At MOHANADHASSAN….
-
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.
-
StarTrader wrote:
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.
What you want to know? If you want a intro… just search wiki…
-
Wikis and news don’t tell us about the feelings of the people.
You are a citizen, you can tell us the reality?
-
You’re such an ass sometimes ST.
-
Thought this was the right place for off-topic discussion?
Back to FL, no sense hanging around here.
-
It is the right place for off topic discussion, but sadly the way the thread went, “discussion” isn’t the correct term to be applied.
To be willing to discuss subject matter in a mature and sensible manner you need to be open, and transparent, to allow people to form opinions about your viewpoints which are based upon evidence.
Whether they reach a similar conclusion, or a different conclusion to your own opinion based upon the evidence is the thing that makes debating topics (politics especially) enjoyable.However, let me put this forward:
95% of Libyans hate Gaddaffi and wanted him gone - but were too scared to say anything!!
Would this be an acceptable point upon which to discuss the legitimacy of the Libyan uprising with yourself, and trusting it is entirely true, that therefore you should change your opinion? Or would you refute this claim as being false?
To be open to discussion and debate you have to be open to altering your opinion or expanding your knowledge in the face of evidence. If you are NOT open to altering opinion or expanding knowledge, then discussion is pointless… I don’t think anyone should change opinions when supposed “evidence” has no validity through references of legitimate sources (friends blogs are not legitimate!
).Discussions fail due to a lack of maturity, respect and transparency.
This post is probably highly patronising to most people, but I’d love to discuss subject matter as I often find people showing a perspective I had not considered, or things I had not noticed. However, it is nigh on impossible to do so on the internet without it descending into a farce. It is a shame, because if for no other reason, the internet should be the ideal location due to the easy and convenient access to supporting evidence!
BTW - last night I had a guest (friend of a friend staying at mine to catch an early train in the morning - so convenience stop-over). His knowledge of politics is much greater than mine, as is his observation (I don’t read papers, only online news sites). I did enjoy this from him, a quick thing that came up during a discussion - have you noticed how whenever anything bad is said, it is Vince Cable who is saying it? Liberal Democrats really should oppose this strategy more, as it is painting a picture in people’s minds
-
Chips, old pal…
My reaction was to FF telling me I’m blowing things out of my arse.
That approach is not conducive to a discussion.
I made my riposte so that he is clear on my next step should his bad attitude to me continue.
After his previous attack with regard to me defining the spec for Schmackbolzen’s sur converter saying it was only my spec and mine alone, intimating that it was therefore invalid, which I ignored (but did not forget, a croc never forgets), this was too much.
I am well open to debate but will not take this kind of attack without response. I don’t ask others for proof, this is childish and disrespectful, and I prefer to ask for more information and try to understand on what basis they make their comments and points of view.
Funny how people turned on me but not on FF, huh.
I don’t need defendants, I have the sentence construction skills to respond. FF called that “menaces”. Hmmm… And threatened that this is their website, like “beware or we’ll kick you off”. Big kids’ stuff, reminds me of my school days like “I’m going to get my big brother onto you!”. Without an audience (us lot) it would not matter whose website, there would be none.
Anyway, here’s more debate fodder for those still interested…
Libya is only one topic, my experience and knowledge is first hand in (I will now be specific for total clarity): Egypt, Lebanon, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Dubai, AbuDhabi, Greece, Cyprus. Going back more years: Germany , Holland, Belgium, France, Italy, USA. Oh - and Malta. And in Canada I discovered an unbelievable man-made problem in a fantastic country that should have no conflicts.
But let’s stick to the Arab countries. Who else here has lived and talked with those people and can cast fair and valid comment / assessment?
My qualification: I lived and worked among them for many years, with colleagues and with customer banks and ministries at up to director and AGM levels, some extremely rich and successful business owners, and I socialised with them, held discussions, learning from them about their politics, attitudes, and outlook. I’m not boasting. FF asked for my proof - I am giving my experiences and sources.
I enjoy listening and learning from people from other cultures. I take the English and American “news” and the views of the ordinary western public with a pinch of salt, it is often flavoured and biased when I compare it with my own knowledge where I have any. I never state “facts” on the affairs of countries I know nothing about. I have followed Ghaddafi since he came to power, he is not alone, he is well supported by many of his people - maybe they are all just as “mad” as he is or he would have been deposed long ago. I know he attacked Chad, Egypt, threatened everyone around him, sponsored terrorism. But he did control the Libyan tribes, by allowing them a certain level of self-rule. In return they did not turn against him - why would they? They were not afraid of him, they are powerful and fear no other tribe, and historically they warred on each other as well as on neighbouring countries. Today some of the Libyan population want him out. I do sympathise to a degree, and their reason is the same as our own discontent - the recession, not “long-term hatred of Ghaddafi” which is what the West (UK & US) are promoting. But many still do not. Saddam kept Iraq under control. Look where it is now. These countries are tribal and need strong leaders. If they have weak ones they will overthrow them and there will be more like todays’ Iraq, see Afghanistan.
But the view of the West is that every country should be friendly and a trade partner - my view: why should any country not be hostile to the West? The US is often hostile to its neighbours without provocation. What a model.
My point was that any lawful government (just as that of Libya is) has the right to defend itself, and no other country has the right to attempt to overthrow it. Even as recently as last year the actual majority of Libyans loved him because he got his Lockerbie bomber home. And despite his recent unpopularity he still has majority support, or his army would already have turned against him. If things deteriorate then his own army will turn on him unanimously if they blame him. This is obvious. How is that “blowing things out of my arse”?
The initially orderly dissidents in Libya were then armed by foreign countries (guess who?) and this has now led to a bloody civil war. My suspicions are that it is all about petroleum, as was Iraq and as was Kuwait, where the US got them to sign a 10-year agreement to sell as much oil as the US wanted for a fixed price of $7 per barrel, the extraction cost, as well as buying goods that had failed to sell in the USA like galvanised steel water pipes, Chevrolet Caprices, in return for the “Liberation of Kuwait”. When Kuwait refused to renew the contract at extraction prices on its expiry, the war on Iraq was waged, and 80% support was gained by frightening the gullible American public with threats of WMDs that did not exist. That did not work in the UK and Blair took England to war with only 20% support.
So - I am open to mature cordial debate, even heated debate, but not to comments about the verbosity of my posterior nor for demands for proof when proof is still all around - you can all research Ghaddafi, from the beginning - it was a bloodless coup, by a cadet officer aged 27. Indicating what? That one man all alone can control an entire country of many tribes already slightly hostile to each other, and unite them, when I am not able to gain control of this friendly website, even by threatening to bite FF’s backside? (Do you get my analogy)? Yeh I know I’m annoying him but I’ve still not insulted him.
NexOse - No, I don’t like your first choice of title, it is not sensible in English. Try again?
Why don’t you want to tell me / us about China, since I ask?
My reason is that I know little about China other than the “news” of troubles, which does not make the government look good, and that has already been changed to cover worse historical events that I saw on TV at the time it happened. Remember I am a lot older than most people here, and my memory is not in poor health just yet. Is there a possible problem to you if you answer, will you risk being arrested as a dissident? Or are you a supporter of your government?
Yes, I’m expecting another “Skip”.Have fun people. But keep it objective and let’s not get personal again, shall we.
And I will wear my heart on my sleeve - when I recover my usual cynical composure and huggable outlook I will go back to my Mad March Hare avatar so you will all know.
