At MOHANADHASSAN….
-
FriendlyFire wrote:
Egypt has had turbulence and deaths, but the revolution was overall relatively safe and peaceful. Lots of tensions, but very few actual outbreaks. Incidents, obviously, but they’ve come out of it very well.Libya is another story.
Libya? Yes, that nation controlled by a madman which is be called dear friends of Chinese by CCP(too), really a joke.
Hope none of Starporter there because there may no way to keep safe until chaos come down. Just i think the madman order army to kill citizens.
-
People outside do not understand what is the real situation in these countries. You cannot judge others by your own standards.
Western people (we) think Democracy and public choice is the way for everyone when they themselves (we) do not have it but they (we) can’t see this. The West itself has made a mockery of democracy, it is not democracy - once we vote in the politicians they take over and make decisions that the majority of the public do not want, this is Oligarchy. It is “rule by a few”, without consultation.
Arab countries have different values, including respect for each other, modesty and propriety that the West has given up in favour of exposure, exhibitionism, one-upmanship, self-inflation and “freedom”.
Europe has no right to control the UK but does.
Iraq is a prime example and typical of many Arab countries where “democracy” has already led and will continue to lead to more conflict amongst the people themselves, like FL factions they struggle against each other for control.
Without a strong leader there will be more deaths. People were not oppressed, they accepted the corruption at the top and lived contentedly, unless they went against the government, which they rarely did. I have lived and worked in several of these countries. Saddam was the most nasty of all recent Middle Eastern leaders but even he killed only a few of his own people in all his regime, those who tried to depose him without support, compared to how many have been killed by each other since. The entire “West” even supported him in his huge long war against Iran, giving him chemical weapons, experts, technology and “WMDs”. Have you all forgotten that?
It is natural for any leader to resist deposition by whatever means he can use. Do you think the UK government will not use force if it is faced with people on the streets shouting and bearing weapons? You saw it recently, remember? The difference is Brits are not prepared to die for their belief. Arab people are.
France, Germany, Spain, Italy, even gentle Holland did use force in the past. Greece does, and it is the leader of democracy still today. There has to be law and order. And corruption. I saw this more than 30 years ago in business in the proud and prim UK which has exposed this very well last year - until then it was just as rife but under covers. How is it that peerages and peers can be bought with money? It is the norm for big business worldwide, so why not the UK?
In Saddam’s case it was not only him controlling his public, he was very well supported by the majority of the people - so this is “democracy”, even if it is only 51%. In Saddam’s case it was 78% support. Smoke that! In the case of Egypt it was higher.
There is always corruption, whoever is at the top will make himself rich and put his family in the best deals and top positions, and the poor people will always be poor.
Gaddafi really was “loved” by his people - the majority, almost 70% again. If he goes the violence will not disappear, nobody can fix their problems and get them back to work. They will fight each other for control, muslim against muslim.
Mubarrak kept the country stable without violence. Now the army is in control and the generals will not want to give up power, so they will try to put in their own “man” in the guise of democracy - what they want is to retain power now that they have it. With a very large population of christians as well as muslims, Egypt is the most religiously tolerant country - at the moment.
Kuwait, Oman, each of the UAE states, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia all have royal families. They have stability and wealth. The poor are helped more than they will admit - all have excellent free hospitals and state schools, as well as private English schools, and all have work, and nobody is hungry.
The people of all of those countries, like here in the UK do not accept the troubles brought on them by this global recession. They come easily into the open to protest, and if angered enough they will take action more readily than “Western” people.
But here the Brits just keep quiet in the open, moan and groan privately, and get blotto, instead of rallying together. One thing Brits cannot do is support each other. Even neighbours don’t know each other, how is this better? Go home and close the door. As long as each feels he is not a victim, he will not support the one who is. Then one day he is the victim and nobody else is listening to or supporting him. Today’s senior executive who is not doing anything to help today’s pensioners is tomorrow’s pensioner without his health and without his home. Those execs of the past 20 years lost their super pensions in the insurance frauds, and the money they put in is lost - but nobody is caring for them, tough luck pal.
And how often is someone’s property damaged and people who see it stay indoors and turn a blind eye? This won’t happen in the Arab countries, the neighbours will come out in numbers and grab the hooligans and call the police. Guarantee the hooligans will be beaten on the way to jail. And that is as it should be.
