt from the Iraqi situation. :y :y
I'm still concerned about this Lizzie - aside from the way we're presently using military power in the region - invited or not.
It appears to me that there hasn't been adequate thought given to a clearly defined command structure for the operation.
Along with the apparent absence of a well planned exit strategy I can foresee things getting unnecessarily complicated as the arguments about just who should assume responsibility for the conduct of the operation continue to develop.
As things stand I think this has been a half-assed attempt to deal with the situation using air power alone when, in reality, ground forces are the only viable resource to apply in the bid to stop one group eradicating the other. There’s no convenient, clean way to do this.
I have a feeling that this whole thing will blow up in the faces of those - who made the case for military intervention - in the UN, the EU and NATO when they suddenly become aware that the US is bowing out due to (amongst other things) the hostile reaction to its involvement of the situation up to the moment.
The longer Western military power is used there the more likely it is that the situation will run out of control - aside from the far from insubstantial cost of running the operation in its present form.
But in the absence of agreement by the Arab nations, and even more importantly the lack of appetite on the part of the Allies, "boots on the gound" is not going to happen, and that must be a good thing. It would be all round totally unacceptable.
No, the current policy must be only to stop Gaddafi threatening and killing his own people, and giving those Libyans wanted democracy a free hand to secure it. I have heard no military head, or political leader, who wants anything but this, and ensure there is no 'mission creep'.
As for the command structure, well that will be sorted, but once more it sounds as though no country, least of all the USA, Britain and France want that millstone, with the dangers it presents, and can only hasten withdrawal of our air forces once the time is right :y :y
As for the cost; we already have the weapons, aircraft and back up command. This is, like the Falklands, a great training opportunity for those in the military and I suspect they are using it to the full! System, procedure, testing of hardware, not least the Typhoon aircraft, and putting pilots along with groundcrew through operational experience must all be considered money well spent if Britain, and Western countries, are going to work together. They are continually preparing for a war that we hope never comes, but all this operational tasking and practice is very good indeed for our military health :y :y
-
But in the absence of agreement by the Arab nations, and even more importantly the lack of appetite on the part of the Allies, "boots on the gound" is not going to happen, and that must be a good thing. It would be all round totally unacceptable.
No, the current policy must be only to stop Gaddafi threatening and killing his own people, and giving those Libyans wanted democracy a free hand to secure it. I have heard no military head, or political leader, who wants anything but this, and ensure there is no 'mission creep'.
As for the command structure, well that will be sorted, but once more it sounds as though no country, least of all the USA, Britain and France want that millstone, with the dangers it presents, and can only hasten withdrawal of our air forces once the time is right :y :y
Oh I do agree that few individuals want this to develop - rightly so - but things seldom go to plan in that part of the world and, as far as I can see, if we continue to use military power, for whatever reason, we will get bitten for it.
The question is, will we still have the determination to carry on when the civilian casualties (as a result of our actions) begin to build up and local hostilities develop which will undoubtly challange our involvement?
-
But in the absence of agreement by the Arab nations, and even more importantly the lack of appetite on the part of the Allies, "boots on the ground" is not going to happen, and that must be a good thing. It would be all round totally unacceptable.
No, the current policy must be only to stop Gaddafi threatening and killing his own people, and giving those Libyans wanted democracy a free hand to secure it. I have heard no military head, or political leader, who wants anything but this, and ensure there is no 'mission creep'.
As for the command structure, well that will be sorted, but once more it sounds as though no country, least of all the USA, Britain and France want that millstone, with the dangers it presents, and can only hasten withdrawal of our air forces once the time is right :y :y
Oh I do agree that few individuals want this to develop - rightly so - but things seldom go to plan in that part of the world and, as far as I can see, if we continue to use military power, for whatever reason, we will get bitten for it.
The question is, will we still have the determination to carry on when the civilian casualties (as a result of our actions) begin to build up and local hostilities develop which will undoubtly challange our involvement?
