Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

«‹›7 »

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Glad to see the new thread Lascicious SLoth, and that's a really impressive OP.

e: just a suggestion, but AJE has a spotlight on Tunisia and Algeria and a live blogs for Bahrain, Libya and Egypt. The Live blog for Egypt was espcially helpful in the Egypt thread.

Live Blogs:
Bahrain
Egypt
Libya

Spotlight on Algeria
Spotlight on Tunisia

Narmi fucked around with this message at 22:42 on Feb 17, 2011

# ¿ Feb 17, 2011 22:35

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 1, 2024 09:00

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Radio! posted:

Anyone else watch that interview with the UK advisor on Bahrain just now?

He was saying that the protesters are "malcontents" and a "vociferous minority" who want to change Bahrain away from being a tolerant nation and are basically ruining it for the rest of the Bahrainis.

Missed it, but you'd think that after backing the wrong horse last time they'd keep from betting on his brother now.

# ¿ Feb 17, 2011 23:19

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Regarding Bahrain, is the government still trying to place the blame on "violent protesters" for the more serious injuries and deaths? Nobody seems to be buying it.

quote:

12.45am New York Times columnist Nicolas Kristof, based in Manama, wrote:

quote:

As a reporter, you sometimes become numbed to sadness. But it is just plain heartbreaking to be in modern, moderate Bahrain today and watch as a critical American ally uses tanks, troops, guns and clubs to crush a peaceful democracy movement and then lie about it.

This kind of brutal repression is normally confined to remote and backward nations, but this is Bahrain! An international banking center. An important American naval base, home of the Fifth Fleet. A wealthy and well-educated nation with a large middle class and cosmopolitan values.

NYT source

# ¿ Feb 17, 2011 23:45

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Reason posted:

So here's a weird idea as far as the internet's and anonymous' role in these things. We know that governments spread misinformation when there is unrest to try and quell the uprisings, but how how effective would spreading counter-misinformation be? Stuff like claiming that a government is near the breaking point, or that military leadership is starting to have inner conflict. It seems that a group like Anonymous could find a way to spread information like this quickly and have it sound somewhat reliable. I feel like if it were an effective thing, it might give protesters in the areas more hope and cause them to continue fighting when they would otherwise give up.

Unless these thins are actually happening, I can see there being some serious blowback. If people get their hopes up that the government is going to step down and they don't that could seriously dicourage them.

But then again the same thing happened in Egypt and it just made people angrier, so who knows really.

# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 00:17

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

ChaosSamusX posted:

Um, did you just quote costofwar.com? Because they said the wars cost over 1 quadrillion dollars since 2001. There's no possible way that could be correct. So could someone qualify or clarify this figure?

EDIT: My bad, I thought that was 775 trillion, not 775 billion.

NY Times had the cost of Iraq at $1.2 trillion in 2007 and at $3 trillion as of September 2009.

I knew it was huge, but I'm having trouble wrapping my head around that number. There's just so many more things that could be done with that money that are a hundred times better than what it's being used for right now.

# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 04:59

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Toadofsky posted:

Is the goal with these protests specifically democracy or do they just want change in general?

I have a strange mix of happiness that people are protesting against their corrupt governments and sadness that people are dying. Some of these pictures are very disturbing.

They want both, but it's a bit more complex than that. Many protesters have specific demands that would have to be carried out for there to be a true democracy and change, and they're protesting to have all of these met.

From what I've seen, their primary goal is to remove the dictator/regime that is oppressing them. Following that, they have a list of demands, including fair representation in the government, free and fair elections, human rights, better working conditions, economic reforms, etc. So while they may only chant "down with X," that's more of a rallying cry/the thing at the top of their list.

For example, in Egypt they wanted Mubarak to step down and the government dissolved since they were all viewed as corrupt, though Mubarak was the one they focused on. However, they also wanted constitutional reforms since Mubarak had more or less bastardized the constitution to eliminate opposition and so he could stay in power. They also wanted the emergency law, which had been in place since Sadat was assassinated, lifted, as it gave the police pretty much unlimited powers (I believe another country, possibly Algeria, has a similar emergency law in place that the government has promised to lift following mass protests). Even after Mubarak left, some lots of people stayed in Tahrir square to make sure the military didn't pull a fast one on them. Also a lot of workers were/are on strike, demanding better working conditions and pay.

Narmi fucked around with this message at 07:28 on Feb 18, 2011

# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 07:23

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Wahat are the odds that the UN gets involved in Bahrain? Bahrain is a member state, and they've already condemned the violence against protesters, but I haven't heard of any action taken other than that.

# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 19:03

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

With regards to Saudi Arabia, I'm not surprised that they're taking a more aggressive stance in Bahrain. Remember, when Mubarak faced the possibility of losing that (roughly) $2b in US aid if he didn't step down or implement reforms, the Saudis pretty much said whatver happens, they'll support him and give him the money if the US pulls out. They even got a few other gulf states to pitch in.

