Things I Don't Understand about Iraq
- Thread starter SamHouston
- Start date
Unregistered
Moderator
I agree with Glen and Alleykat also. The desire for liberty is not an innate quality. If it were, then a majority would never submit to the will of a minority. This is, however, in contrast to a right to liberty, which every person has.
Just because you have a right to liberty does not mean you have a desire for liberty. This is no different than any right.
Just because you have a right to liberty does not mean you have a desire for liberty. This is no different than any right.
Glenn E. Meyer
New member
TwoXForr - you can find a whole bunch of nutty things being said to be self-evident of the will of a Creator.
That the Founding Fathers said what they did is a product of their historical background and reasoning.
Me is eloquent becuz I goed to skool alot.
That the Founding Fathers said what they did is a product of their historical background and reasoning.
Me is eloquent becuz I goed to skool alot.
Yes. And right behind that desire is the desire to tell other people what the limits are on their freedoms and self determination. Always has been that way and always will be. That is why our nation has a COTUS designed to specifically limit what the gov't and the majority can do to the minority. That whole amendment and super majority thing you know...
The FF had a decidedly western point of view born out of "The Age of Enlightenment". The part of the world we are talking about now is as it was then, divided along tribal and religious faction lines. The concepts of self determination and liberty, equality for all men and more important, acceptance of the views of others, are not strong trends in that society.
Right now I think the factions in Iraq are more concerned about creating a nation where their group can dominate the other than in creating a nation where no group can dominate the other. The question is how long do we sit there holding them apart? They haven't figured it out in 800 years, why expect them to start now.
I still believe every human being has the desire, wherever it comes from, to determine the course of thier own life, I consider it human nature.
As to how much a person is willing to fight, or stand up for thier own rights well that is a product of their enviroment. And I believe that we humans can do terrible things in order to depress, supress, and oppress others, but I do not believe that spark to do what you want and how you want can ever go out short of breaking the mind in a million pieces and then stomping on it.
We may never agree, but I believe that a large part of history is the individual rebelling against the oppression of thier free will.
Now then wheather or not a individual will subordinate thier own desires for the betterment of a group (weather it be a family, clan, tribe or even the nation is another discussion all together.)
As to how much a person is willing to fight, or stand up for thier own rights well that is a product of their enviroment. And I believe that we humans can do terrible things in order to depress, supress, and oppress others, but I do not believe that spark to do what you want and how you want can ever go out short of breaking the mind in a million pieces and then stomping on it.
We may never agree, but I believe that a large part of history is the individual rebelling against the oppression of thier free will.
Now then wheather or not a individual will subordinate thier own desires for the betterment of a group (weather it be a family, clan, tribe or even the nation is another discussion all together.)
Unregistered said:
They are not submitting out of an innate desire to be ruled over and dictated to. They submit because they lack the means to resist.
Those means include:
education (the enlightnenment that Musketeer refers to),
capacity for organization (overcoming tribal divisions),
leadership, (ascendancy of the enlightened)
and the practical tools (weapons).
As long as the West indulges in the arrogant notion that the Arab world is too brutal to be aided, we will have the status quo: ruthless autocracies propped up by Western energy money, who redirect their peoples hatred toward America.
We now have a genuine opportunity to provide for self-determination and an entirely new era in the Middle East. The Bush Doctrine has been pathetically prosecuted at home, but if we see it through, it has the potential to rival the post-war democratizing of Europe and Japan.
We now have a genuine opportunity to provide for self-determination and an entirely new era in the Middle East. The Bush Doctrine has been pathetically prosecuted at home, but if we see it through, it has the potential to rival the post-war democratizing of Europe and Japan.
Every human has a survival instinct. Beyond that everything is learned. Some things such as the concepts of a right to life (not talking about abortion here), political self determination and free speech are so ingrained in our society we can't imagine their not being present everywhere. They are not.
I think it is important that we learn what we can about other cultures throughout history. There are plenty of examples where such concepts we consider as innate as being non-existent. Where we continue to flounder as a nation is when we mistakenly assume the value systems of other culures mirror our own.
What a pretty concept. I personally would love to see it. The problem is WE cannot force anyone to have a functional representative gov't where the rights of the minority are protected unless they choose to have it.
Part of their choosing to have it is their enforcing it. The Iraqis need to have their own troops enforcing the peace amongst their own citizens in a manner blind to ethnic, tribal and religious divisions. So I must ask, when is that supposed to happen? What is more why should we expect to have it happen if we continue to write a blank check with no limit to our efforts to prop up what they have?