The simple answer to that is Z, "NO"! Once the Libyan people / democratic / rebel groups do not want us the mood is set for us to pull out. I really do not see any doubt in that based on the term of the UN resolution, the coalition sentiments, let alone the feelings of the Arab element. We are there for only one purpose; for Gaddafi to be stopped from threatening his own people. No one is saying any different, or wants any other result. :y :y
-
As for the cost; we already have the weapons, aircraft and back up command. This is, like the Falklands, a great training opportunity for those in the military and I suspect they are using it to the full! System, procedure, testing of hardware, not least the Typhoon aircraft, and putting pilots along with groundcrew through operational experience must all be considered money well spent if Britain, and Western countries, are going to work together. They are continually preparing for a war that we hope never comes, but all this operational tasking and practice is very good indeed for our military health :y :y
Yes we have the capital equipment Lizzie but not necessarily the costs involved with operating it in this way.
In terms of using this intervention to further hone our skills in warfare I think that's a dangerous strategy. We are heavily committed in the military sense in various parts of the world and I fear that should the situation in Libya deteriorate we will be unduly exposed.
With the proposed defence cuts, financial concerns, staff fatigue and developing change in the global power base we will have to be very careful about whom we pick a fight with from this point onwards.
-
It should all be sorted very soon. :y
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/i-kind-of-assumed-you're-trying-to-kill-me%2c-says-gaddafi-201103223647/
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/planes-kill-baddies-201103213643/
....or maybe not. :D
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/fingers-crossed-libyan-rebels-aren't-insane-201103183639/
-
It should all be sorted very soon. :y
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/i-kind-of-assumed-you're-trying-to-kill-me%2c-says-gaddafi-201103223647/
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/planes-kill-baddies-201103213643/
....or maybe not. :D
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/fingers-crossed-libyan-rebels-aren't-insane-201103183639/
Yes Albs, and I noted today in Sainsbury's that according to the Daily Star Gaddiafi is leaving Libya with 40 women! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
-
Lizzie, after all what happened in the past of those countries that Zulu also has mentioned, do you really believe west help them for just democracy and freedom.. ;D ;D ;D ;D
do you really think all those arab nations sleep for many hundred years and one day wake up, voila all of them want democracy and freedom ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D is that possible or someone push a needle in their arse ;D ;D
honestly, west is searching/feeding supporters/partisans in that area .. giving them some promises.. but what west dont know is those areas mostly stay on a very critical balance that when you play all things collapse on your head where those people are living very far from western values.. middle east is the best example .. :-/
and can I remind those helps are never free.. when the time comes the bill will be on the table.. :-X
-
Still at least all this has spawned a new app for the iPad, though some find it too difficult...
http://the-spine.com/2011/03/is-new-angry-birds-too-difficult/
;) ;D
-
yep.. nothing can be hide forever at this age..
France is behind the scenes with El Mismari, Qaddafi's important man.. And the meetings are done between the French agents and him at Concorde Lafayette..
Why, because elections are very close.. >:(
there is a saying in my language :
"hat is dropped, bald is shown!"
-
Lizzie, after all what happened in the past of those countries that Zulu also has mentioned, do you really believe west help them for just democracy and freedom.. ;D ;D ;D ;D
do you really think all those arab nations sleep for many hundred years and one day wake up, voila all of them want democracy and freedom ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D is that possible or someone push a needle in their arse ;D ;D
honestly, west is searching/feeding supporters/partisans in that area .. giving them some promises.. but what west dont know is those areas mostly stay on a very critical balance that when you play all things collapse on your head where those people are living very far from western values.. middle east is the best example .. :-/
and can I remind those helps are never free.. when the time comes the bill will be on the table.. :-X
Yes I do Cem. In England we were dictated to by the monarch and church for centuries, then the English peasants with the middle classes and even arostricacy (Magna Carta 1215/25) started to rise up, asking questions and requesting greater freedoms. That developed into further demands on "the system" to give the people their rights. The English Civil War,1642-1651, questioned the divine status of the monarch and his / her right to rule by the word of God against the natural rights and freedoms of the people. A number of movements questioned the 'ruling classes' further, but the British Chartist movement, 1838-48, took this to new heights, demanding voting rights within a truely democratic system. That actually didn't happen altogether immediately, but by the start of the twentieth century, much of that fought for by the Chartists had been established within the modern British democracy.
