The Arab Spring

The Arab Spring (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

StrangerThan -> The Arab Spring (8/25/2011 4:41:23 AM)
So I'm wandering around this morning looking at the phrase Arab Spring, and stumble across some bloggers, stories asking if Bush deserves some credit for it. The events leading up to it undoubtedly are foreshadowed by the removal of two of the more oppressive regimes in the region, that of Saddam, and the Taliban. I was against the Iraq invasion, not so much on grounds of removing Saddam, but in the manner it was done. The whole concoction of wmd stories and indicated we knew exactly where they were, things that proved to be patently untrue as events unfolded left me, and a good many others, feeling like I had an administration willing to twist truth in whatever knots they needed in order to create justification for their actions. I still believe that. But, the truth is, we took out two of the worst in terms of corruption and oppression. I'm off to work, but the question lingers. Would the Arab Spring have occurred if Saddam and the Taliban were still in power? Was it seeing democracy unfolding in those two places that led to enough hope for the rest that A) it could happen here, and B) the US will help?

FirstQuaker -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/25/2011 4:54:41 AM)
It is really hard to see democracy as a done deal in either Iraq, of Afghanistan, as of yet. Look at it more as the final collapse of the Pan Arab Soviet clients, now their sugar daddy in Moscow has been dead for 20 years. Judging from what filled this vacuum in places like Iran, along with the despotism of the regional monarchs installed by the and maintained by the Anglosphere in places like the Gulf States and the cracks appearing in them, I woudl not count my chickens before they are hatched. Egypt is the one to watch, if they pull off a modern Turkish style republic, it is all good. If they cannot, I doubt the rest of the area will do any better.

DomKen -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/25/2011 6:20:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan So I'm wandering around this morning looking at the phrase Arab Spring, and stumble across some bloggers, stories asking if Bush deserves some credit for it. The events leading up to it undoubtedly are foreshadowed by the removal of two of the more oppressive regimes in the region, that of Saddam, and the Taliban. I was against the Iraq invasion, not so much on grounds of removing Saddam, but in the manner it was done. The whole concoction of wmd stories and indicated we knew exactly where they were, things that proved to be patently untrue as events unfolded left me, and a good many others, feeling like I had an administration willing to twist truth in whatever knots they needed in order to create justification for their actions. I still believe that. But, the truth is, we took out two of the worst in terms of corruption and oppression. I'm off to work, but the question lingers. Would the Arab Spring have occurred if Saddam and the Taliban were still in power? Was it seeing democracy unfolding in those two places that led to enough hope for the rest that A) it could happen here, and B) the US will help? There is only one person who can be said to deserve credit for the Arab Spring, Mohamed Bouazizi. It is reasonable to conclude that GWB's actions in Iraq delayed the coming of the Arab Spring. The arab street was very much opposed to the invasion and occupation and it held their attention for years as the economic and social conditions that led to the events of the past year continued to detoriate. Once arab satellite TV and arab websites were no longer obsessed with the crusader conquering Iraq they started to investigate and report on the corruption and lack of opportunity throughout the arab part of the world which certainly helped bring about the uprisings.

Owner59 -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/25/2011 6:38:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan So I'm wandering around this morning looking at the phrase Arab Spring, and stumble across some bloggers, stories asking if Bush deserves some credit for it. The events leading up to it undoubtedly are foreshadowed by the removal of two of the more oppressive regimes in the region, that of Saddam, and the Taliban. I was against the Iraq invasion, not so much on grounds of removing Saddam, but in the manner it was done. The whole concoction of wmd stories and indicated we knew exactly where they were, things that proved to be patently untrue as events unfolded left me, and a good many others, feeling like I had an administration willing to twist truth in whatever knots they needed in order to create justification for their actions. I still believe that. But, the truth is, we took out two of the worst in terms of corruption and oppression. I'm off to work, but the question lingers. Would the Arab Spring have occurred if Saddam and the Taliban were still in power? Was it seeing democracy unfolding in those two places that led to enough hope for the rest that A) it could happen here, and B) the US will help? The taliban still exists ,sparky. I doubt anyone would do another Iraq,bush style, if they knew what a fucking deadly waste it was/would be. I was just wondering. When will bush be given "credit" for dropping the ball big time, on 9/11?