Seeing how that didn't work, them being more proactive isn't surprising.

# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 21:24

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

DevNull posted:

The genocide of the Palestinian people is pretty atrocious. We just vetoed the resolution on condemning the settlements in the West Bank. gently caress you Obama.
http://www.undispatch.com/israel-security-council-bahrain

Reading this just made me angrier and angrier. The sheer hypocrisy and stupidity of that ambassador's statement sickens me. They reject the settlements in the strongest terms but won't call them illegal? They claim to have invested the most in Israeli-Palestinian peace, but have nothing to show for it and refuse to try anything new.

But hey, stay the course, right?

e: As far as UNSC vetoes, this graph (from wiki) shows just how much the fiver permanent members use it:

Click here for the full 787x369 image.

Since 2000 ther have been 15 vetoes between China, France, Britain, the US and Russia; the US was responsible for 10 of those, Russia 3 and China 2.

Narmi fucked around with this message at 23:38 on Feb 18, 2011

# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 23:32

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

That was absolutely horrifying to watch. I hope when this is over the rulers of Bahrain find themselves thrown in jail for th rest of their miserable lives.

# ¿ Feb 19, 2011 00:27

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Dudebro posted:

Are any major governments saying anything official about this? Most people are lurking because politics is confusing and frustrating. I am too, but I just wanted to ask about official statements.

Most goverments are wary of taking sides until everything is over. Ther are a lot of politics at play, which makes it really hard to stand up to the governments here. Hillary Clinton recently called a press conference denouncing the violence and saying the people had a right to protest peacefully, but reaffirming that the US supports the Bahrain government (but then again you can read this thread to see how much she believes that).

Dudebro posted:

Otherwise, it would just be, "Well, why isn't Obama saying anything when we're in Iraq and Afghanistan trying to spread democracy? These Bahraini people are trying to spread democracy and being murdered for it. Where's the support now?"

You have to realize that stability has always been prioritized above peace in these countries. In Egypt the US threw its support behind Mubarak, then Suleiman taking over (who was the CIA point man/torturer) until those scenarios became unrealistic. Also keep in mind that Bahrain serves as a base for the US 5th fleet, and Iran is right next door, so they have a vested interest in not shaking the boat too much there.

e:

Space Monster posted:

(I'm also one of those damned conservatives. Love this thread full of stereotyping hatred.)

Most people who bring up conservatives are more referring to the Glenn Beck/Fox news type, who act as though Middle-Easterners couldn't handle democracy without becoming the next Iran.

e2:

For the record, this sums up what the protesters in Egypt looked like:

Click here for the full 634x472 image.

(Christians formed a human barrier around the Muslims so they could pray peacefully, and the Muslims returned the favour during Mass.)

Narmi fucked around with this message at 02:18 on Feb 19, 2011

# ¿ Feb 19, 2011 02:05

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Young Freud posted:

What exactly would Bahrain do if we sided with the protesters? Kick us out?

My understanding was that the west supports these guys, and in return they suport the us, especially with regards to the wars going on. They've got a pretty good thing going on over there, and the would like to keep it that way. Siding with people who (in their eyes) want to tear them down from their ivory tower wouldn't endear them to us, that's for sure.

But actualy ramifications, that's something I can't expand too much on without knowing exactly how we benefit from having the current regimes in power. Just as an example, I know that in Egypt, the CIA used Suleiman to torture prisoners and kept Islamist movements down. That's probably going to end now.

Also pissing off the Saudis would for sure have consequences, which is what would happen should anyone side against Bahrain's government.

VVVVV You said it better that I could.

Narmi fucked around with this message at 02:37 on Feb 19, 2011

# ¿ Feb 19, 2011 02:30

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Can people please stop paying attention to BCR? He's either a troll or doesn't know what he's talking about. In either case arguing with him just further derails the thread.

Semi-related, US the went ahead and vetoed the UNSC resolution that would have called the settlements illegal. If anyone wants to see a US ambassdor flounder like a fish out of water, click here. Apparently the US vetoed the UN resolution (supported by all of the other 14 members of the UNSC) because it would lead to an increase in settlement activity and they're the ony ones who can broker a peace deal.

It's stuff like this that really lower the confidence people in he Middle-East have ith the US, and I can't blame them. In many Arab countries the US has lost its air of impartiality, and they see it as acting either in Isareli interests or its own. From what I've seen, this is why they don't want anyone in the west to "help" them et up transitional governments of in negotiations.

In any case, I would think that this would increase the amount of Palestinians protesting. They had a few hundred out yesterday, hopefully more will come out now.