That is what basically is happening now in the Middle East and North Africa. The taste of democracy has reached those people as it did in historic England / Britain, but in Egypt first, if you do not include Iran during the 1970s, and they like the idea of it, thinking it could be for them. That feeling is spreading, with the age of the dictator that was still alive and kicking in Europe until relatively recently, now fading at last in those distant parts.
We, the democractic west, must help this process if and when we can, because the peaceful future of our world depends on it. No longer, if ever we could, can we let dictators rule over the people's of the world. It will take time to rid ourselves of all of them, but we must head in that direction. ;) ;)
-
It should all be sorted very soon. :y
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/i-kind-of-assumed-you're-trying-to-kill-me%2c-says-gaddafi-201103223647/
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/war/planes-kill-baddies-201103213643/
....or maybe not. :D
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/fingers-crossed-libyan-rebels-aren't-insane-201103183639/
Yes Albs, and I noted today in Sainsbury's that according to the Daily Star Gaddiafi is leaving Libya with 40 women! ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;)
lucky sod ;D ;D
-
Lizzie, after all what happened in the past of those countries that Zulu also has mentioned, do you really believe west help them for just democracy and freedom.. ;D ;D ;D ;D
do you really think all those arab nations sleep for many hundred years and one day wake up, voila all of them want democracy and freedom ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D is that possible or someone push a needle in their arse ;D ;D
honestly, west is searching/feeding supporters/partisans in that area .. giving them some promises.. but what west dont know is those areas mostly stay on a very critical balance that when you play all things collapse on your head where those people are living very far from western values.. middle east is the best example .. :-/
and can I remind those helps are never free.. when the time comes the bill will be on the table.. :-X
Yes I do Cem. In England we were dictated to by the monarch and church for centuries, then the English peasants with the middle classes and even arostricacy (Magna Carta 1215/25) started to rise up, asking questions and requesting greater freedoms. That developed into further demands on "the system" to give the people their rights. The English Civil War,1642-1651, questioned the divine status of the monarch and his / her right to rule by the word of God against the natural rights and freedoms of the people. A number of movements questioned the 'ruling classes' further, but the British Chartist movement, 1838-48, took this to new heights, demanding voting rights within a truely democratic system. That actually didn't happen altogether immediately, but by the start of the twentieth century, much of that fought for by the Chartists had been established within the modern British democracy.
That is what basically is happening now in the Middle East and North Africa. The taste of democracy has reached those people as it did in historic England / Britain, but in Egypt first, if you do not include Iran during the 1970s, and they like the idea of it, thinking it could be for them. That feeling is spreading, with the age of the dictator that was still alive and kicking in Europe until relatively recently, now fading at last in those distant parts.
We, the democractic west, must help this process if and when we can, because the peaceful future of our world depends on it. No longer, if ever we could, can we let dictators rule over the people's of the world. It will take time to rid ourselves of all of them, but we must head in that direction. ;) ;)
::) ::)
Really ? :-?
you forgot one point.. those countries didnt pass the phases you mention.. none of them.. have a different religion which control and tie their hands still.. no renaissance ( I hate this word, I cant write it ;D) , no industrial revolution, no real working middle class etc..
no.. you cant artifically build a revolution from those tribes like the west understands, they are not ready and at maximum they will be a religious/religion "republic" (I cant see republic though) like iran.. :(
and last point :
west can abuse the oil and other sources from those countries only if those dictators are on the job.. capitalism have to do that or no other way.. actually the final economic crysis trigger those events (explanation : west started to poke them ) .. I'm sure as a historian you can see that..
-
and I also forgot to say one thing: iran has an old empire.. so has historcal roots and tradition of state managing and experience.. but Libya.. desperate imo..
they will broke into many pieces if west will be successful (as an estimation like Iraq)..