BamaD -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/25/2011 6:49:46 AM)
The left tried to claim that Bush was wholly responsable for 9/11 so your answer was out there years before you asked it sparky.

BamaD -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/25/2011 6:54:37 AM)
We will see that in the long run the Arab Spring is not such a good thing (at which time owner 59 will give Bush full credit for it) when these counties are controlled by more hostile, more violent people a la Iran.

ashjor911 -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/25/2011 2:06:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen There is only one person who can be said to deserve credit for the Arab Spring, Mohamed Bouazizi. It is reasonable to conclude that GWB's actions in Iraq delayed the coming of the Arab Spring. The arab street was very much opposed to the invasion and occupation and it held their attention for years as the economic and social conditions that led to the events of the past year continued to detoriate. Once arab satellite TV and arab websites were no longer obsessed with the crusader conquering Iraq they started to investigate and report on the corruption and lack of opportunity throughout the arab part of the world which certainly helped bring about the uprisings. agreed

willbeurdaddy -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/25/2011 4:42:43 PM)
Arab Spring.....credit???? blame is more appropriate.

StrangerThan -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 1:45:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan So I'm wandering around this morning looking at the phrase Arab Spring, and stumble across some bloggers, stories asking if Bush deserves some credit for it. The events leading up to it undoubtedly are foreshadowed by the removal of two of the more oppressive regimes in the region, that of Saddam, and the Taliban. I was against the Iraq invasion, not so much on grounds of removing Saddam, but in the manner it was done. The whole concoction of wmd stories and indicated we knew exactly where they were, things that proved to be patently untrue as events unfolded left me, and a good many others, feeling like I had an administration willing to twist truth in whatever knots they needed in order to create justification for their actions. I still believe that. But, the truth is, we took out two of the worst in terms of corruption and oppression. I'm off to work, but the question lingers. Would the Arab Spring have occurred if Saddam and the Taliban were still in power? Was it seeing democracy unfolding in those two places that led to enough hope for the rest that A) it could happen here, and B) the US will help? There is only one person who can be said to deserve credit for the Arab Spring, Mohamed Bouazizi. It is reasonable to conclude that GWB's actions in Iraq delayed the coming of the Arab Spring. The arab street was very much opposed to the invasion and occupation and it held their attention for years as the economic and social conditions that led to the events of the past year continued to detoriate. Once arab satellite TV and arab websites were no longer obsessed with the crusader conquering Iraq they started to investigate and report on the corruption and lack of opportunity throughout the arab part of the world which certainly helped bring about the uprisings. I suppose that is a reasonable conclusion, DK. I will say this though, either Bush A) had God talking to him like he claimed he did, or B) had some clairvoyance going on because what's happened in the last few years pretty much sounds like his vision for the middle east. That vision was derided by a lot of people. One of the readings I ran across was a response to his democracy in the middle east speech, where the authors noted the flawed idealism along with the reasons that democracy was virtually impossible in the region. Bright, liberal stars they were.

StrangerThan -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 1:46:57 AM)
quote: The taliban still exists ,sparky. Get back to me in 2024, Ace. That's about the point you can make that statement with any sense of reality attached to it.

