I've come to believe that Bush's policy of Democratization in the Middle East is a farce and a lost cause. It began to unravel when I saw the Iraqis time and time again standing on the smoldering ruins of American machinery and lives screaming allah akbar and it came to a grand finale, in a political sense, when Hamas. a terrorist organization, was democratically elected in the Gaza strip. Add to that woeful outcome the election in Lebanon of Hezbollah, a terrorist organization responsible for the Marine barrack bombing in Beirut and countless other bloody attacks on Americans and Israelis spanning the last 3 decades. Now, as we watch revolution in Egypt I can only hope the dictator Mubarak holds onto power and keeps the Egyptian people from electing the Muslim Brotherhood. Arabs and Persians will vote for the most repugnant, anti West regime imaginable. Time to wrap our troops and bring em home. Secure our borders, drill wherever oil might be, create a crash program to convert all residential and commercial property to natural gas heat, and deny all Visas to anyone from the Middle East, including those who try sneaking through France, Britain, and Germany.
As a German born and raised I resent your statement.
I assume the Japanese would feel similarly that their post-war society has indeed brought good results.
(And a "nation of billions"? Really?)
Perhaps I spoke too soon. I know the Mid East is a giant mental institution and that we should probably wait for a while to see what shakes out, but the fall of Ghaddafi in Tripoli and the potential toppling of the Iranian Mullahs leads me to reconsider whether I should totally give up on Bush's policy. If Ghaddafi and the Iranian Mullahs fall and are replaced with pro western regimes, or at least non threatening ones, then kicking in Saddam's door and creating an example of democracy has been a good thing for the region and world.
Leaki, that is nice ... resent to your heart’s content (I am blond and blue eyed like most). I certainly meant nothing cryptic or accusatory or demeaning ... but it was nice of you to apply it to you and Japan. I Think there might be a few more examples to site first though, don't you?
If you had asked me about that reference, I could have told you I was doing a lot of research on India (population 1,028,610,328) instead in Egypt (population 76,699,427) but since you didn't ask ... I am not going to tell you. Try being nice as opposed to quick for a change and try not to be so easily offended. German, right.
Anthony;
Kicking down Saddam WAS a good thing even if not done for the right reasons (IMO). I think we SHOULD probably wait for a while to see what shakes out because it is just one of the most unstable areas on Earth. This is the hard part: “If Ghaddafi and the Iranian Mullahs fall and are replaced with pro-western regimes, or at least non-threatening ones” just contains too much speculation for me is all.
Leauki, that is nice ... resent to your heart’s content (I am blond and blue eyed like most). I certainly meant nothing cryptic or accusatory or demeaning ... but it was nice of you to apply it to you and Japan. I Think there might be a few more examples to site first though, don't you?
Actually these are the prime examples for imposing a belief system. So your point is that you make a claim but the most prominent examples that disprove the claim cannot be used because they disprove the claim?
If you had asked me about that reference, I could have told you I was doing a lot of research on India (population 1,028,610,328) instead in Egypt (population 76,699,427) but since you didn't ask ... I am not going to tell you.
So the "nation of billions who have lived for thousands of years under harsh totalitarian domination (last 30 years under an American subsidized dictator)" were the Indians? Thanks for clearing that up.
I can see how the Indians could be describes as a "nation of billions" (actually they are a nation of one billion), but I am looking for the dictator of the last 30 years... don't tell me it's Mubarak.
Try being nice as opposed to quick for a change and try not to be so easily offended. German, right.
Just try to do better research before you post, don't make claims that aren't true and don't confuse Arabs or Egyptians with Indians and we should be fine.
Leauki:
What I said
Leauki what you said
[quote]As a German born and raised I resent your statement. I assume the Japanese would feel similarly that their post-war society has indeed brought good results. (And a "nation of billions"? Really?)[/quote]
Leauki, not sure how you got here but it had nothing to do with communication (IMO).
[quote]Actually these are the prime examples for imposing a belief system. So your point is that you make a claim but the most prominent examples that disprove the claim cannot be used because they disprove the claim?[/quote]
[quote]So the "nation of billions who have lived for thousands of years under harsh totalitarian domination (last 30 years under an American subsidized dictator)" were the Indians? Thanks for clearing that up. I can see how the Indians could be describes as a "nation of billions" (actually they are a nation of one billion), but I am looking for the dictator of the last 30 years... don't tell me it's Mubarak.[/quote]
Now how you got from my first statement (you quoted it) and through my next statement (you quoted it) … and not at least come up with some of the mystifying answers that seem to be plaguing you? I am not responsible for your inability to organize your thoughts nor am I responsible for your inability to do anything besides fight. The only way you could not see the truth is that you do not want to … attack … attack … attack, go figure
And as a matter of fact, neither Germany nor Japan wanted our cozy form of government at all … it was forced on them by the winners (guess who) … gifted to them so to speak. I made no claims past that point because I have not researched it in this light … So don’t get mad any more … just get gone .. oops ,not my article sorry. Go find someone who actually wants to fight and then you can be happy too. You are too much, go figure.
