to that point, I disagree that the only way for various ethnic groups to work together is under the control of a singular power.
Well, thank God for that, it's a ridiculous notion.
BUT, with that said, given the long and brutal (and I mean BRUTAL) history, forcing these ethnic groups to work together only incites more violence and perpetuates the division between them.THAT is what I'm saying. Do you agree or disagree?
Disagree and disagree vehemently. Violence and ethnic division is their historical foundation, division and warfare alive and well before there was an Israel or a United States. And everything perpetrates violence....teddy bears, Salman Rushdie, and inaction itself. Not being a Muslim incites militant Islam. Support for Israel incites militant Islam. Look at OBL's declaration of war and Fatwa against us while we're not in Iraq. Sheer and utter hate drove these terrorists to catastophically attack the US, where did that hate derive, we weren't trying to incite through force then were we?
Doesn't Al Maliki's recent excursion into Sadr City (backed heavily by the US military) kinda prove it is?
Prove what?
Are you saying Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, post-Stalinist Russia and South Korea are anything like the Middle East? That these countries share the same seclarized history as Iraq?
I think each has its differences, each has its similarities. I give you Japan. One of the most militaristic, non-democratic nations in history. A brutal regime that slaughtered Chinese and mainland persons like chickens. We devastated Japan, A, remember? And then we occupied Japan. After dropping an atomic bomb, killing hundreds of thousands, I cannot believe any single Japanese citizen wanted us there. Highly proud traditions and non-democratic, Japan was absolutely transformed. So no, I'm not saying Iraq is like Japan. Japan was a much more difficult, much more dominant power that we defeated and transformed. Questions?
As for Israel, it's level of "Democracy" is a moot point. In name and form, yes, but in practice, the country still refuses to acknowledge equal rights for ALL citizens. A survey conducted in 2003 shows that over half the population is opposed to equal rights for Israeli Arab.
It boasts more self-detemination in its lil nation pinkie toe as the entire Arab world. Please.
Hard-headed" is more like it.
I imagine Germans, Japanese, Koreans, Chinese, and al-Qaeda felt so. When you're right, you're right.
It was sarcasm...
It was what you first said it was. An error. You don't have to have murderous dictator to force ethnic diversity to live in peace. Completely ridiculous.
I said nothing of peace and don't pretend like such a thing is even remotely possible in that region nor did I ever call Suddam "peaceful". I said his control over Iraq kept the REGION relatively peaceful at the risk of INTERNAL disorder.
His control of Iraq kept the REGION peaceful.....what the f are you talking about! Ever heard of the Iran/Iraq war, was that relative peace. Heard of this? Heard of the Kuwait invasion he peacefully torched off? Involved in an oil for food scam, shooting at no fly zone enforcements, launched missiles into Israel trying to touch off a broader war during the Gulf conflict. Perhaps go back to Reagans reflagging of oil tankers so they could peacefully move thru the Straits.
Saddam was a threat, a constant threat to the entire region, you're wrong, A. Totally wrong.
he was our "ally".
Like Stalin was our ally in WW2. He was our ally as IRan was our enemy.
And what I find ironic is that Suddam was only a brutal dictator AFTER he invaded Kuwait.
Really? Read how he came to power, how he oppressed Shia...do you do ANY reading?
Only after he endangered US oil intrests did he become a threat, at which point "human rights" became nothing more than an excuse to intervene militarily.
Endangered oil interests by invading another sovereign nation, yes? Would you think inaction would have spurned him to give Kuwait back? And...as I've stated, Iraq and Irans war has necessitated American presence, not Kuwait.
I'm a big fan of Noam Chomsky
Pull for the St. Louis Rams myself. Red Sox, Celtics, and Jimmie Johnson. And Blue
That hasn't happened in the US since World War II, so mentioning it doesn't really help your case...
Happened with both Afghanistan and Iraq. You're wrong again.
It's the COUNTRY'S self intrest in EVERY war, even those run by dictators and tyrants. Otherwise, what's the point in being the sole ruler of your country if you don't have a country to rule?
Really? OBL declared war for Afghanistan? al-Qaeda interested in a country's self-interest? And our involvement in the two 20th century European wars, was alone our own country's interests? And then the lil incursions we always seem to sprout up, whether it be Bosnia, Somolia, Haiti, the Sudan....are these humanitarian or country self interest missions?
The primary self-intrest of ANY entitiy is self defense - in this function, Democracies and Dictatorships preform the same way.
The primary self-interest of al-Qaeda is self-defense? That's interesting, Abraxas. Wrong, but interesting.
You really and truely are. You have NO concept of that region and your blanket statements of how "Democracy is possible" only reflect your naivite... and the ignorance of the people in charge.
Democracy, I truly believe is inevitable everywhere. Self-determination man'e enlightenment, Islam will eventually lose to this. I apologize for proving you wrong so many times, it seems you don't like it. Alas.
Democracy CANNOT be given it must be earned, cause otherwise, what was the whole point in personally choosing to change the way your governed... if it wasn't a personal choice? This is why Iran is a FAR better place to promote Democracy.
Japan...learned democracy? Germany....learned democracy? Korea learned democracy? Our infant United States learned democracy or carried it at the end of a rifle demanding existence and recognition? Pay attention, Abraxas, your complete ignorance is showing.
So again, I ask, what does a Democratic Iraq do to the Middle East?
It's an absolute disaster for militant Islam and for Iran. An absolute disaster and what they fear most. AS well, it adds yet another free self-determining nation to the ME. Absolute chaos and fear for Iran.
Now, ask me what a Democratic Iran gets.
A revolution. The Shah was the closest they came.
A Democratic Iran serves a serious blow to Hamas and Hezbolah,
And a democratic Iraq, Iran realizes, brings the reality of a democratic Iran that much closer.
Either way, a Democratic Iran decreases the level of violence in the region FAR better than a Democratic Iraq.
Cause...Iran has started more wars? I mean, Israel herself took care of the Iraqi threat at Osirak in 1983. A democratic Iran would provide new opportunity and would affect Iraq as well. As far as deceased levels of violence against Israel, it would depend. It could be most Iranians don't recognize Israel's existence.
... you still have nothing.
But, more than enough to dismiss your mistaken opinions.
Before I go, let me say that MY objective is to protect my country by NOT creating a generation of militant Arabs in a country that represented no direct threat to us.
How'd the militant "Arabs" generate enought hate to inflict 9-11 on us...or Khobar towers...or the USS Cole. Generations of militant Islamists hating us and wanting to kill us began when W owned the Texas Rangers. You're not applying historical perspective and your facts are wrong on their face. I suggest some reading before we discuss again.