-
Lizzie, after all what happened in the past of those countries that Zulu also has mentioned, do you really believe west help them for just democracy and freedom.. ;D ;D ;D ;D
do you really think all those arab nations sleep for many hundred years and one day wake up, voila all of them want democracy and freedom ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D is that possible or someone push a needle in their arse ;D ;D
honestly, west is searching/feeding supporters/partisans in that area .. giving them some promises.. but what west dont know is those areas mostly stay on a very critical balance that when you play all things collapse on your head where those people are living very far from western values.. middle east is the best example .. :-/
and can I remind those helps are never free.. when the time comes the bill will be on the table.. :-X
Yes I do Cem. In England we were dictated to by the monarch and church for centuries, then the English peasants with the middle classes and even arostricacy (Magna Carta 1215/25) started to rise up, asking questions and requesting greater freedoms. That developed into further demands on "the system" to give the people their rights. The English Civil War,1642-1651, questioned the divine status of the monarch and his / her right to rule by the word of God against the natural rights and freedoms of the people. A number of movements questioned the 'ruling classes' further, but the British Chartist movement, 1838-48, took this to new heights, demanding voting rights within a truely democratic system. That actually didn't happen altogether immediately, but by the start of the twentieth century, much of that fought for by the Chartists had been established within the modern British democracy.
That is what basically is happening now in the Middle East and North Africa. The taste of democracy has reached those people as it did in historic England / Britain, but in Egypt first, if you do not include Iran during the 1970s, and they like the idea of it, thinking it could be for them. That feeling is spreading, with the age of the dictator that was still alive and kicking in Europe until relatively recently, now fading at last in those distant parts.
We, the democractic west, must help this process if and when we can, because the peaceful future of our world depends on it. No longer, if ever we could, can we let dictators rule over the people's of the world. It will take time to rid ourselves of all of them, but we must head in that direction. ;) ;)
::) ::)
Really ? :-?
you forgot one point.. those countries didnt pass the phases you mention.. none of them.. have a different religion which control and tie their hands still.. no renaissance ( I hate this word, I cant write it ;D) , no industrial revolution, no real working middle class etc..
no.. you cant artifically build a revolution from those tribes like the west understands, they are not ready and at maximum they will be a religious/religion "republic" (I cant see republic though) like iran.. :(
and last point :
west can abuse the oil and other sources from those countries only if those dictators are on the job.. capitalism have to do that or no other way.. actually the final economic crysis trigger those events (explanation : west started to poke them ) .. I'm sure as a historian you can see that..
No, I have taken that into account Cem.
Their history cannot be the same as the British experience. Their "process" to democracy will be different in line with their culture, and could take a century to achieve! As I described the English / British path to democracy has taken centuries, and the final chapter has not been written yet as real democracy has yet to be reached, if that is ever possible. Arab states will take a different path, but will one day arrive at the same conclusion. Religion will become far more secular, as it has in Britain and throughout Europe. Islamic states will be no different. ;) ;)
The process has started in full amongst an ever increasingly educated people who also access the internet along with the rest of us. The worlds peoples revolution will now continue apace. 8-) 8-) :y :y
-
Lizzie, after all what happened in the past of those countries that Zulu also has mentioned, do you really believe west help them for just democracy and freedom.. ;D ;D ;D ;D
do you really think all those arab nations sleep for many hundred years and one day wake up, voila all of them want democracy and freedom ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D is that possible or someone push a needle in their arse ;D ;D
honestly, west is searching/feeding supporters/partisans in that area .. giving them some promises.. but what west dont know is those areas mostly stay on a very critical balance that when you play all things collapse on your head where those people are living very far from western values.. middle east is the best example .. :-/
and can I remind those helps are never free.. when the time comes the bill will be on the table.. :-X
Yes I do Cem. In England we were dictated to by the monarch and church for centuries, then the English peasants with the middle classes and even arostricacy (Magna Carta 1215/25) started to rise up, asking questions and requesting greater freedoms. That developed into further demands on "the system" to give the people their rights. The English Civil War,1642-1651, questioned the divine status of the monarch and his / her right to rule by the word of God against the natural rights and freedoms of the people. A number of movements questioned the 'ruling classes' further, but the British Chartist movement, 1838-48, took this to new heights, demanding voting rights within a truely democratic system. That actually didn't happen altogether immediately, but by the start of the twentieth century, much of that fought for by the Chartists had been established within the modern British democracy.
That is what basically is happening now in the Middle East and North Africa. The taste of democracy has reached those people as it did in historic England / Britain, but in Egypt first, if you do not include Iran during the 1970s, and they like the idea of it, thinking it could be for them. That feeling is spreading, with the age of the dictator that was still alive and kicking in Europe until relatively recently, now fading at last in those distant parts.