So who are the "nation of billions"?
You got me there Leauke, I have done gone and confused myself so I guess you will just have to sharpen your mind and figure out all this confussion all on your own ... how cool is that, you amptly show what is so important to you ... I will try and use smaller numbers in the future
I don't know. Maybe you made a good point. I just didn't understand any of it. Why are you using words and terms that confuse you? How would I be able to figure out what you meant to say?
Let's make this simple: Do you or do you not believe that it is possible, with good results, to impose a belief system on another nation of any size?
If yes, why shouldn't we do it?
If no, what happened in Germany and Japan (and Iraq to a great extent)?
Much better! Certainly I do … we just never got to this point before is all? I am sorry if my language and highlights seem confusing, the words come naturally (mostly anyway) and the highlights allow me to emphasize things using fewer words is all. My source is only a normal dictionary which also provides much leeway (many definitions) and in the cases I have experienced, people are want to attack the words as opposed to clarifying them or concentrating on the theme. This (my problem) I am just not capable of doing well; branching astray I mean because I usually need to do more research first. When I run across a word that has particular significance for me, I check the list of synonyms to see if there is leeway I can accept or not. I also use this list to ensure that MY CHOICES are applicable to my article and point of view. I try to look at the thoughts rather than the specific words used because that takes me to an argument and I do not want to argue or fight with anyone … especially just about words? Words do seem to be causing much of our (America’s) troubles because we are arguing about the words while the real problems just keep festering. This IS the socialist way, not mine.
I try to look at the people involved not the governments (I have the same disdain for all of them) … so this allows me much more leeway. Any large group of people not prepared (emotionally and theologically) for our concept of a “democratic government”, will not have much of a chance of success IMO, and this will result in countless innocent deaths. Japan (I was concerned with more recent times) did not want what we left, but learned to use it and prosper from it in time (Germany too I suppose). Over there (somewhere), if Islam is not taken into consideration; well Islam and the democratic process are just diametrically opposed. It is strange to me that Our Government is trying to make good little socialist robots out of us … and is somehow promoting democracy elsewhere? This is hard for me to swallow … so I have to wonder what we are actually doing there. I just cannot chat (comfortable) in depth without research is all. I never said it couldn’t or hasn’t worked, only that the success rate is poor, IMO.
While it is a nit to pick, the reality of Egypt also is that it has not been under the dominion of the US for the past 30 years. Under Sadat and even Mubarrak, they were allied with the eastern block more than the US. Now if you want to count it since the fall of the USSR, that would be 20 years. But I still fail to see how recognizing a dictator is supporting them. I know many in the peanut gallery are going to cry fowl since that also destroys their argument for Iraq and Hussein as well. But then facts usually are not the strong point of those looking to trash the US for their own personal reasons, not for any object reasons.
I try to look at the people involved not the governments (I have the same disdain for all of them) … so this allows me much more leeway.
Congratulations. I am the people involved.
Two of my friends were beaten up by the police in Cairo during the protests. And I am sponsoring one of them's trip to Israel this year. You see, when it comes to Egypt and the people, not the governments, I am quite involved.
What do you want to talk about?
I guess I misspoke sorry (silly me), I must have meant to say all the people, except for you. Now take the chip off your shoulder, please? I do not really want to talk to you about anything until your sanity returns.
You mean when I stop questioning what you claim as facts?
No Leauki ... when you grow up.
AnthonyR
Lula posts:
Here's something that goes to the discussion........
An American-born Israeli author and political expert says Americans need to understand the distinction between "free elections" and "democracy" when watching the tumultuous mayhem in the Middle East.
Tunisia's interim president Fouad Mebazaa recently called for new legislative elections to be held July 24, the objective being to elect representatives for a constitutional assembly tasked with writing a new constitution. Tunisia was the first Islamic country where massive street rallies forced the ouster of a longtime ruler with the hope of a more democratic form of government. Media reports continue to portray the ongoing demonstrations in the Middle East as "pro-democracy protests." But Israel terrorism expert David Rubin contends democracy is not what this is all about. "Democracy -- that's an understanding that people in the United States have developed the past couple of hundred years. But the Islamic countries do not have that understanding at all," he explains. "They don't believe in those principles. What they are demonstrating for is free elections." Rubin notes that the result of "free elections" can turn out disastrous -- as in Gaza, where the Hamas terrorist organization took power. "...Then they seized complete power as a result of their militias and the terrorism," he continues. "And if you look to the north of Israel in Lebanon, you have the Hezbollah terrorist organization that recently has taken power through free elections." Rubin is concerned the same fate may await some of the countries currently being praised by the media for their "pro-democracy protests."