Leave them alone to keep their balance, the west has failed in this.
Anyway, friends are friends and we hope they are not in danger.
-
No you are not talking about dissenters. This is not a peaceful protest.
You are talking about factions trying to overthrow a legitimate government backed by the majority of its people (still more than 50%) and who will still not back down after the threat of force was given.
All they had to do was go home.
-
StarTrader wrote:
No you are not talking about dissenters. This is not a peaceful protest.You are talking about factions trying to overthrow a legitimate government backed by the majority of its people (still more than 50%) and who will still not back down after the threat of force was given.
All they had to do was go home.
Really? If im wrong, that must be the problem on data source. I apologize about that problem if you saying is true, you know in China, almost news website&forum is blocked most talk about Libya and Egypt.
-
Wow, ST, I’d really like you to back up your claims with sources on that one. If you haven’t noticed, Gaddafi his bombing his own citizens with utter contempt and disregard for safety. He is a murderer and a manipulator and I am very much glad that the Libyan people is getting rid of the scum.
What you’re saying will require some serious sourcing to stand on its own.
-
=Alex= wrote:
NeXoSE, ever heard of Tor?
And no ST, you simply cannot call them legitimate governments.Tor? That things already got banned even bridge. Now i use another tool made by “reactionist” to pass the GFW. But i just use it to visit website like Youtube, Twitter even Android development and Python website.
Yes, just for the simple reason to made me using proxy. and some dissenters In my eyes is … frantic, and saying not very true. The lastest joke they made is the Jasmine Revolution in China, which only about 7 or 10 people “joined” Revolution (And almost over thousands of people joined the “circusee”). I really caring about is the people who try to stick up for their rights by law but got injustice.
Since Google start to support IPv6, all things coming better, because GFW not support keyword detection and IP blocking with IPv6 yet, so i can open Youtube without any proxy tool. And that’s why i can upload video to Youtube.
-
Personally, I think the majority of citizens in the middle east just want their voice to be heard.
None of us really know what any of them think because they don’t have the right to free speech, they don’t have a free press so only the message handed down by the state is heard.
They may have accepted the status quo for so long because they didn’t have the internet, but now that they can connect with each other via facebook and twitter and finally communicate, they are discovering that they finally do have a voice, and they are all feeling the same way, pissed off with the way things are and willing to do something about it.
The internet has also given them the opportunity to see other parts of the world without having to travel, I’m guessing that it’s probably shattered the illusion that the western world is some kind of monster war machine and that it’s actually full of normal people just like them, but living relatively free.
I really hope, regardless of the consequences, that all country’s adopt democracy, get free speech and a free press.
-
NexOse - problem in translation, I know nothing about China, I thought you were referring to Libya.
You guys have a very short memory - like only yesterday.
Democracy is what those countries have had, because that is how those leaders came to power, and they have been accepted all these years. Even last year Ghaddafi was extremely popular.
You don’t concede that 50% support of a government is a democratic “yes”?
The UK government didn’t have anywhere near that. What did the US government have? And so on.
The countries which have royal families are beyond question, they have been prosperous under their rulers. All rulers put down uprisings with extreme violence in the past, including England, Scotland, the US, Russia, China, France, Greece, Norway, Denmark, Sweden, Africa… Need I go on?
In Libya you will know when the time comes that Ghaddafi has less than 50% support because the army will immediately turn on him too.
Like I say, like most westerners you know very little about the people or the politics outside your own countries and especially of the thoughts of people in the middle east, so let it lie. I am a lot older than many of you, and I have lived and worked in several countries there for many years and have listened to and learned from the local people. Your standards are not theirs, and even if 40% of the population dissented it would still be an uprising against a lawful government.
I am informing you of what is true, not guesswork, and you don’t want to listen - that’s up to you. Go back into the internet and learn how Ghaddafi and the others (remember Hitler and Stalin too if you wish) came to power.
-
You probably didn’t see this, what with your aging eyes and all that. I understand that.
Give some sources to back your claims.