I have gone back and forth on Iraq trying to arrive at the best solution given where we are now. Having all US troops jump on transports and leave in the next 30 days I do not think is the best solution. At the same continually telling the Iraqis "This time we mean it, you better get your act in gear!" while at the same time refusing to place any timetables upon them is folly. I cannot fathom why the same president who wants schools and teachers held accountable for results refuses to do the same when it comes to a foreign nation whose gov't we are propping up.
Give us a real goal. Not some fairytale about "Winning the War on Terrorism". That is right up their with "Defeating Communism," "Winning the War on Crime" or "Winning the War on Drugs."
Musketeer said:
How long? As McCain said, perhaps 100 years.
I believe the larger question is "what is it worth to the world, to provide the security (holding them apart) they need to establish democracy?"
Why not expect them to start now? If one believes that all people seek liberty, when is a better time?
If a school fails to meet benchmarks, it can be closed and the students sent to a school that meets those standards.
If meeting specific benchmarks a precondition to further US support, you give the adversary an incentive to queer additional progress. The more the adversary accomplishes, the less support US allies get.
You can't just shut Iraq down and send its people to other, more functional countries.
sw_florida
Moderator
The best way to deal with the fanatics is to isolate them, starve them. But as long as they have the oil money coming in they can buy explosives, etc. To make it near impossible for an Arab to enter the US would help alot.
Unregistered
Moderator
No means to resist? Surely you jest. We have been fighting the Iraqis for 5 years now, longer than we fought in WWII. We have 130,000 soldiers in Iraq, and need more. We have had 4,000 soldiers die.
I would say they are doing a pretty good job at resisting us, and if they can resist us, then resisting some 3rd world chump of an Ayatollah or Dictator should be easy.
Middle East Democracy
I had to laugh when I see all these posts about how arabs don't value freedom, democracy and don't understand "western" ways.
Here's a link that demonstrate how the rest of the world views "western" ways.
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html
Democracy in Iran destroyed by the US and Britain. If you don't like that link go google and find some more.
Of course, then there was Chile etc. etc. etc.
I had to laugh when I see all these posts about how arabs don't value freedom, democracy and don't understand "western" ways.
Here's a link that demonstrate how the rest of the world views "western" ways.
http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html
Democracy in Iran destroyed by the US and Britain. If you don't like that link go google and find some more.
Of course, then there was Chile etc. etc. etc.
To compare bringing Democracy to Japan with Iraq is a complete joke. As it is the democracy in Japan is dominated by the agendas of the Zaibatsu who really run the country. In addition the population of Japan was already cowed to obey the dictates of the Gov't in charge. All we did was change the gov't. It was already a society with a long history of blind conformance beaten into it. You did not have Shintoists blowing themselves up in markets full of Buddhists with a large group of people already opposed to the gov't. To top it all off you had the hereditary divine Emperor supporting the full conversion to a trading power.
Now compare that to the situation in Iraq.
I love the mantra of "We stay until it is done." It will never be done. Our sitting there is a huge invitation to those wishing to attack us. They are there because we are there. They were NOT there until we got there and by now that has been proven ad infinitum. I have no problem with the original goal. Iraq had failed repeatedly to live up to the cease fire agreement and did everything possible to give the impression of WMD programs which were at the least hidden away and in storage. Everyone, even Russia and France, agreed on that. Fine. We removed the old regime. We made certain there would be no WMDs in the foreseeable future.
At some point we decided to call this a War on Terror and that is where the lie has started as far as I am concerned. We are NOT going to get what we consider ideal in Iraq because the Iraqis cannot agree on what they want. This was supposed to be about WMD, well I don't see any threat of that in Iraq now so I say mission accomplished. We should do what is reasonable to establish a serious nation as we leave but leave we must. It is not our job to set up shop there indefinitely. At some point the Iraqis must run themselves. The "leaders" there though have no reason to accomplish squat as long as Uncle Sam and his Green Machine is there keeping them in power.
I say we set a timetable to draw things down and let the Iraqis know it is their job to run their country. If the UN, France, Germany, Russia, Saudi Arabia or anyone else wants to go in there and bring order then do so. Iraq is closer to all of them anyway.
I have to laugh that you think other cultures have the same concepts of morality and social order as we do.
Understanding the concepts of the COTUS is easy. Accepting them is something else and I have not seen any Middle Eastern nations lining up for that. Shall we hold all of them at gunpoint and force them to embrace our COTUS?