And here's a look at Egypt through an
From the point of view of the internal life of the country, we very much appreciate the work that is being done by the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces and the Transport Ministry, which are carrying things forward in this phase of change. Despite this, the delicate economic, administrative and social situation that the nation is going through is evident to everyone. Hence, we expect rapid change toward stability, work, productivity and security.
ZENIT: Are there ecclesiastical initiatives for greater awareness of the political and cultural role that Christians can have in Egypt?
Patriarch Naguib: Yes, there are many initiatives in many churches to increase cultural and political awareness in Christians in Egypt, and this is happening in all the churches and in parishes and institutions of the Church, in order to encourage Christians to develop their national role, for the good of our beloved nation. This was evidenced, both in the spirit that existed in collecting the electoral cards and in the active participation in the last referendum.
It is necessary to point out here that the Church does not engage in political work, being a religious institution. However, Christians, being also citizens, participate in social life and work with all others to build their country.
ZENIT: The Church, in all her confessions, has rejected the idea of Christian political parties. Can you explain why?
Patriarch Naguib: The Catholic Church does not promote the institution of parties with a religious base, but she calls Christians to participate in political life insofar as they are citizens. She invites them to enter politics on the basis of the principles and programs that guarantee human, moral and national values, the integral rights of man, among which must be pointed out religious liberty, namely liberty of worship and the right to be able to choose one's religion.
The institution of parties on a religious basis constitutes a confusion between what is religious and what is political, that is, between what is absolute and what is relative. This situation would help neither religion nor politics, because it would lead inevitably to the politicization of religion and to the religious instrumentalization of politics. What really matters is that every citizen, Christian and Muslim, positively comply with his duty with a national and free commitment, a commitment that comes from one's conscience and convictions for the common good.
ZENIT: Is there really a counter-revolution?
Patriarch Naguib: I cannot say with certainty that it is a counter-revolution. And I prefer to speak of the "movement of change," rather than "revolution." I believe, however, that every thought, every behavior and every act that contradicts the principles and objectives that caused the movement of change can be considered a counter-revolution, regardless of who initiates such behavior or thought. The movement of change was born for social justice, for liberty, for the elimination of corruption, and to institute a modern and democratic Egyptian state, for Egyptian national security, to reform education, the economy and the other sectors of the national life. Hence, every initiative that goes against these principles and values acts, in fact, against the movement and can be considered a counter-revolution.
ZENIT: The general guide of Muslim brothers has had a positive initiative, meeting with a group of Christian young people, as a sign of the unity of the country, and has responded to different questions posed by Christian young people with respect for the principles of the Muslim brothers. What do you think of this?
Patriarch Naguib: As a beginning, the Church receives warmly every opening to dialogue and to reciprocal respect, and she doesn't exclude anyone. Every man has the right to engage in dialogue with another, and he has the right to express his own opinion and to explain his own perspective. The Church is open to all the intellectual, political and social currents present in society. On one hand, she listens and, on the other, she looks at the works. Man is an enemy of what he does not know, and that is why it is essential to know one another mutually. We hope for a social dialogue that embraces all sides and political, cultural and social components in Egypt, to discuss together the questions of our society, to arrive at a better vision and more adequate style to work in the development and progress of our nation and to remodel Egypt on the basis of a correct democracy.
ZENIT: As a member of the Pontifical Council for Migrants and Travelers, do you support the transfer of peoples from one country to another in search of a better life?
Patriarch Naguib: The liberty to move in search of a better life is one of the rights of man; it is sanctioned and protected by international constitutions for the rights of man, and the Church accepts it without hesitation. However, the Church always wants to call the attention of her faithful to the need to study the reason for movement and migrations, to know the positive and negatives sides, so that immigrants are not surprised by difficult situations in the countries to which they emigrate and, being unprepared, find themselves in unenviable situations. The Church invites her children to think in-depth also on the meaning of their presence in their countries of origin, and the spiritual significance of persevering in their own countries, because it is better that they remain in their nations; it is better for them as well as for their nations.
ZENIT: Is there a plan for an official press conference that will clarify the Church's directives in this important phase of the history of Egypt?
Patriarch Naguib: The idea is good and can be considered. I think it is necessary to wait until the perspective is clarified on the present situation. We believe there are several realities that are still not clear. And the Church expresses her opinion through public statements, which are issued every now and then, when there is need.
We call attention above all to the fact that in this period it is necessary to prioritize national interests over private interests, and this is applicable to all the parties and all the political, cultural, social and religious orientations. Egypt is going though a very delicate period and exacts from every Egyptian who considers himself a genuine citizen that he put the common good in the first place, and that he think about how to look after Egypt and help it to come out of this situation of transition with its head high and stronger than before.