We, the democractic west, must help this process if and when we can, because the peaceful future of our world depends on it. No longer, if ever we could, can we let dictators rule over the people's of the world. It will take time to rid ourselves of all of them, but we must head in that direction. ;) ;)
I don't think that we can necessarily hold up our version of democracy as being one to follow Lizzie.
For the most part this democratic process has allowed many here to enjoy the freedom and rights associated with it, however these facilities are contingent upon the Establishment being acquiescent to its presence, however when that Establishment by way of elected government or otherwise decides that certain rights should be ignored in the national interest or those interests of the government/Establishment, then that very process of democracy is put to one side.
I'm thinking of such things as Treaties being signed which fundamentally alter our ability to independently govern ourselves, military action being taken on the back of cobbled together information and rumour dressed up as a pressing need to defend our way of life, super injunctions which permit those who have influence and money to restrict, absolutely, knowledge – by anyone - of their circumstances, deals done behind closed doors favouring those 'in the know' and a very parliamentary system which has allowed the most appalling behaviour within it's own portals to go unchallenged in all the most simplified way - the list could go on but finally I would cite the 'Big Sis' phenomenon in the US where it now seems that many Americans are being subject to stringent regulations in order to 'protect them' - many of these regulations affecting their ability to travel freely, communicate freely and associate freely without government interference and examination – all applied by agencies never voted for under a declared mandate.
I would submit that democracy and all the generally accepted benefits that should accompany it can never be a universal given as democracy (in whatever flavour) exists insofar as the government/Establishment of whatever nation is operating under its banner allows it to do so.
I wouldn't be at all surprised that many of currently fighting for influence in those regions view the West's notion of democracy with suspicion as there invariably appears to be a price to be paid for everything (in terms of assistance rendered) and whatever the process, those with influence, power and money can operate in a way of their choosing - democratic process or not.
Sadly there are few (if any) true democracies in this world as the very thing that cripples the socialist/communist movements also afflicts democracy - the inclination of the individual to put themselves, their circumstance and their own wellbeing first and foremost.
We're not too badly off here in this nation - but things could be much better if true concern for the nation and one’s neighbour was put before concern for one’s self/party or social grouping.
Given human nature, that is a very big ‘ask’ indeed.
-
Lizzie, after all what happened in the past of those countries that Zulu also has mentioned, do you really believe west help them for just democracy and freedom.. ;D ;D ;D ;D
do you really think all those arab nations sleep for many hundred years and one day wake up, voila all of them want democracy and freedom ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D is that possible or someone push a needle in their arse ;D ;D
honestly, west is searching/feeding supporters/partisans in that area .. giving them some promises.. but what west dont know is those areas mostly stay on a very critical balance that when you play all things collapse on your head where those people are living very far from western values.. middle east is the best example .. :-/
and can I remind those helps are never free.. when the time comes the bill will be on the table.. :-X
Yes I do Cem. In England we were dictated to by the monarch and church for centuries, then the English peasants with the middle classes and even arostricacy (Magna Carta 1215/25) started to rise up, asking questions and requesting greater freedoms. That developed into further demands on "the system" to give the people their rights. The English Civil War,1642-1651, questioned the divine status of the monarch and his / her right to rule by the word of God against the natural rights and freedoms of the people. A number of movements questioned the 'ruling classes' further, but the British Chartist movement, 1838-48, took this to new heights, demanding voting rights within a truely democratic system. That actually didn't happen altogether immediately, but by the start of the twentieth century, much of that fought for by the Chartists had been established within the modern British democracy.
That is what basically is happening now in the Middle East and North Africa. The taste of democracy has reached those people as it did in historic England / Britain, but in Egypt first, if you do not include Iran during the 1970s, and they like the idea of it, thinking it could be for them. That feeling is spreading, with the age of the dictator that was still alive and kicking in Europe until relatively recently, now fading at last in those distant parts.
We, the democractic west, must help this process if and when we can, because the peaceful future of our world depends on it. No longer, if ever we could, can we let dictators rule over the people's of the world. It will take time to rid ourselves of all of them, but we must head in that direction. ;) ;)
I don't think that we can necessarily hold up our version of democracy as being one to follow Lizzie.