DomYngBlk -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 5:27:29 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan So I'm wandering around this morning looking at the phrase Arab Spring, and stumble across some bloggers, stories asking if Bush deserves some credit for it. The events leading up to it undoubtedly are foreshadowed by the removal of two of the more oppressive regimes in the region, that of Saddam, and the Taliban. I was against the Iraq invasion, not so much on grounds of removing Saddam, but in the manner it was done. The whole concoction of wmd stories and indicated we knew exactly where they were, things that proved to be patently untrue as events unfolded left me, and a good many others, feeling like I had an administration willing to twist truth in whatever knots they needed in order to create justification for their actions. I still believe that. But, the truth is, we took out two of the worst in terms of corruption and oppression. I'm off to work, but the question lingers. Would the Arab Spring have occurred if Saddam and the Taliban were still in power? Was it seeing democracy unfolding in those two places that led to enough hope for the rest that A) it could happen here, and B) the US will help? There is only one person who can be said to deserve credit for the Arab Spring, Mohamed Bouazizi. It is reasonable to conclude that GWB's actions in Iraq delayed the coming of the Arab Spring. The arab street was very much opposed to the invasion and occupation and it held their attention for years as the economic and social conditions that led to the events of the past year continued to detoriate. Once arab satellite TV and arab websites were no longer obsessed with the crusader conquering Iraq they started to investigate and report on the corruption and lack of opportunity throughout the arab part of the world which certainly helped bring about the uprisings. I suppose that is a reasonable conclusion, DK. I will say this though, either Bush A) had God talking to him like he claimed he did, or B) had some clairvoyance going on because what's happened in the last few years pretty much sounds like his vision for the middle east. That vision was derided by a lot of people. One of the readings I ran across was a response to his democracy in the middle east speech, where the authors noted the flawed idealism along with the reasons that democracy was virtually impossible in the region. Bright, liberal stars they were. So which God was speaking to dubya, Jesus or Mohammed

rulemylife -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 6:41:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan So I'm wandering around this morning looking at the phrase Arab Spring, and stumble across some bloggers, stories asking if Bush deserves some credit for it. The events leading up to it undoubtedly are foreshadowed by the removal of two of the more oppressive regimes in the region, that of Saddam, and the Taliban. I was against the Iraq invasion, not so much on grounds of removing Saddam, but in the manner it was done. The whole concoction of wmd stories and indicated we knew exactly where they were, things that proved to be patently untrue as events unfolded left me, and a good many others, feeling like I had an administration willing to twist truth in whatever knots they needed in order to create justification for their actions. I still believe that. But, the truth is, we took out two of the worst in terms of corruption and oppression. I'm off to work, but the question lingers. Would the Arab Spring have occurred if Saddam and the Taliban were still in power? Was it seeing democracy unfolding in those two places that led to enough hope for the rest that A) it could happen here, and B) the US will help? No, the truth is we created a civil war in Iraq that is producing as much bloodshed as existed under the previous regime. Attacks across Iraq kill 14, wound dozens Reuters via Yahoo! News - Aug 25 And there is also no success in Afghanistan. The Karzai government only controls a small portion of the country. The Taliban controls the rest. As soon as American troops leave one area they come right back in. So please spare me the hero worship of Bush. I supported going into Afghanistan but there was never a real commitment made by him there. He went with the neo-cons desire to invade Iraq and started another war when he had not finished the first.

mnottertail -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 6:53:00 AM)
And to further rmls post: B) had some clairvoyance going on because what's happened in the last few years pretty much sounds like his vision for the middle east. That vision was derided by a lot of people. Everybody wants peace and democracy in the middle east, always have. Bushes vision went something like this, I want the toilet to work (not a clairvoyance exactly) therefore I will bomb the toilet and everything will be fine from then on (that was derided and rightfully so). End of joke.