We must dedicate our attention to urgent and sensible questions such as the reform of education, the reform of the economy, Egypt's national security, Egypt's waters, Egypt's relations with Arab and non-Arab countries, its historic pioneer role and, culturally, care of the citizen who for a long time has sacrificed his freedom of expression, religion and of conscience, peace and tranquility for the future, health rights, the right to work and have a fitting life, the right to the future for persons and their children. All this should be on the agenda of every Egyptian and nationalist, no matter what party he belongs to, whether he is a Christian or a Muslim. Our national membership must precede any other membership in this phase, because Egypt needs her faithful children.
The problem with the official Christian leaders in the ME is that they pretty much ignore the plight of their people. They say what the regimes make them say and otherwise give in to Muslim radicals whenever they can.
I couldn't disagree with you more that the Catholic Church leaders are ignoring their plight...nor the plight of the others as well.
North African Bishops: War Solves Nothing
The Episcopal Conference of the North African Region (CERNA), which includes bishops from Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia and Libya, released a statement reaffirming the "urgent appeal to find an end to this painful conflict, just and dignified for all."
It noted the "processes of historical development concerning Arab countries and especially the Maghreb," namely, the violence that has recently sprung up in countries such as Yemen, Jordan, Egypt, Libya, Morocco, Syria and Bahrain.
The statement, signed by Archbishop Vincent Landel of Rabat and sent to Fides news agency, noted that at the basis of these events there is a "legitimate claim for freedom, justice and dignity, particularly by the younger generations."
It added, "This demand translates into a desire to be recognized as responsible citizens with the opportunity to find a job that allows them to live decently, excluding all forms of corruption and cronyism."
"Today this wind of change passes through Libya," the prelates affirmed. "And we especially unite with our brother bishops in Tripoli and Benghazi, and with all communities in the country."
They continued: "We know that war solves nothing, and when it breaks out, it is just as uncontrollable as the explosion of a nuclear reactor!
"The first victims are always the poorest and most disadvantaged."
"Moreover, whether we like it or not, the war in the Near East, and now in the Maghreb, will always be interpreted as 'a crusade,'" the bishops stated.
"This will have inevitable consequences on the friendly relations that Christians and Muslims have woven and continue to weave," they lamented.
The prelates concluded, "We pray to the Almighty to inspire the leaders of nations to find the path that leads to justice and peace."
Oh. They spoke up. Great. Now the problem is solved.
In the mean time Christians are executed in Iran, persecuted and murdered by Islamic terrorists in Iraq, and slaughtered in Sudan.
Good to know the Church is calling for an end to violence. Now everything will be good.
You claim the Christian leaders are ignoring the plight of the Christians and that very clearly is not the case.
Yes, they spoke up and what they say should be heeded.
Besides speaking up they also pray to Almighty God.
Speaking up is worth nothing. And even that they rarely do. They are afraid of the Muslims and lack the faith to speak up openly against them.
So says you!
Even though they are a minority and suffer religious discrimination and bloody violence seemingly growing by the day, the Church is not afraid of radical Muslims.
Sorry Lulu, I have to disagree here. The Church is afraid of everything that is not 'of the church'. Islam is a religion that is still capable and willing to actually defend its beliefs ... with their very lives. Do you have any idea at all how many Christians would disavow their God when faced with life or death ... not so with the Islamists? I like to call them ‘Sunday Christians’.
I know. Islam is spread by the sword...jihadic violence against unbelievers that is until Allah's religion prevails.
Actually the Church is far from being "afraid" of radical Muslims. It is actually out there publiclly denouncing Muslim violence and religious discrimination and the latest wars in Northern Africa and the Middle East.
Tripoli (Agenzia Fides) - “The violence and bloodbath must stop immediately, as war is not the solution to the current problems,” affirms a statement by the Ecumenical Council of Christian Churches in Tripoli (Libya) issued today, 13 April, to the United Nations Office in Tripoli and copied to Fides. The statement, in Arabic and English, was forwarded by Bishop Giovanni Innocenzo Martinelli, Apostolic Vicar of Tripoli. In the preamble it states: “As a community of believers we are greatly saddened by the tragic events that happened recently tearing apart this Country with prolonged agony and suffering, fears and anxieties of its people and we wish to express our solidarity.”The Christian Churches asks for “an immediate and unconditional ceasefire by all parties involved in the dispute and humanitarian assistance to... the victims.” It further states: “dialogue and reconciliation should be the way forward to find amicable solutions and bring about peace.” For this, the message continues, “we strongly support any efforts and initiatives of elders of this Country who know the genuine sentiments and aspirations of the Libyan people and of any international organisations, in creating an atmosphere of confidence to find a peaceful solutions.” The statement concludes saying that their “prayers will continue to be in solidarity with all the Libyan Muslims as they struggle to find peace and justice in this difficult time in the Country's history.” (L.M.) (Agenzia Fides 13/4/2011)
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account