# ¿ Feb 19, 2011 03:18

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

CNN posted an interesting article as to why Bahrain is important, and why some people might want to maintain the staus quo:

quote:

Washington (CNN) -- Bahrain -- a tiny group of islands where hot political rhetoric meets cold military reality.

As far as Washington is concerned, this small Persian Gulf kingdom may be where support for Middle East democracy dies. The loss of American military power that could accompany an overthrow of the regime of King Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa is incalculable.

Nestled between Saudi Arabia and Qatar, Bahrain is home to 1.2 million people. More importantly, it's home to the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet -- a vital instrument for the Pentagon in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Fighter jets from carriers in the fleet provide close air support for American troops in Afghanistan.

The fleet is also a potential bulwark against a future nuclear Iran, analysts note.

"It's our most important strategic asset in the Persian Gulf," said Michael Rubin, a former Bahrain resident and Middle East expert at the American Enterprise Institute.

[...]

Bahrain has been ruled by a Sunni Muslim royal family since the British left in 1971. Two-thirds of its population are Shiites. While the latest turmoil is largely a reaction to uprisings in Egypt, Tunisia, and elsewhere, younger Shiites have routinely led protests -- often violent -- to complain about discrimination, unemployment and corruption.

They also rioted when the Islamic Revolution toppled the Shah of Iran in 1979. Since then, every time Shiite protests have become too heated, the Sunni rulers of Saudi Arabia have quietly sent troops into the country, according to Rubin.

"On the one hand, Bahrain is a flash point between the United States and Iran," he told CNN. On the other, it's "a flash point between Saudi Arabia and Iran."

Bahrain was actually a Persian province through the 16th century. Iran claimed the territory when the Britain left, but the Bahrainis opted for independence.

"Bahrain is Iran's Kuwait," Rubin said, referencing former Iraqi strongman Saddam Hussein's insistence that Kuwait was rightfully an Iraqi province.

If Bahrain's government falls, "there is no question -- no ifs, ands or buts -- Bahrain would become an Iranian satellite, and the Fifth Fleet would be sent packing," Rubin predicted.

The Obama administration is "not being too vocal on the riots in Bahrain because it's pretty much the one country where we can't afford regime change," he said.

Could U.S. officials find a new naval home in the Gulf? Possibly Qatar or the United Arab Emirates, Rubin said, but "if there's a sense that the dominoes are falling and the United States is the big loser, then all the regional states are going to make their accommodation with Iran whether they like us or not."

The stakes could not be higher.

source

For people who want a bit more background on the protest in the Middle East/N. Africa, CNN also has an interactive mapr/short summary for each country:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/02/18/mideast.africa.unrest/index.html

# ¿ Feb 19, 2011 03:30

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

An article on the civilian massacre:

Click here for the full 667x500 image.

quote:

"We decided to walk to the hospital because we knew there was a demonstration. Some of us were carrying tree branches as a token of peace which we wanted to give to the soldiers near the square, and we were shouting 'peace, peace. There was no provocation � nothing against the government. Then suddenly the soldiers started shooting. One was firing a machine gun from the top of a personnel carrier. There were police but they just left as the soldiers shot at us. But you know, the people in Bahrain have changed. They didn't want to run away. They faced the bullets with their bodies."

With regards to the Saudis,

quote:

Why has the royal family of Bahrain allowed its soldiers to open fire at peaceful demonstrators? To turn on Bahraini civilians with live fire within 24 hours of the earlier killings seems like an act of lunacy.

But the heavy hand of Saudi Arabia may not be far away. The Saudis are fearful that the demonstrations in Manama and the towns of Bahrain will light equally provocative fires in the east of their kingdom, where a substantial Shia minority lives around Dhahran and other towns close to the Kuwaiti border. Their desire to see the Shia of Bahrain crushed as quickly as possible was made very clear at Thursday's Gulf summit here, with all the sheikhs and princes agreeing that there would be no Egyptian-style revolution in a kingdom which has a Shia majority of perhaps 70 per cent and a small Sunni minority which includes the royal family.

source

The article also mentions how the government/royal family is getting Sunnis from around the region to come in and hold pro-government rallies. They even had a truck with the logo of the interior ministry handing out bottles of water. I know it's been said before, but they really are using the same playbook as Mubarak to deal with the protesters, except that the army is taking side here.

# ¿ Feb 19, 2011 11:30

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Apology posted:

Unfortunately most of the news about Algeria is in Arabic, so this terse little note is the best I can provide.

There's a website called Algeria-Watch that seems pretty useful. There's been a ton of articles posted recently in the French section, but the English one seems to have been largely ignored for the past few days unfortunately.

e: Apparently there's an Algerian group called Mothers of the "Disappeared" :smith:

Narmi fucked around with this message at 19:46 on Feb 19, 2011

# ¿ Feb 19, 2011 19:39

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Slantedfloors posted:

I can't really see the outcome of the African mercenaries in Libya as something other than it massively loving backfiring and polarizing all dissent in the country against the Ghadaffi regime.