StrangerThan -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 8:23:09 AM)
The truth is, we have revolution and democracy, at least the potential for democracy spreading across the middle east. That rml, is the truth. It is also a truth that we took out the governments of Hussein, and Taliban up front. Considering the deal we're working to keep air power, special forces and trainers in Afghanistan until 2024, that too earmarks a Bush quote indicating a dedication for decades to the fight, and maybe escalation given that the Taliban can only remain a viable force by using Pakistan to regroup and move fighters. Either way, to state that Bush caused the Arab Spring would be flatly untrue. Yet, the vision he laid out, including some of the very countries that have undergone or are in the process of undergoing a revolution, is also a truth. It is as much a truth to state that prior to our invasion of Iraq, most saw the prospects for any type of democratic process in the Middle East as both limited and unlikely. Bush had a lot of failings, but one of his fallacies was to believe you can hand democracy to a people who haven't the faintest idea what to do with it, and both expect it to work, and expect them to be able to set aside a few thousand years of hating each other to make it work. About the only time the sects can seem to work together is against either an outside power or Israel. Past that, they go back to hating each other and killing each other. You talk about a civil war in Iraq. The reality is that the whole middle east is ripe for a civil war with or without outside influence. A good many of the power brokers there have subsisted by oppressing, often brutally, other branches of their own religion. What we did in Iraq and Afghanistan was create not just an internal, but regional power vacuum. Two repressive regimes were toppled. Regardless of how successful our efforts are and were, that vacuum resonated through the Middle East and the world. Being here, now, it's easy to segregate the events since 9/11. A hundred years from now, it won't be. The timeline involved is too short - roughly being 10 years since invading Afghanistan and 8 from invading Iraq - 8 years from Bush describing his vision for the Middle East, and it beginning to unfold. I've no doubt that he will be credited to some degree. What he may also be credited with is opening the door to a conflagration of civil war that encompasses the entire region where hundreds of millions die.

DomKen -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 9:38:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan The truth is, we have revolution and democracy, at least the potential for democracy spreading across the middle east. That rml, is the truth. It is also a truth that we took out the governments of Hussein, and Taliban up front. Considering the deal we're working to keep air power, special forces and trainers in Afghanistan until 2024, that too earmarks a Bush quote indicating a dedication for decades to the fight, and maybe escalation given that the Taliban can only remain a viable force by using Pakistan to regroup and move fighters. Either way, to state that Bush caused the Arab Spring would be flatly untrue. Yet, the vision he laid out, including some of the very countries that have undergone or are in the process of undergoing a revolution, is also a truth. It is as much a truth to state that prior to our invasion of Iraq, most saw the prospects for any type of democratic process in the Middle East as both limited and unlikely. No, the truth is we have revolution and perhaps democracy in spite of Bush not because of him. You tried to dimiss the points I made above and then trotted out the pro Bush nonsense again so I'll repeat the points I made. The dictators in the ME have long used their state owned media to direct the street's attention and ire where they wanted it, usually Israel and the US. At the very moment when satellite TV and the internet started to challenge that stranglehold on information the US invaded Iraq for clearly trumped up reasons, the arab street knows full well which states are secular and which would embrace islamic extremists. So instead of al Jazeera covering the corruption in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen etc. they were covering the wholesale slaughter and wanton destruction that came with our invasion of Iraq. It's only now when the emergent arab free press has turned its attention to the problems faced by the arab street has the attention and ire of the people fallen on their governments. Bush did not facilitate the Arab Spring he probably delayed it by several years.

MrRodgers -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 9:49:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD The left tried to claim that Bush was wholly responsable for 9/11 so your answer was out there years before you asked it sparky. Bush didn't have the brains to do a 9/11. If there is anything truly fishy about 9/11, Bush was an ignorant dupe at best an obedient puppet at worst. I do know that nobody but NOBODY...successfully attacks the pentagon. Somehow, someway on his watch...'somebody' did. The success of that attack has yet to be fully explained to the American people. As for the post...why does it not surprise me that those who obviously feel in need to 'credit' somebody in western politics simply pick up on their latest hero. [sic] So why isn't Obama being credited ? If McCain had been elected, you know damn well that most of the right would be saying it was all 'his' doing. The fact is...the people of Tunisia, the people of Egypt, Libya and now Sryria are the ONLY people I credit as it is only they that got it done or are trying to get it done.