For the most part this democratic process has allowed many here to enjoy the freedom and rights associated with it, however these facilities are contingent upon the Establishment being acquiescent to its presence, however when that Establishment by way of elected government or otherwise decides that certain rights should be ignored in the national interest or those interests of the government/Establishment, then that very process of democracy is put to one side.
I would submit that democracy and all the generally accepted benefits that should accompany it can never be a universal given as democracy (in whatever flavour) exists insofar as the government/Establishment of whatever nation is operating under its banner allows it to do so.
Sadly there are few (if any) true democracies in this world as the very thing that cripples the socialist/communist movements also afflicts democracy - the inclination of the individual to put themselves, their circumstance and their own wellbeing first and foremost.
We're not too badly off here in this nation - but things could be much better if true concern for the nation and one’s neighbour was put before concern for one’s self/party or social grouping.
Given human nature, that is a very big ‘ask’ indeed.
Perhaps my last post Z will help you understand my thinking more, with the highlighted piece in my summission touching on how we haven't got full democracy yet;
[size=24]"[/size]Their history cannot be the same as the British experience. Their "process" to democracy will be different in line with their culture, and could take a century to achieve! As I described the English / British path to democracy has taken centuries, and the final chapter has not been written yet as real democracy has yet to be reached, if that is ever possible. Arab states will take a different path, but will one day arrive at the same conclusion. Religion will become far more secular, as it has in Britain and throughout Europe. Islamic states will be no different.
The process has started in full amongst an ever increasingly educated people who also access the internet along with the rest of us. The worlds peoples revolution will now continue apace[size=24]."[/size]
"
We should also bear in mind the wonderful Churchill quote when he spoke about democracy:
“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”
;)
-
Lizzie, after all what happened in the past of those countries that Zulu also has mentioned, do you really believe west help them for just democracy and freedom.. ;D ;D ;D ;D
do you really think all those arab nations sleep for many hundred years and one day wake up, voila all of them want democracy and freedom ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D is that possible or someone push a needle in their arse ;D ;D
honestly, west is searching/feeding supporters/partisans in that area .. giving them some promises.. but what west dont know is those areas mostly stay on a very critical balance that when you play all things collapse on your head where those people are living very far from western values.. middle east is the best example .. :-/
and can I remind those helps are never free.. when the time comes the bill will be on the table.. :-X
Yes I do Cem. In England we were dictated to by the monarch and church for centuries, then the English peasants with the middle classes and even arostricacy (Magna Carta 1215/25) started to rise up, asking questions and requesting greater freedoms. That developed into further demands on "the system" to give the people their rights. The English Civil War,1642-1651, questioned the divine status of the monarch and his / her right to rule by the word of God against the natural rights and freedoms of the people. A number of movements questioned the 'ruling classes' further, but the British Chartist movement, 1838-48, took this to new heights, demanding voting rights within a truely democratic system. That actually didn't happen altogether immediately, but by the start of the twentieth century, much of that fought for by the Chartists had been established within the modern British democracy.
That is what basically is happening now in the Middle East and North Africa. The taste of democracy has reached those people as it did in historic England / Britain, but in Egypt first, if you do not include Iran during the 1970s, and they like the idea of it, thinking it could be for them. That feeling is spreading, with the age of the dictator that was still alive and kicking in Europe until relatively recently, now fading at last in those distant parts.
We, the democractic west, must help this process if and when we can, because the peaceful future of our world depends on it. No longer, if ever we could, can we let dictators rule over the people's of the world. It will take time to rid ourselves of all of them, but we must head in that direction. ;) ;)
::) ::)
Really ? :-?
you forgot one point.. those countries didnt pass the phases you mention.. none of them.. have a different religion which control and tie their hands still.. no renaissance ( I hate this word, I cant write it ;D) , no industrial revolution, no real working middle class etc..
no.. you cant artifically build a revolution from those tribes like the west understands, they are not ready and at maximum they will be a religious/religion "republic" (I cant see republic though) like iran.. :(
and last point :
west can abuse the oil and other sources from those countries only if those dictators are on the job.. capitalism have to do that or no other way.. actually the final economic crysis trigger those events (explanation : west started to poke them ) .. I'm sure as a historian you can see that..