Right now, you’re really ranting like that old grandpa in the corner who seems to think he’s always right and sees through stuff everybody else does not. If you know something we don’t, good. Perhaps it might be a good thing to prove to us that what you’re saying is true and not just some numbers you’ve pulled out of your arse. I’ve looked for any information about Gaddaffi having support from the population and instead all I’ve found were reports on his brutal repression of opposition and numerous attempted coups. I’m sorry but if your 50% number is even remotely true, scoring that through nationwide scaremongering and downright assassinations means shit. Nobody will oppose you when they know they’ll get killed if they do.
-
Well there you go again FF, proving your own ignorance is supreme and will always remain so.
Find your own proof, I already know.
As for my arse - you are of the “new youth”, and have shown your disrepect for others too many times, cut this out or you will get my teeth in yours.
-
C’mon ST. Sounds like you’re quite happy for them all to just lie down and do nothing, accept that things are beyond their control.
These people are taking to the streets because they want to be heard, considering the risk to their lives I think they’re extremely brave.
I see no reason why they shouldn’t have the opportunity to express dislike of their government, they shouldn’t be suppressed for having an opinion.
Right here, in this thread, you’re voicing your opinion, at times it reads like you’re telling us how it is and that is that, so I suppose it comes as no surprise that you might expect people to just fall into line both here and over there. Nevertheless, it’s nice to be able to express that opinion wouldn’t you agree, and I might add nice for me to be able to express my own in return.
We take it for granted, they’ve got to fight for their right to be heard.
-
StarTrader wrote:
Well there you go again FF, proving your own ignorance is supreme and will always remain so.Find your own proof, I already know.
As for my arse - you are of the “new youth”, and have shown your disrepect for others too many times, cut this out or you will get my teeth in yours.
Um, really? He’s asking you to put your money where your mouth is, and you’re repeatedly on the defensive without backing up your claims. I’d like to see some real solid proof to your far reaching and borderline obsurd comments before I’d take what you say at all serious.
Until then, I’ll just take them as rants from a grumpy old rabbit.
-
Politics, always a sensitive issue. C’mon guys, go and make some mods and leave such discussions. No matter what you say here things wont change in the countries you speak of, the only things that will change are the relations between (some) of us and that can only affect us as a community. There really is no way for us to know what’s going on in another country … doesn’t matter if we watch the news every day, cause they don’t always show the truth and it doesn’t matter that someone has lived in a country in the past, unless you’ve actually spent your life in that particular country there is no way to know the situation there 100%. We can all say this and that but in the end, what’s the point, nothing that we say will have an impact on that country, so why argue about it.
I’m gonna go back now and do my 3D models thing, I suggest you go and do your thing also./Peace
-
ST, you really sound like a Truthist right now. It’s funny.
Yet at the same time, remember that you can be gwumpy and funny all you want, but there are borders not to cross. This isn’t your website. You play by our rules, and those include not making fancy menaces like you seem to do more and more. Take it down a notch or two, please, it’ll make for a more interesting and livelier discussion for everyone.
-
Actually, I’m perfectly ready to see what information he has on the subject. I dug and couldn’t find anything, hence why I asked in the first place. I got no answer, so I pressed, and apparently I got nothing more out of it.
If he has proof of his claims, I’m more than willing to look at them.
-
Sushi, Timmy -
Why do you think my comments far-fetched and borderline absurd? Have you read my post? I have lived and worked in several Arab countries, and socialised with local people in each of them. This gives me some information that I can repeat, it is what I have been told by them.
Have you?
Your opinions of min-skirted women is….??? Yeh, sexy - or maybe just ignore her, there are so many, after all. And a woman who prefers to cover her face or her hair with a shawl and wear a long dress? Oppressed? Odd?
Arab opinion of mini-skirted women is… prostitutes. Do you like this? I think not. But they don’t like women dressing this way and even in the fairly liberal UAE they have arrested and deported many for it. In Saudi they would not only arrest but stone to death any woman dressed that way.
My main original point was to not apply your thinking to the rest of the world, your thinking is good only for our own environment. And my second point is that every lawful government has a right to defend its sovereignty, as does any western government. You do not agree but every one of the affected governments is legitimate including Ghaddafi’s, Mubarrak’s, and the elected governments of Iraq and Iran too.
