The Struggle for Power in the Middle East
If you thought that Bush could actually bring democracy to the Middle East and therefore peace to a strife-torn area, I have a bridge in Brooklyn at a very low price just for you.
Okay that's tongue in cheek, but really the Middle East does not want democracy and certainly not the type of democracy that the United States has envisioned.
The type of government that people in the Middle East seem to embrace is modeled on their own tribal and personal relationship model that they embrace. Many in the Middle East look for a strong man to make the decisions and to shape the government. This is one reason why Saddam Hussein was even in power.
Just look around at the other countries there what kind of government model do they have? Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, Lebanon has a Parliament, but the government is constantly being challenged by well armed strong leader militants. Look at Iraq the militias are the real force in the state with Iran pulling the puppet strings. Then look at Iran, there is the Supreme Leader in charge even though they have a President. Again strong men, who the population wish have their best interest at heart, but are not representative of the real people in the country.
The entire culture of the region is built on strong personalities and men who have taken power. Democracy as we know it will never take root and never thrive in this type of cultural equation.
Okay that's tongue in cheek, but really the Middle East does not want democracy and certainly not the type of democracy that the United States has envisioned.
The type of government that people in the Middle East seem to embrace is modeled on their own tribal and personal relationship model that they embrace. Many in the Middle East look for a strong man to make the decisions and to shape the government. This is one reason why Saddam Hussein was even in power.
Just look around at the other countries there what kind of government model do they have? Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, Lebanon has a Parliament, but the government is constantly being challenged by well armed strong leader militants. Look at Iraq the militias are the real force in the state with Iran pulling the puppet strings. Then look at Iran, there is the Supreme Leader in charge even though they have a President. Again strong men, who the population wish have their best interest at heart, but are not representative of the real people in the country.
The entire culture of the region is built on strong personalities and men who have taken power. Democracy as we know it will never take root and never thrive in this type of cultural equation.
Labels: democracy
I agree with what you said. There is nothing that Bush will be able to do in Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, etc...I voted for Bush twice, but the chances of the US effecting positive change in that area is impossible. It is truly something better left to G-d. The arabs don't want peace, they want to kill Jews. They've made that clear. If they were truly interested in peace, they would've accepted what Ehud Barak was offering in the Wye Agreement at Camp David. Arafat wanted no part of it, so it became very clear that they choose bloodshed over peace. How do you negotiate with someone like that? You can't. You must fight fire with fire.
Posted by
Yehudi01 |
Sun Sep 30, 11:32:00 PM EDT
so called the choisen people jews why God punish U if are truthful but are human beings so jews israel should return all the lands U have stolen from arabs if U are seeking peace. peace wont come oppression while the oppression goes on in the eyes international community.
Posted by
Anonymous |
Wed Oct 31, 11:25:00 PM EDT
Israel is God's chosen people and as long as the US requires Israel to give up their land, judgment will fall. As long as all these other countries keep coming again Israel, they will fall. Read the Bible, it's all in there. Israel will win it all!!!
Posted by
Anonymous |
Sun Mar 02, 03:15:00 PM EST
No, it's not because of "strong personalities" in the Middle East. Or the culture. Or the religion. Go pick up a history book. Seriously, there has to be a Barnes&Noble nearby.
Iran *had* a democratically elected leader until the good ol' U S of A decided to listen to Churchill and overthrow that government. Enter the ruthless Shah, installed by the USA and UK.
Ottoman Turks were one of the most advanced leaders, rivaling Europe, and were finally overthrown by the Brits who sent tribal Arabs to fight them. Tribal Arabs from the Hijaz can't possibly be an archetype for the rest of the Middle East (which includes Iran, Turkey, Israel, etc).
In the Gaza Strip, Hamas was democratically elected. Whether you agree with it or not, that, my friend, is a willingness for referendum and a basis for democracy.
Many other Middle Eastern leaders have power, not because the people want them, but the history and geopolitics of the world has allowed these ruthless dictators to amass power over the common man and kill any who dare protest. You can fit Iraq, Syria, Libya, etc, here. These "leaders" aren't loved by their populations, but tolerated.
Cultural generalizations don't get any more idiotic than this. Remember, stop pushing the Q-Tip if it starts to hurt.
Posted by
MTHS |
Wed Jul 09, 10:25:00 PM EDT