No, I have taken that into account Cem.
Their history cannot be the same as the British experience. 1.Their "process" to democracy will be different in line with their culture, and could take a century to achieve! As I described the English / British path to democracy has taken centuries, and the final chapter has not been written yet as real democracy has yet to be reached, if that is ever possible. 2.Arab states will take a different path, but will one day arrive at the same conclusion. 3.Religion will become far more secular, as it has in Britain and throughout Europe. Islamic states will be no different. ;) ;)
The process has started in full amongst an ever increasingly educated people who also access the internet along with the rest of us. The worlds peoples revolution will now continue apace. 8-) 8-) :y :y
1. if real democracy will be permitted by the west.. looking at Turkeys past and present experiences , I'm afraid this will never happen.. Just remember Sevres treaty , is this the treaty that the democracy and freedom lovers prepare :D :D ;D
2. I'm sure of one thing, Arab states were/are never a state and never will be, until the sun gives up boiling their brains .. And I'm serious..
3. Religion also, will never be secular to any extent until a force beats it..
sorry, I'm not optimistic for those subjects.. but the truth that I live in daily burries all hopes >:( >:(
-
Lizzie, after all what happened in the past of those countries that Zulu also has mentioned, do you really believe west help them for just democracy and freedom.. ;D ;D ;D ;D
do you really think all those arab nations sleep for many hundred years and one day wake up, voila all of them want democracy and freedom ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D is that possible or someone push a needle in their arse ;D ;D
honestly, west is searching/feeding supporters/partisans in that area .. giving them some promises.. but what west dont know is those areas mostly stay on a very critical balance that when you play all things collapse on your head where those people are living very far from western values.. middle east is the best example .. :-/
and can I remind those helps are never free.. when the time comes the bill will be on the table.. :-X
Yes I do Cem. In England we were dictated to by the monarch and church for centuries, then the English peasants with the middle classes and even arostricacy (Magna Carta 1215/25) started to rise up, asking questions and requesting greater freedoms. That developed into further demands on "the system" to give the people their rights. The English Civil War,1642-1651, questioned the divine status of the monarch and his / her right to rule by the word of God against the natural rights and freedoms of the people. A number of movements questioned the 'ruling classes' further, but the British Chartist movement, 1838-48, took this to new heights, demanding voting rights within a truely democratic system. That actually didn't happen altogether immediately, but by the start of the twentieth century, much of that fought for by the Chartists had been established within the modern British democracy.
That is what basically is happening now in the Middle East and North Africa. The taste of democracy has reached those people as it did in historic England / Britain, but in Egypt first, if you do not include Iran during the 1970s, and they like the idea of it, thinking it could be for them. That feeling is spreading, with the age of the dictator that was still alive and kicking in Europe until relatively recently, now fading at last in those distant parts.
We, the democractic west, must help this process if and when we can, because the peaceful future of our world depends on it. No longer, if ever we could, can we let dictators rule over the people's of the world. It will take time to rid ourselves of all of them, but we must head in that direction. ;) ;)
I don't think that we can necessarily hold up our version of democracy as being one to follow Lizzie.
For the most part this democratic process has allowed many here to enjoy the freedom and rights associated with it, however these facilities are contingent upon the Establishment being acquiescent to its presence, however when that Establishment by way of elected government or otherwise decides that certain rights should be ignored in the national interest or those interests of the government/Establishment, then that very process of democracy is put to one side.
I'm thinking of such things as Treaties being signed which fundamentally alter our ability to independently govern ourselves, military action being taken on the back of cobbled together information and rumour dressed up as a pressing need to defend our way of life, super injunctions which permit those who have influence and money to restrict, absolutely, knowledge – by anyone - of their circumstances, deals done behind closed doors favouring those 'in the know' and a very parliamentary system which has allowed the most appalling behaviour within it's own portals to go unchallenged in all the most simplified way - the list could go on but finally I would cite the 'Big Sis' phenomenon in the US where it now seems that many Americans are being subject to stringent regulations in order to 'protect them' - many of these regulations affecting their ability to travel freely, communicate freely and associate freely without government interference and examination – all applied by agencies never voted for under a declared mandate.