If the videos are to be believed, the mercenaries are already getting killed and I can't see them sticking around too long once people start fighting back.

There was a Lybian writer interviewed who claimed that the mercenaries that had been captured said that they had been promised $30,000 dollars each, so I doubt there's a shortage of thugs they can hire.

Apology posted:

There's talk of fundamentalist Islamic violence to come in Indonesia next week:

They can't have an Egyptian-style revolution like they're calling for, though. For one thing, they're not peacefully protesting for more freedom and for democracy, they're rioting for less freedom and for oppression of a minority group. I think this is more of a pogrom than a protest. It's an example of what the right-wingers in the US have been crapping their pants about for the past month: Radical Muslims taking advantage of the situation in order to wrest control away from a mostly secular democratic government and replace it with a fundamentalist Islamic government. Who wants to bet that nobody in the US gives a poo poo about fundamentalist Islam taking over in Indonesia since they don't export oil any more or have any US military bases, though?

I'm not going to add Indonesia to the list. This is not the same type of revolution or protest at all.

Those guys didn't get the message of the protesters in Egypt at all. Hopefully it dies out really quickly, though I'm worried that they might actually have the numbers to pull something off.

Narmi fucked around with this message at 04:16 on Feb 20, 2011

# ¿ Feb 20, 2011 04:12

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

ganglysumbia posted:

Libya is out of control, flat out massacres...

I thought the Libyan military was not very loyal to Gaddafi. Why is a Egypt type scenario not playing out with the Army preventing a slaughter?

In Egypt the army was involved in so many businesses that the people were literally their customers, and opening fire on them would have been bad for business.

e:
Also conscription in Egypt made it so the army had more loyalty to the people than the government.

e2:
Looking on wiki apparently the army has 18 months conscription, which makes my above point kind of moot. Not sure why they'd let this happen, unless their commanders told them to just let it go.

Narmi fucked around with this message at 16:41 on Feb 20, 2011

# ¿ Feb 20, 2011 16:33

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Interesting that they've starting calling protesters rebels now. I guess it's impossible to pretend it isn't a civil war at this point, especially if it's true that people are signing up to fight Gadhafi.

# ¿ Feb 23, 2011 19:01

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Apology posted:

And reports that Aisha is furiously backpedalling:

Honestly, if Aisha crashed and burned in the desert, she'd probably have been better off, because her Dad is going to be so pissed...

Okay, now it's time for me to take a break and feed my fat 1st world face while the less fortunate folks in the Middle East and Africa starve again. Tonight I'm having a giant heap of brussels sprouts as the only course, so I'm sure that most of them would prefer to continue to starve rather than join me.

Not that I'm a fan of here or anything (didn't even know about her until a few days ago), but being part of Saddam's defence actualy seems kind of brave given that they targeted just for doing their job, however distasteful it might be. It could just be that she believes everyone deserves a fair trial, not that she considered him a hero or anything. But then again, like I said, I know nothing about her so this is purely playing devil's advocate.

Her brothers are nuts though, kinda wondering what they're up to these days since I haven't heard of them trying to leave.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 03:04

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

This popped up on NPR:

Provisional Government Forming In Eastern Libya

quote:

As forces loyal to Libyan President Moammar Gadhafi reportedly held on to control of the capital city Tripoli and continued a crackdown on protesters Wednesday, the eastern part of the country was in the hands of the rebels � who are now trying to organize themselves.

In eastern Libya, in the city of Bayda, a provisional government was being formed. The new leadership also is holding some Gadhafi loyalists hostage.

As the first Western journalists many of the residents of Bayda had ever seen were led into the meeting, the crowd gave a standing ovation � quickly followed by cries of "Freedom, Freedom!" and "Libya, Libya!"

This building had been a symbol of Gadhafi's regime � where his revolutionary council would meet to discuss local affairs.

A new revolution was finding its voice in Bayda, and its fighters were vowing to end Gadhafi's reign. Some people were crying, others pumping their fists in the air.

"Ordinary people, doctors, lawyers are talking about how we can coordinate with all other cities in Libya who are now under the protesters' control," says Ahmed Jibril, a former diplomat at the Libyan mission at the United Nations.

He says this is the beginning of a new government.

"We have a former minister of justice who just resigned three or four days ago," Jibril says. "He's among us and people agreed ... he would be one of the people in control."

In eastern Libya, it's still chaotic. On the streets, heavily armed and masked young men man checkpoints. There are tanks and anti-aircraft guns that have been looted from military bases positioned around towns and cities � and they are all in the hands of the rebel forces.

Jibril says that eastern Libya will defend itself, but they want a united country. "We will not divide Libya. We will not accept a division of Libya," he says.