In the case of middle eastern royal families there is no challenge possible, the monarchs are the absolute rulers until they are deposed and this will not happen easily and not without great bloodshed, because even anti-monarchists in those countries will not easily raise weapons against their monarch.
Of course everyone can have his own opinion and there is also sadness that people everywhere can’t have their own opinion without danger.
FF has a habit of getting up my nose and I won’t take it. I don’t take kindly to being told by someone that only sees the end of his own nose and has not stepped out of white territory in his life that I am bringing things out of my arse.
As for proof, it is already in front of you - these people have accepted their leaders for many years, they welcomed them at the start, and they cheered them en mass, in Libya as recently as last year. How many dissenters did you see in the streets, compared to the entire population? And in Cuba, if Castro is so unpopular as many seem to think, where are the protesters on the streets now that he is on his deathbed and at his weakest ever? (I haven’t heard of his death, so I presume he is still hanging on poor guy. I actually liked him a lot when he was well.)
In the middle eastern royal states they have always respected their royal families, even in troubled Bahrain their target was the government, not the royal family. The ruler did dissolve the government, but he did not have to. He chose the best path to alleviate the problem. But the population already know that not much will change, the next government will be elected but will still present the same problems, and this really is the way things are.
Saudi has banned all protests on pain of death and they will keep that threat. So their streets are peaceful.
Suddenly in Libya because Ghaddafi initially did not respond antagonistically to the protests (have you forgotten that too?), but tried talking to them, the opponents were encouraged and suddenly were brandishing weapons and threatening. Then they took over entire districts, and an entire city by force. Proof? It was in the news, remember? But they are still not the majority. Why should Ghaddafi not take military action to restore government control and order to that city? Who fired the first shots? That is unclear and like so many similar situations will fade into history without real clarity.
How much do you all know about Lebanon? Put that comparison here if you think they have democracy. How many civil wars have they been through? And who is running Lebanon now? The strongest militia, not an elected government - tell me who it is?
In Egypt for example, where Mubarrak has been suffered but has been unpopular for many years, the population of Cairo alone is 14 million people. Did you know that? And did you know that around 0.2 million live permanently in the central cemetery? Will you ask me for proof for that too? You can find it yourselves easily.
And of those 14 million, how many were in the protests? Only a few hundred thousand, not even 1 million - not even 10% of the population of Cairo alone. The rest kept away, because many still support Mubarrak, and many others fear what is to come once he is gone, so they prefer to have the devil they know. But even though the majority would still prefer him to a troubled future, he gave in very easily. Watch what happens next.
In the case of Libya, even if the opponents reach 30% there will still be a majority support for Ghaddafi. Democracy is all about the majority will, no? So 50% is a majority and even 49% is still a minority. And in practice it does not need to be 50%, if 30% support him and 50% don’t know and keep quiet, then where is the power of the 20% opposition? Democracy will still support Ghaddafi.
I don’t support any particular government nor faction in any country, but I understand their point of view and I understand the right of any legitimate government to protect its sovereignty. Do you really believe that 20% or less of dissidents shows a popular hatred of government? Think again.
In ending, think of the real poor of these countries. Do you think they will ever see a better day through a change of government? No, they will still be as poor as they are today, and possibly poorer because the new governments will eat as much as they can while they can before thinking to show some kindness to the poor people.
Mubarrak was a friend of the USA, who paid him lots of money to keep up his forces - against who? Egypt has no enemies in the region, not even Iran. What will happen in the next “democratic government” if it is Islamic? Israel will lose a neutral, and Iran may gain an ally.
This is the way of the real world, not what you or I wish would be the way of the world. It is not about ordinary people. It is about power, no matter who is in charge, and corruption is found even in the most “respectable” countries.
Far fetched, and borderline absurd, eh?
In our own Western countries we have poor people who go hungry and have no home. In Saudi and Kuwait and Libya and Bahrain and the UAE, and in Oman (I don’t know about Yemen), there are no homeless people, and all have food to eat under their current governments. There are “democratic” countries where this is not the case despite “higher values” - the USA, the UK, France, India…
How about Canada?
Let’s change the subject to learn instead of continuing to heckle and badger and anger each other…
NexOse - please tell us about China, I really do have no idea other than what the press tells us and we know a lot of this is based on troubles.