I would submit that democracy and all the generally accepted benefits that should accompany it can never be a universal given as democracy (in whatever flavour) exists insofar as the government/Establishment of whatever nation is operating under its banner allows it to do so.
I wouldn't be at all surprised that many of currently fighting for influence in those regions view the West's notion of democracy with suspicion as there invariably appears to be a price to be paid for everything (in terms of assistance rendered) and whatever the process, those with influence, power and money can operate in a way of their choosing - democratic process or not.
Sadly there are few (if any) true democracies in this world as the very thing that cripples the socialist/communist movements also afflicts democracy - the inclination of the individual to put themselves, their circumstance and their own wellbeing first and foremost.
We're not too badly off here in this nation - but things could be much better if true concern for the nation and one’s neighbour was put before concern for one’s self/party or social grouping.
Given human nature, that is a very big ‘ask’ indeed.
Zulu , I'll work for your passage at home.. not easy to translate and keep in mind at a single pass with online dictionaries ;D :y
-
does all this trouble in the middle east mean that nice mr bush's "new world order" is being put on hold then? ;D
-
Zulu , I'll work for your passage at home.. not easy to translate and keep in mind at a single pass with online dictionaries ;D :y
;D ;D I often forget that cem and I do apologise: although it would be a good excuse to visit you over there in Turkey to expand on my thoughts.
Having said that your grasp of English and the standard of your debate is impressive to say the least.
I will try to cut the longer pieces down as I can see how referring to a translating dictionary as you read would interrupt the flow of what you're looking at.
-
Perhaps my last post Z will help you understand my thinking more, with the highlighted piece in my summission touching on how we haven't got full democracy yet;
[size=24]"[/size]Their history cannot be the same as the British experience. Their "process" to democracy will be different in line with their culture, and could take a century to achieve! As I described the English / British path to democracy has taken centuries, and the final chapter has not been written yet as real democracy has yet to be reached, if that is ever possible. Arab states will take a different path, but will one day arrive at the same conclusion. Religion will become far more secular, as it has in Britain and throughout Europe. Islamic states will be no different.
The process has started in full amongst an ever increasingly educated people who also access the internet along with the rest of us. The worlds peoples revolution will now continue apace[size=24]."[/size]
"
We should also bear in mind the wonderful Churchill quote when he spoke about democracy:
“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”
;)
Sorry Lizzie I didn't see that one - now that I'm fit again I've restarted the woodshed that's been sitting dormant over the period of my illness so am cracking-on with it as the weather is reasonably good today.
I'll come back to this later.
-
Perhaps my last post Z will help you understand my thinking more, with the highlighted piece in my summission touching on how we haven't got full democracy yet;
[size=24]"[/size]Their history cannot be the same as the British experience. Their "process" to democracy will be different in line with their culture, and could take a century to achieve! As I described the English / British path to democracy has taken centuries, and the final chapter has not been written yet as real democracy has yet to be reached, if that is ever possible. Arab states will take a different path, but will one day arrive at the same conclusion. Religion will become far more secular, as it has in Britain and throughout Europe. Islamic states will be no different.
The process has started in full amongst an ever increasingly educated people who also access the internet along with the rest of us. The worlds peoples revolution will now continue apace[size=24]."[/size]
"
We should also bear in mind the wonderful Churchill quote when he spoke about democracy:
“It has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.”
;)
Sorry Lizzie I didn't see that one - now that I'm fit again I've restarted the woodshed that's been sitting dormant over the period of my illness so am cracking-on with it as the weather is reasonably good today.
I'll come back to this later.
Ok Z, fair enough! Enjoy the sun, as I know I am at the moment 8-) 8-) :y :y
Hope the shed builfding comes on a treat :D :D :D ;)
-
Zulu , I'll work for your passage at home.. not easy to translate and keep in mind at a single pass with online dictionaries ;D :y
;D ;D I often forget that cem and I do apologise: although it would be a good excuse to visit you over there in Turkey to expand on my thoughts.
Having said that your grasp of English and the standard of your debate is impressive to say the least.
I will try to cut the longer pieces down as I can see how referring to a translating dictionary as you read would interrupt the flow of what you're looking at.
any time you wish sir .. be my guest :y :y
and thanks for kind words :y