Libya is a country of huge oil wealth, but also great poverty. Abdullah Mortady, an architect who hasn't built anything for 15 years, says the people here want to use Libya's riches for the people, not just for the enrichment of one family.

"We want to build our country," he says. "Infrastructure is nothing. Building is nothing. Our morality is completely destroyed. Today I can't speak because for 42 years we didn't speak, even our voice completely disappeared."

The new leadership is asserting itself. An elementary school has been converted into a prison, where around 100 pro-Gadhafi fighters are being kept in detention. They are what remains of a group of fighters who had holed up at a nearby airport and then were forced to surrender after a bloody battle that left a dozen people dead on Tuesday.

Many of the men are wounded, but they've been given blankets and medical attention. They are clearly scared. Most of the men say they are Libyans from the south. Among them are four men from Chad who look weak and malnourished. They declined to talk.

There have been rumors of foreign mercenaries being shipped in by the planeload to fight for Gadhafi in the east, but there is scant evidence of them here.

A Libyan soldier in detention, Ismael Salem Abu Salah, acknowledges that he was sent in to quell the initial unrest. He says he was fired upon first by the pro-democracy forces and that is why the troops fired back.

He adds that he's been treated well since he's been in detention.

The fate of these men is unclear. There is no court to try them and many in the city have been calling for their execution, especially among the younger men.

The older generation, which is now trying to form a government, is ensuring they are protected.

"The leaders, the wise people ... they had a meeting and they said they should stop these youth from, you know, from revenge, you know, because some of the youth have two or three brothers killed from the same family," says Dr. Masoud Abdullah, a professor of management science. "I was there in that meeting. It all comes down to the older generation who stopped the youth from taking revenge and ... killing them."

But he adds that they haven't been released yet because "the uprising hasn't finished. We don't know what will happen to this area. They might stop electricity; they might stop sending gas here, milk, food. We don't know."

They will use them as a way to negotiate with the regime, he says, if it should come to that.

Good on them for treating the captured forces as actual humans, especially considering the Gaddafi would have no qualms about having anyone he captured shot in the head. Hopefully they're able to form an actual government and unify the country soon.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 10:58

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Great White Hope posted:

Double Edit: Re-posted

Anyone know what the different colours mean?

# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 11:13

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

The Atlantic has posted a collection of pictures from Libya and Bahrain (Libya's collection was posted yesterday and Bahrain's is from a week ago, but I don't recall seeing it posted):

Libya
Bahrain

Default resolution is 1024px, but you can change it to 1280 by clicking the radio button above the first picture, or click the little enlarge icon underneath a picture to view that specific one.

They also have two collections from Egypt from Jan 28 and Feb 10/11 that some people probably haven't seen.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 12:19

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Slave posted:

If the UN get him then he will die of a heart attack in a cell in The Hague long before he is convicted of anything, which is quite sad.

The same thing happened to Slobodan Milo�ević. In fact, I think his supporters argued that since he hadn't technically been found guilty (for sue he would have been convicted, that must mean he was innocent. And it was a shame that his victims were robbed of the chance to see him found responsible for his crimes.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 20:27

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

THE HORSES rear end posted:

Once Gaddafi is gone, I wonder what the effect will be on Iran. The Green movement was an incredibly brave and and righteous cause, but the Libyan uprising makes the Green movement look tame by comparison. The Libyans will have demonstrated that even brutal crackdowns aren't always sufficient to stop an uprising. The Iranian youth might be forced to ask themselves how much they really want freedom, and just how much they are willing to risk.

On a related note, back in 2009, a few days before Ahmadinejad's "fake but accurate" election that inspired the original Iranian uprising, a friend of mine in Iran sent me a video with her name attached to a pro-democracy message and requested that I upload it.

A few days ago I received a message from someone in Iran saying that "she discovered her name in an internet search next to the video, and that she was really scared for her life because she didn't make the video but shared the same exact name of someone who did." She requested I change the name, which I immediately did. I tried to contact this person, but her channel was deleted.

I recently found out my Iranian friend has two facebook accounts - one for personnal used, the other on which he supports pro-democracy/protest groups. The second one uses his first name and "Green [omega symbol]" as a last name, to make it harder for them to identify him. The lengths that they go to to avoid being identified as protesters online is surprising to say the least.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 21:55

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Fluffy Bunnies posted:

Unrealistic or not, if the Saudis rise, that's pretty much the entire mid-east toppling point, isn't it?

Yeah, but they're being pretty smart about this (pumping money into the economy, driving down prices), so I doubt that's going to happen because of this.

If it does though, that'd be huge.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 23:05

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Patter Song posted:

I will admit to being disappointed about the lack of a rising in Syria (which I would've personally thought far more unstable than Libya).

I remember hearing about some small protests that got quickly dispersed in Syria. I think it nerver really caught on because even though Syria is ruled by a dictator, most people view him as a good dictator, who share their views and concerns.

# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 23:11

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Uglycat posted:

Honestly, I think that rhetoric - as ridiculous as it is - is far better than the 'radical Islam' fear-mongering I hear from the right-wing. I'd rather they get on board with the optimistic, positive narrative (in a self-serving, historically ignorant fashion) than actively work to undermine that (possible) outcome.

A world where stable, sound, secular democracy takes hold in the middle east; where the Right falsely claims "credit" for that outcome; and where the Left insists that the people on the ground who overthrew their oppressors (while utilizing a variety of intelligent methods including but not by any means limited to new communications technologies) - is preferable, to me, to a world where the Right works to erode support for and confidence in the possibility of a peaceful, prosperous future.

I'd have to disagree with you there. The thing is that democracy in the Middle-East is being achieved in spite of the right's (or the left's, since it seems like everyone supported "progressive" Ghaddafi) efforts, not because of it, and believing it's because of them justifies (to them at least) their actions, as well as any further actions which might destabilize the region because they were "right" this time.

For example, in the article quoted, the author uses Libya as an example as to why Bush was justified in his invasion of Iraq, going as far as to say this is what GWB envisioned, when the lack of WMDs here is a by-product, not a direct consequence, of the invasion of Iraq.

# ¿ Feb 25, 2011 01:56

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Vladimir Putin posted:

How do events in Libya contribute to the theory that the US unpopular regimes that that eventually draw the ire of their people? Libya wasn't propped up by the US, in fact the US would like to see nothing more than Gadaffi to die.

To me it means that dictators will sprout up no matter what, and US support doesn't mean all that much in the end in terms of generating tyranical assholes.

I might be misunderstanding you, but you're saying that Libya's case negates the theory that the US is solely responsible for supporting dictators? Except that people aren't saying the US is/was solely responsible for all the dictators out there, just that they DID support some, and that these are backfiring spectacularly. Anyways, I don't think I've seen anyone specifically say that the US supported Ghadaffi in the first place. He was, however, supported by England, Italy, and a bunch of other Euoprean countries that are backpedalling as fast as they can to distance themselves from him.

The theory that you are referring to basically states that a dictatorship is unsubstainalbe and tends to implode due to the very things that makes a dictator a dictator. Supporting the dictator, while at first beneficial, then becomes an embarassement, like with Egypt/Iran and the US or Italy and Libya.

# ¿ Feb 25, 2011 02:37

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Life has some pretty interesting pictures/info related to Ghaddafi for anyone interested:

Gaddafi's Craziest Quotes

Gaddafi: The Last Supervillain?

When Gaddafi Was Cute

He's also featured here: The World's Worst Dictators (no idea if it's in any particular order or just random).

# ¿ Feb 25, 2011 03:02

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Jack Napier posted:

Asianews.it (reliable?) is saying that North Korea is having a few protests, the first in Kim's history, due to the food shortage :x

http://www.asianews.it.nyud.net/news-en/First-public-protests-against-the-Kims%E2%80%99-regime-20861.html

So, uh. Yeah?

Sounds more like a story the South made up to take advantage of the Middle-East protests. While it is possible (though higly, highly, unlikely), that the people might protest in some form, a lot of the story doesn't add up with the nature of the North Koreans, who venerate their dear leader god-like.

# ¿ Feb 25, 2011 03:48

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

I remember seeing a piece on the news awhile ago that showed how NK intelligence officers in charge of monitoring the south tended to defect once they learned just how bad their lives were. They even tried to join the south's army, but weren't allowed, and ended up forming their own little militia, ready to make war with their former home.

# ¿ Feb 25, 2011 04:09

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

EskimoFreeState posted:

Weird question, but how can you really have covert cell phones without (somehow) covert cell towers? Are they actually satellite phones, or are they piggybacking off of some other kind of tower (military, etc.)?

quote:

Bloomberg Businessweek has a story on the Chinese cell phones in use in North Korea along the border region. It estimates around 1,000 people use such phones to keep in touch with relatives and associates in China, South Korea and elsewhere. Because the cell phones connect to Chinese cell phone towers it�s difficult for the North Korean government to eavesdrop on the calls, but it does mean use is restricted to the border area.

source

e: The original story has more info:

quote:

As many as 1,000 North Koreans use handsets that connect to Chinese networks to tell people in the South about subjects ranging from food shortages to leader Kim Jong Il�s health, said Ha Tae Keung, a South Korean who runs a Seoul-based radio station that broadcasts daily to the North.

Ha�s Open Radio for North Korea is one of several groups gathering information from people on phones that only work near the 1,400-kilometer (870-mile) border with China. The risks are absolute: One caller was executed, Ha�s employees heard, leading Open Radio to curb contact with informants.

[...]

