Sweeping Democracy in the Middle East?

Hold the phone, there. Isn't this the dictator we supported and allowed to stay in power? Funny how malleable our perceptions are. Once, the rhetoric went "he may be an SOB, but he's our SOB" and we gave him everything he needed to stay in power. Now it seems he is a power-hungry dictator that needs to be taken out now to ensure democracy in the middle east. When was the change, I wonder?
 
I learned today that one of the Egyptian protesters exclaimed: "Give me liberty or give me death." Very powerful words. There's no going back to the old regime. I only hope the Egyptian military makes the right and honorable decision tomorrow and over the weekend. We are witnessing history here.
 
Looks like Hosni was told by the military not to count on them to turn on their own people. He's likely on a plane right now to Switzerland. Wow.

Now comes the hard part. Does this mean peace in the Middle East, or bigger problems for us four years from now? Those entering the system now (either at an SA, ROTC, or other commissioning source) should have a clearer picture around graduation time.
 
The fact that this was a relatively peaceful revolution is encouraging, but power vacuums are always a bit dangerous.
 
I'm gonna make a bold prediction that the days of the totalitarian Iranian regime are numbered (not just in terms of their days in power, but on this Earth)

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/02/15/iran.protests/index.html?hpt=T2

This is Chapter 2 in this developing story, and the other authoritarian governments are surely watching how this will all play out in Iran. When they ultimately see the Iranian lawmakers strung from poles in the market square (or at least portions of them), it will inform other dictators around the world on how best to deal with their own civilian populations.

I wouldn't be surprised if the citizens of Venezuela (and our friend Hugo Chavez) are watching these unfolding events with great interest as well.
 
Last edited:
Am I alone in thinking that having new regimes in the Middle East increases the probability of conflict involving US troops in that region? Of course, things could go the other way.
 
The above report appears to be not accurate. But now this nut is accusing the United States Military of having fired on unarmed Libyan civilians and urging his people to rise up against the US!
 
BBC has this report- very interesting back ground on Gaddafi. His rant yesterday must have certainly been something to watch in Libya. Promising to be a martyr when it's your own population you are fighting against kind of changes the genrally accepted meaning of martyr. Angela Mirkel has it right when she said that he essentially "declared war on his own people".
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-12558066
 
I certainly hope that he doesn't do anything to interfere with efforts to repatriate our citizens and those of our allies. We've got to send the Marines in at that point, and things will really get messy. Next 24 hours will be important in this situation.
 
Okay, . . . so now it's Osama. If he starts blaming www.serviceacademyforums.com tomorrow, then I'll really be annoyed!! If the situation wasn't so horrible, I'd say this was actually funny. This guy is truly nuts!

[LIBYA, 9:54 a.m. ET, 4:54 p.m. local] Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi blamed unrest in his country on al Qaeda, saying the organization's leader, Osama bin Laden, is exploiting Libya's youth, which are told to attack after taking pills. "Our children have been manipulated by al Qaeda," he said. "Those exploiting the youth have to be arrested."

Bin Laden's followers are waging "jihad" on the Libyan town of Zawiya, Gadhafi said on state television Thursday. He appealed to mothers and fathers to go retrieve their children, arrest the al Qaeda conspirators and treat the children for the drugs they have been given.

He also mentioned the town of Zawiya, where at least seven people were killed in bloody clashes overnight. "We shouldn't leave Zawiya just like that without any control," Gadhafi said.

Gadhafi maintained that the Libyan people are in control of the country and denied that he has any power. "We have 3 million Libyans. They run the country," he said. "... I have only moral authority."
Click to expand...
 
Bullet and I were discussing this issue today... what will this mean for our troops? For troops around the world?

Let's be honest oil is an issue. The UK is hitting 9 bucks a gallon, and that is a common price in Europe.

Baghdad is showing signs of unrest.

People are fleeing countries, with unemployment in Europe matching ours if not more, they can't absorb this influx.

It is like a virus out of control. Part of me fears we might being seeing the beginnings of Gulf III.
 
Pima, I think it really depends on what kind of people inherit these countries. If a bunch of war-hawks take over, then there will be trouble. I really think we need to do another Marshall Plan, funded by Middle East oil, to get them on the right track.

I do think we dodged a bullet this week with getting our citizens out of Tripoli. If Gaddafi had tried to hold them hostage, it would have forced our hand. Looks like we got them all out safely!!

At the end of the day, I don't think we can afford another conflict right now. We have major issues to deal with at home.
 
I was somewhat surprised to learn, though, that we currently don't have a carrier group in the Mediterranean to deal with contingencies. :confused:
 
From an historical perspective, it is pretty interesting to see what is happening in real time in the Middle East. In particular, two major issues are game-changers for the future:

1. The UN took significant action yesterday, basically telling a sovereign head of state that he's got to go. http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/02/26/libya.un/index.html?hpt=T2 This will have a lasting impact on international relations and international law in the old "UN v. Nation State Sovereignty" debate. Some day, this will be used as precedent against other countries.

2. What we are seeing playing out in the Middle East is akin to the French Revolution, which subsequently prompted the fall of monarchies throughout Europe in the coming decades. Time will tell if we see another "Napolean" in that region. Certainly, our many of great, great grandchildren will find this just as boring as we sometimes did in having to learn about the French Revolution.

Maybe I'm just a closet history nerd, but I find this very interesting.
 
patentesq said:
From an historical perspective, it is pretty interesting to see what is happening in real time in the Middle East. In particular, two major issues are game-changers for the future:

1. The UN took significant action yesterday, basically telling a sovereign head of state that he's got to go. http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa/02/26/libya.un/index.html?hpt=T2 This will have a lasting impact on international relations and international law in the old "UN v. Nation State Sovereignty" debate. Some day, this will be used as precedent against other countries.

2. What we are seeing playing out in the Middle East is akin to the French Revolution, which subsequently prompted the fall of monarchies throughout Europe in the coming decades. Time will tell if we see another "Napolean" in that region. Certainly, our many of great, great grandchildren will find this just as boring as we sometimes did in having to learn about the French Revolution.

Maybe I'm just a closet history nerd, but I find this very interesting.
Click to expand...
Wish i thought that UN action had any force behind it- it does not and note they softened it to specifically exclude it being used as the pretext for any military action to be used there. Sanctions are business as usual and historically they have very little impact.
Just as likely to be another Robespierre. Note that Napoleon was no democrat- he was actually the precursor to the return of monarchies everywhere- he just changed monarchs and installed them himself in the countries he conquered. 1848 was also hailed as the death of monarchies- again a misreading of history- it was a broad but short term uprising followed by return to the throne virtually everywhere. It took World War 1 to really end the era of the princes- let's hope that's not what this is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top