StrangerThan -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 1:53:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan The truth is, we have revolution and democracy, at least the potential for democracy spreading across the middle east. That rml, is the truth. It is also a truth that we took out the governments of Hussein, and Taliban up front. Considering the deal we're working to keep air power, special forces and trainers in Afghanistan until 2024, that too earmarks a Bush quote indicating a dedication for decades to the fight, and maybe escalation given that the Taliban can only remain a viable force by using Pakistan to regroup and move fighters. Either way, to state that Bush caused the Arab Spring would be flatly untrue. Yet, the vision he laid out, including some of the very countries that have undergone or are in the process of undergoing a revolution, is also a truth. It is as much a truth to state that prior to our invasion of Iraq, most saw the prospects for any type of democratic process in the Middle East as both limited and unlikely. No, the truth is we have revolution and perhaps democracy in spite of Bush not because of him. You tried to dimiss the points I made above and then trotted out the pro Bush nonsense again so I'll repeat the points I made. The dictators in the ME have long used their state owned media to direct the street's attention and ire where they wanted it, usually Israel and the US. At the very moment when satellite TV and the internet started to challenge that stranglehold on information the US invaded Iraq for clearly trumped up reasons, the arab street knows full well which states are secular and which would embrace islamic extremists. So instead of al Jazeera covering the corruption in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen etc. they were covering the wholesale slaughter and wanton destruction that came with our invasion of Iraq. It's only now when the emergent arab free press has turned its attention to the problems faced by the arab street has the attention and ire of the people fallen on their governments. Bush did not facilitate the Arab Spring he probably delayed it by several years. I understand your position dk. In fact, I understood before you ever posted it. That doesn't change the fact that while many were whining, crying, bitching, and screaming it ain't SO! Bush was describing today, and in his own thoughts, doing what he needed to do to get the ball rolling. Every leftist op/ed piece I read in conjunction with anything he said, was basically no way, ain't happenin, can't happen, he's so full of shit. I imagine those same people today are still writing bullshit. As for the emergent arab free press, they held their 4th forum in 2010. That rise probably had something to do with covering the evil crusader. See, ace, there are really two sides to the moon. Believe it or not. I didn't try to dismiss your "facts." I understand them as coming from one perspective, albeit one that hasn't an objective bone involved in the body that holds it.

mnottertail -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 2:05:23 PM)
How droll, how trite. What is the objective evidence that Bushes 'vision' had aught to do with Bushes actions, and the outcome, cuz there is no objective causality laying about as near as I can tell. So, he gave a fucking speech. Then he invaded a country under false pretenses, and by god, everybody out there looking at how that went, just waded in, 10 years later (I assume to insure he was really gone) and proceeded to sculpt his vision. Yeah, I havent seen the speech, and frankly, you would have to be on acid to link anything else up with the current events. But cite the speech, I'll read it.

DomKen -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 5:32:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan I understand your position dk. In fact, I understood before you ever posted it. That doesn't change the fact that while many were whining, crying, bitching, and screaming it ain't SO! Bush was describing today, and in his own thoughts, doing what he needed to do to get the ball rolling. He didn't get anything started. He delayed what is happening now. What needed to happen to 'get the ball rolling' was for the arab street to focus their attention on their own affairs rather than Israel's or the US's latest 'outrage.' Notice how vital it was in every successful revolt so far how the US stayed well out of the limelight. That kept Qadafi etc. from making their claims of this whole thing being our creation stick. An important fact is democracy cannot be imposed from outside it must be created by the people themselves. That's why Iraq is a such a dismal failure. You simply cannot swoop into a nation wipe out the political class and demand that father's of a new nation emerge to lead. quote: Every leftist op/ed piece I read in conjunction with anything he said, was basically no way, ain't happenin, can't happen, he's so full of shit. I imagine those same people today are still writing bullshit. As for the emergent arab free press, they held their 4th forum in 2010. That rise probably had something to do with covering the evil crusader. You know nothing of the region apparently. Al Jazeera predates the Iraq occupation (started in 1996 actually).

NewOCDaddy -> RE: The Arab Spring (8/26/2011 5:46:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: StrangerThan Every leftist op/ed piece I read in conjunction with anything he said, was basically no way, ain't happenin, can't happen, he's so full of shit. I imagine those same people today are still writing bullshit. As for the emergent arab free press, they held their 4th forum in 2010. That rise probably had something to do with covering the evil crusader. You know nothing of the region apparently. Al Jazeera predates the Iraq occupation (started in 1996 actually). No, as usual youre a fucking liar again. He didnt say a fucking thing about when Al Jazeera started, he said 2010 was the 4th Arab Free Press forum, and he is 100% correct.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875