The man said to have been executed, in his 40s, was shot in public in January in Hamhung, the country�s second-biggest city, Open Radio said March 4, citing a police officer in the North it didn�t identify. The victim had a Chinese cell phone and had confessed to giving details on rice prices and living conditions to a South Korean defector, the report said.

[...]

More than 10 North Korean informants for Open Radio use phones with pre-paid SIM cards bought in China that work as far as 10 kilometers across the border, Ha said. Pre-paid cards accounted for 82 percent of all users at Beijing-based China Mobile Ltd., that country�s biggest operator, in 2007.

Illegal phones started appearing as early as 2000, when defectors living in China and South Korea had them smuggled across the border to relatives, said Sohn Kwang Joo, chief editor at Seoul-based Daily NK.

�Cell phones are the most powerful and surest way to change the North Korean regime,� said Sohn, whose newspaper was the first to report on North Korea�s bungled currency revaluation last year. �A regime change is inevitable and it may come a lot faster than we expect.�

The government in December knocked two zeros off the currency, wiping out savings derived from the black market. The move backfired when food prices soared, sparking sporadic protests, according to Daily NK and Open Radio. The government executed a senior official, Pak Nam Gi, in February for �intentionally harming the country�s economy,� South Korea�s Yonhap News agency said.

�What the regime is worried about is the North Korean people�s growing awareness that the South Korean people are not only richer but that they also do not want to live under Kim Jong Il,� said Brian Myers, professor of international studies at Dongseo University in Busan, South Korea. �You raise in the minds of the North Korean people: �Why don�t we just live under South Korean rule?��

source

e2: So according to the above article, there actually were protests. Doesn't say what came of it (probably nothing good though).

Narmi fucked around with this message at 05:59 on Feb 25, 2011

# ¿ Feb 25, 2011 05:54

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Patter Song posted:

That is a gross exaggeration and twisting of the facts of what 1950s Iran was like.

I think he means it was a newly formed democracy that showed promise, especially with regards to raising the standard of living once they nationalized their oil. But the embargo by the US/UK was pretty bad for them and negated that.

Samurai Sanders posted:

Would it be an exaggeration to say that the 50-70s in Iran were better than now, and that the CIA engineered the transition between then and now?

Don't know about being better, since they basically traded the Shah for the Ayatollah. The Shah was pretty brutal, crushing any opposition and using SAVAK to keep the people in line, and keeping them pretty poor. Under the Ayatollah Iran became a pariah, and the Revolutionary Guard isn't looked upon very fondly. Their economy isn't doing to well either.

In the end, I guess they traded some liberties for others, but whether you lived under the Shah or the Ayatollah you were kinda screwed. At least under Mossadegh they had a chance of deciding their own fate and creating a better life. And they didn't risk being jailed for voicing opposition either.

Narmi fucked around with this message at 08:26 on Feb 25, 2011

# ¿ Feb 25, 2011 08:08

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Crowley posted:

unless he's willing to use air strikes. I imagine the rebels doesn't have all that much AA present, or know how to use it in any case.

Does he even have an air force left to carry out air strikes? It seems like whenever a Libyan gets in a plane they end up defecting or ejecting.

e: On a lighter note,

Click here for the full 634x720 image.

Osama in your Nescafe, huh?

Narmi fucked around with this message at 15:58 on Feb 25, 2011

# ¿ Feb 25, 2011 15:56

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

I'm honnestly surprised the military is resorting to violence. I mean, despite that promise that noone from the military would run for president I figured they'd try and slip a guy in they could control, but they seemed to realize that they had to work with the people, not against them.

Also, won't further unrest hurt their businesses? For weeks they've been saying people need to get back to work and start rebuilding the coutry, but now the exact opposite is going to happen.

# ¿ Feb 26, 2011 01:39

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

jsk070 posted:

Don't get me wrong. I'm all for the people in the Middle-East having their freedom. Some of these dictators are just brutal. I don't want to be cynical; however, I can't see how any of these revolutions will end well.

Egypt won it's freedom; however, now the infighting starts. No one is going to be pleased with any of the decisions from here on out. Some of the citizens really are calling for an overhaul of their government...but that takes AGES, and of course, people will be fighting about what will be put in place.

The U.S. constitution wasn't drawn up in a day or two. It took a good long time and in addition, it was drawn up back in the 1700's. Back then, media, knowledge, standard of living, and differing opinions weren't prevalent like the 21st century revolutions.

The standard for revolution is now different. Egypt sacks it's members, and puts new people in. The revolutionaries aren't happy and stay in the square. It's just a cycle that won't end well. The people rioting have pretty given up everything for this cause, but without a unifying voice or politics, no one will agree with anything. I understand there will be elections, but still, I don't think people will be happy and they will STILL stay in the square.

