Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by Qua, Mar 8, 2010.
A bit of positivity's always a good thing
Will Iraq's democracy vindicate Bush? - CNN.com
Hey, currently Viet Nam is a great place for 'Mericuhns to enjoy safe and adventuresome travel. It does not mean that the Viet Nam war was "a good idea." I hope Irak does become stable, but don't ask me do hold my breath with Pollyanna optimism.
The prospect of having a democracy and a friend in that region (in addition to Isr) is a substantial and unprecedented accomplishment.
Regardless your views on W, history will look very favorably upon this development.
You are a regular little Pollyanna just puts me into diabetic shock reading it. W. is a dumbass and that's how history sees him now and for all eternity.
I didn't say he wasn't a dumbass.
However, a democracy in the Middle East (aside from Isreal) is a significant diplomatic and strategic development in that region. Remarkably significant.
It is a huge advantage for the U.S. and her allies everywhere.
particularly enjoyed this little snippet:
"... Iraq "could be one of the great achievements of this administration," boasted Vice President Joe Biden to CNN's Larry King last month. Next we'll hear how we owe the Marshall Plan and the Panama Canal to the Obama administration. ..."
Bush's vindication by the success of democracy in Iraq had always been a question I had posed (not that I'm a fan of his)
for any future in the Middle East, other than the coming obliteration I see, Iraq's ambitions must curtailed
that there can be a possibility of a civilized and enlightened Middle East we can see the example Lebanon was becoming; under Israeli bombardment and Islamic radicalization, we can see how easily that process can be halted
Well, they are searching hard for something positive. Not much to choose from unfortunately with this administration.
The democratization of Iraq - combined with the impending assassination of Ahmadinejad - could instill some semblance of peace to that volatile, religious wasteland of a region.
Keeping fingers crossed...
Only if the dead Americans are somehow brought back to life, and the $2trillion+ he blew over there is returned to the bank.
Which accomplishes what for the American people?
Something tells me that actually being a man and keeping his word (catching OBL) would have been more effective, quicker acting, and be accomplished for vastly less expanse in lives and money.
However, you can't change history. The lives, sadly, are lost and the money spent.
Would you rather have democracy there now or not? In the long-term, it could save tens of thousands of lives and potentially countless future conflicts.
I do believe we have friendly relations with several nations besides Israel in the region. And though there are no democracies in the purest sense, and Israel is not perfect in that regard either, nations like Jordan and Turkey are moving in that direction all on their own. Several other states have hybrid aspects of democracy at present, and the expectation is that they will evolve naturally to be more democratic over time.
Historically speaking, I don't think we've had great success in the realm of nation building and imposing democracy, especially by killing people and blowing things up. We'll just have to wait and see if this time is different and how significant it is in the long term. Consider this predominant theory of why there are is an absence of democratic rule in the region:
"Proposed reasons for the relative absence of liberal democracy in the Middle East are diverse, from the long history of imperial rule by the Ottoman Empire, Britain and France and the contemporary political and military intervention by the United States, all of which have been blamed for preferring authoritarian regimes, because this simplifies the business environment while enriching the governing elite and the companies of the imperial countries."
Democracy in the Middle East
Let's be real. This war had a lot less to do with spreading democracy than it had to do with establishing control over the oil supply and enriching corporate elites: Halliburton, Cheney et al.
No, you can't change history. However, you can hold people accountable for their actions in shaping history, actions which in this case were despicable and criminal, with horrendous and far reaching consequences: The number of innocent Iraquis killed, easily over 100,000, destruction of homes, facilities and infrastructure, the miserable living conditions the population was subjected to for years afterward, the recruiting tools provided to future terrorists, etc. The serious damage done to U.S. standing internationally, strained relations between the U.S. and much of the world, even with traditional allies. The rancor and division magnified domestically, erosion of civil liberties, monumental debt accrued from this exercise ($2-4 trillion), collateral damage to the economy, and on and on.
I figured it would take at least a decade to repair the damage done to international relations; remarkably the current administration seems well ahead of schedule. No, you can't change history, but you can hold people accountable for their actions. Sadly and frustratingly, it doesn't look like that will happen here. And that is a dangerous lesson for would be despots.
I don't advocate assassination. However, I am hopeful that the Iranians, who are among the most sophisticated educated secularly minded and intelligent people in the region, will ultimately be successful in overthrowing the theocrats who have ruled for 30+ years. Friendly relations between Iraq, Iran and other nations in the region could do more to bring stability there than anything we could ever dream of doing, IMHO.
Also keeping fingers crossed . . .
Let's be real. This war had a lot less to do with spreading democracy than it had to do with establishing control over the oil supply and enriching corporate elites: Halliburton, Cheney et a................................how much longer until we put the next dictator in power? `
:biggrin1::biggrin1::biggrin1:You stold my thunder;
Japan is the now 3rd strongest economy in the world, but that doesn't mean Hiroshima and Nagasaki is what caused it to happen ..
The USA elected the first Black president in 234 years, but that doesn't mean the first 100 years or so of legalized slavery made it happen so soon..
The argument being, I take it, that a complete loon's determination to continue his daddy's war by basing it upon an outright and utter lie might yet find justification if, years and countless lives later, after the devestation of families, homes, and infrastructure, some semblance of a democracy might be the end product....
Is that the premise?
The point he made about oil rich states tending to be repressive is an interesting hypothesis. There are clearly other models for Iraq to follow if it so chooses; Norway and Brazil come to mind. I wonder if the possibility of an Alaska type fund is out of the question either....
You're reading my mind.
I hope that it does happen, the democracy that is. And I hope W. gets the credit he deserves, assuming that when it happens his actions did impact it enough to matter. I also hope that if that is the case, whatever administration is in charge at the time doesn't get it all either. Sadly I don't see the credit getting parceled out fairly in this country. Fringes on both sides will be trying to steal the glory for their guys, and they will be the two loudest voices.
The continued and blatant violation of countless U.N. resolutions didn't happen.
That was a hoax, too.
Iraq wasn't taking aid money and buying weapons.
You and Sean Penn know more about the scenario than a multinational intelligence coalition with satellites, phone/wiretaps and a worldwide, coordinated espionage effort.
Tell us more about what happened.
That puts an exclamation point on the erroneousness of the claim.
Well Glory, Glory, Hallelujah!
Isn't War just Glorious?
(Especially the illegal ones waged under false pretenses.)
And I want 'W' to get the credit he deserves, too.
Sadly, as I said, I don't think that's going to happen.