A government official with ties to big business! Holy Jesus your revelations are compelling! Next you'll be telling me we have put a man into orbit in "outer space"!
Groverat, we HAVE! And we have put a robot on MARS!
I've been getting to be a bitter bastard in recent days, but you should know I dig you nonetheless. Still do. Always will. Unless you call me a hate-filled reactionary again, and then I won't contribute to your birthday present.
But when you speak of "a government official with ties to big business" in mock-revelation, you're sort of obscuring the point that the big business in question is arms and that 'appointee' is to sit in a city bombarded by the arms his company has manufactured. \
We're getting wildly off topic here and we're down to that boring point-and-refute guerilla threadwarring I really hate and don't have time for right now. But I think that an American appointment like this, as opposed to a UN appointment, is a big mistake and bad for our nascent Iraqi democracy. Originally we were going after WOMD, which the guy doesn't seem to have, and then the spin was 'liberate the Iraqis' (which isn't ANYWHERE in Resolution 1441, which apparently legitimises this invasion.)
If you're going to liberate them then liberate then. Then get the **** out of Iraq and let them get rich.
Right up front, let me say that I support the war in Iraq. But the feasibility of installing a "democracy" into Iraq has also been a "concern" for me. (Not that my concerns really matter in the grand scheme of things.) If we stay on topic, this could be a very interesting thread.
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
A benevolent monarchy can be a great thing for a rebuilding nation.
As much as modern, Western thinking opposes this kind of solution, Solzhenitsyn suggested much along this line as an alternative to Soviet rule. "Democracy" is not a cure all. In fact, it can be a quick way to install a totalitarian rule. Just look at Africa. Colonial rule was the great evil, but what has come out of self rule? (1) For democracy to work, citizens must take on a high level of personal responsibility. (2) And here is the bomb: I don't think an Islamic world view provides a workable foundation for democracy. Islam means "submission." The thinking that went into Western democracy does not exist in Muslim theology.
I know I am just skimming the top here, but I am trying to keep this post short.
I think this is a great example of reductionist American thinking. You can't assume that other cultures value human life, or understand "freedom"---or value it---in the same way western culture does.
....throwing in a Sesame Street understanding of Islam makes it almost impossible for the west to read what the middle east wants or is ready to support.
We are going on 40 years since that part of the world has kicked out the west and has been basically independant. If they wanted democracy, I think you would see more of it.
Comments
Originally posted by groverat
A government official with ties to big business! Holy Jesus your revelations are compelling! Next you'll be telling me we have put a man into orbit in "outer space"!
Groverat, we HAVE! And we have put a robot on MARS!
I've been getting to be a bitter bastard in recent days, but you should know I dig you nonetheless. Still do. Always will. Unless you call me a hate-filled reactionary again, and then I won't contribute to your birthday present.
But when you speak of "a government official with ties to big business" in mock-revelation, you're sort of obscuring the point that the big business in question is arms and that 'appointee' is to sit in a city bombarded by the arms his company has manufactured.
We're getting wildly off topic here and we're down to that boring point-and-refute guerilla threadwarring I really hate and don't have time for right now. But I think that an American appointment like this, as opposed to a UN appointment, is a big mistake and bad for our nascent Iraqi democracy. Originally we were going after WOMD, which the guy doesn't seem to have, and then the spin was 'liberate the Iraqis' (which isn't ANYWHERE in Resolution 1441, which apparently legitimises this invasion.)
If you're going to liberate them then liberate then. Then get the **** out of Iraq and let them get rich.
Originally posted by groverat
A benevolent monarchy can be a great thing for a rebuilding nation.
As much as modern, Western thinking opposes this kind of solution, Solzhenitsyn suggested much along this line as an alternative to Soviet rule. "Democracy" is not a cure all. In fact, it can be a quick way to install a totalitarian rule. Just look at Africa. Colonial rule was the great evil, but what has come out of self rule? (1) For democracy to work, citizens must take on a high level of personal responsibility. (2) And here is the bomb: I don't think an Islamic world view provides a workable foundation for democracy. Islam means "submission." The thinking that went into Western democracy does not exist in Muslim theology.
I know I am just skimming the top here, but I am trying to keep this post short.
Rebuttals?
....throwing in a Sesame Street understanding of Islam makes it almost impossible for the west to read what the middle east wants or is ready to support.
We are going on 40 years since that part of the world has kicked out the west and has been basically independant. If they wanted democracy, I think you would see more of it.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
If you're going to liberate them then liberate then. Then get the **** out of Iraq and let them get rich. [/B]
they will almost certainly do alright..........but.......look at what has happened to production in Iran since the theocracy was installed.
Originally posted by ena
they will almost certainly do alright..........but.......look at what has happened to production in Iran since the theocracy was installed.
I'd be interested to know, actually; I have a feeling it's not great. I'm not a fan of the current government in Iran.
What does that mean?