The country has got to get back on its feet, but with everything in disarray...it may be a long time before anything happens. People are just in a mob mentality, fought for their revolution, and now await their handouts. When I look at images of all the protesters, I feel happy for them, but now what. I just see a sea of people requesting change and handouts. Bad news, it's going to be a long process, and in this 21st century where everything is instant gratification, I can't see it ending well.

Couple of points:

What infighting has started? From what I've seen, Egyptians are still united in their demands. There's a people who accept the military s their new rulers, and those that don't, but they aren't fighting/counter-protesting on the streets (or at least, not yet they aren't). Unless you mean they're protesting against the military now, which isn't infighting at all.
A complete overhaul of the government would not necessarily take ages. Egypt has a few opposition parties/institutions that could step in to fill the void, and elections were supposed to be held in a few months.
The constitution would also not necessarily take a long time since they aren't exactly starting from scratch. They could revert back to the old/original constitution (before Mubarak started playing around with it), and work from there. From What I understand, it was actually quite decent, and could lay a lot of the groundwork for a new one.
The military did sack the parliament, but then put some of the old (and hated) people back in power. Hopefully you can see why the people might not excatly like that.
What exactly fo you mean when you say they're expecting "handouts?" It almost sounds like you mean they expect to be automatically paid for protesting. Short of trying to seize the assets of some of the crooks of the old regime, they haven't been demanding money from the government to go away.

It's also worth pointing out that quite a lot of the people's demands have been put off to a later date, and with crackdowns like the one today these promises of reforms are losing credibility. They still have the emergency law in effect, they're still under curfew, the military sill hasn't handed over power to a civilian government (or at least, not as far as I know).

The people weren't just demanding Mubarak step down, they had a whole list of demands, and while I doubt they expected then to be implemented immediately, I can understand how, jaded as they are, they would expect to see something actually being done.

# ¿ Feb 26, 2011 02:11

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

jsk070 posted:

Hmm, thanks for enlightening me on some of my cynical points. I used the word infighting for future compromises regarding the next government. Next, I used the word "handouts" as in jobs, education, or some sort of opportunities. Many of these protesters gave up everything by going into this revolution. They achieved it, but now what? The world isn't ideal where things change, and everyone becomes equal and happy etc.

I can understand the army trying to get the country's infrastructure/economy back on it's feet, but you have to restore order. A bunch of people protesting...isn't going to accomplish anything now, and change itself will be a LONG time coming. Government tries to restore order by force, and the people revolt back. I can understand the revolt back, because they don't trust anything with the current government. But now, the country is in shambles. What to do? what to do?

It's a tricky line to walk. I just hope that it doesn't spiral into civil war.

I guess I'm cynical. Hope for the best though.

Ah, I see what you mean. Sorry for the misunderstanding - when I hear handouts I immediately think of someone cutting a check.

And I agree with you on the fact that restoring order by force just pushes people to revolt more. From what I understand (and this is a fairly broad generalization), the military probably can't/won't enact real reforms until the economy gets back on track. That can't happen until people get back to work and start rebuilding economy. The people won't get back to work until they get the reforms they were promised, or at least see headway being made, and will continue to protest until then. It's a pretty vicious cycle where nobody wins. I mean, they haven't even reopened the EGX, and it's been close to a month now (I checked, and supposedly it'll be back up next week, but it was supposed to open on Wednesday, so who knows). It'll be interesting to see how big a dive it takes when they reopen it.

The best thing to do, in my opinion, would involve each side working together and taking baby steps. Give more than 10 days to rewrite the constitution. Hand over power to an interim government and involve the military and civilians, but don't put Mubarak's old cronies back in power. Address the workers on strike and explain why, at this time, their demands can't be met. Like you said, it's going to take time for there to be any real change, but I think that if people saw progress being made they'd be okay with that.

Narmi fucked around with this message at 04:56 on Feb 26, 2011

# ¿ Feb 26, 2011 04:39

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Yeah, I know, I mentioned that in my previous post. I was referring more to how they could work together to make things better.

# ¿ Feb 26, 2011 05:36

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 1, 2024 09:00

Narmi: Feb 26, 2008

Apology posted:

Now I was under the impression that truly poisoning the water supply for a large area would be inefficient to say the least, and impossible to say the most. Wouldn't the poisoners need such huge supplies of poison that they'd need trucks and water pumps in order to distribute the poison through the water supply? Your thoughts and ideas on this are appreciated.

I think that this might just be hysteria. I'm doubtful that whoever has been detained would actually be capable of poisoning the water supply.

It could just be that Gadahffi doesn't know how to poison wells and just told some guys "go there, do this" thinking it would work. I mean, honestly, the man has no idea what he's doing at this point so I wouldn't put it past him to poison the water supply without knowing how to actually poison the water supply.

# ¿ Feb 27, 2011 00:02

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Middle East Thread of Despair: More Broken Than Syria

«‹›7 »