The Democracy Problem |
Post Reply | Page <123 |
Author | |||
Noah
Senior Member Joined: 25 June 2005 Status: Offline Points: 199 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Nico. wow man, you burst right into the core of things. i have nothing
to further add. i wouldt have gone there for anothr 3 or 4 pages.
Peace Noah |
|||
Noah
Senior Member Joined: 25 June 2005 Status: Offline Points: 199 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
You answer the question you wish i would have asked it seems. Here is the Question again So, if someone robs your house, and you think it might be the neighbour, but you can neither prove, nor disproof it. but you do know that he did at some point have something to do, or was perhaps involved with theft, thats valid reason enough to go smash his door in, and burn down the house?. Am i correct ,in following the outline of the logic you just presented?. B: You surely know about the high level contacts between the Iraqi Intelligence Services under Saddam and al Qaeda leadership, don't you? Assuming of course, you're doing your homework!? My best freind was mujahideen. I have this streight from the horses mouth. I have confirmed it by media sources aswell although they tend to only tell what serves them or whatever agenda they might have. No i actually dont know about those high level contacts, because they didnt excist at all ever. They met up with him, because saddam had become scared and suddenly gave it as the faithfull muslim (allthough when he came to power he was communist) calling for a jihad. The mujahideen smelled rat (and had a problem with his rule in first place) and left, to later attack him. They where slaughtered by saddams forces, American marines, Brittish S.A.S and their new hardware, courtesy of the UNITED STATES! So yes i have as usuallly really done my homework, because information is one of the things i love most about the world :) here comes a question though...
leadership of what? Al'Queda has never been anywhere near power in Iraq? Today they properbly are active in the sunni triangle again, but what does that tell you? its the shiits that keep smashing everything up, and the sunnis that try to hunt them down. Its insanity. we were brethren once Peace Noah |
|||
b95000
Senior Member Joined: 11 July 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1328 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Economics certainly has a huge part - perhaps predominant as you may suggest - part to play. However, we cannot minimize the impact or radicalized Islam on the region. Taking personal responsibility for commonly held religious principles and opposing vigorously those that don't is a huge test for Islam as a great world faith. Diversifying economically will be another huge test for the region. As to the successful models you point to, you can add Turkey to that list, although do they have oil - can't recall...also do the nations you mention have secular governments, institutions and constitutions (again not sure on all the specifics there) but that would also set them apart from many of the other so-called predominantly Muslim nation states. |
|||
Bruce
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. |
|||
b95000
Senior Member Joined: 11 July 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1328 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
That wasn't my point at all Noah. It wasn't that al Qaeda was in power in Iraq it was that they had the ear of the Iraqi state and that the Iraqi state appartus was assisting them in many and sundry ways - through diplomatic pouches and papers and there were many meetings over the 12 or 13 years prior to 2003 between IIS and important al Qaeda operatives and representatives. Iraq had all kinds of weapons and other expertise, all kinds of motive and this kind of collaboration would portend all kinds of trouble and threat - even as it did in Afghanistan... Are you also opposed to the MNF action in Afghanistan? |
|||
Bruce
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. |
|||
nico
Senior Member Joined: 23 July 2005 Status: Offline Points: 163 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Economics certainly has a huge part - perhaps predominant as you may suggest - part to play. However, we cannot minimize the impact or radicalized Islam on the region. Radicalized Islam exists out of materialism, it exists because of the economic failure of the regimes to bring the nessecary improvements in living standards, it exists out of the failure of Nasserism to bring about a Arab revival, its stems from the secular Arab regimes being humiliated in 1967 (a major turning point for the regions intellectual history), it also exists due to the role of Islam in the war in Afghanistan, and the Iranian Revolution (1979 the most important year in modern Islamic history) it showed to people that Islam is feasible and possible to acheive through violent means (although now violent Jihad is widely discredited by most Muslims and even Islamists as a way to achieve power). The economies of the region allow for wasat or corruption, which is the biggest greviance that the people of the region have against their gov'ts, and the Islamists (peaceful or not) play on that angst of intrenched special interests at the top of the population at the expense of the lower segments. It is the opposite of the European experience where the Church was that vested interest and the people became secularized, here visa versa. They have legitimate points that it is un-Islamic to have such massive discrepancies in wealth and oppurtunity, these societies exist because we support them, and because the population is disempowered, and apathetic and usually can be bought off. As to the successful models you point to, you can add Turkey to that list, I don't due to the role of the ultra-secularist military in the democracy (especially considering it has thrown out Islamic parties in the past from power), the human rights abuses done against Kurds. although do they have oil They don't have enough to even satisfy their own needs. also do the nations you mention have secular governments, institutions and constitutions (again not sure on all the specifics there) but that would also set them apart from many of the other so-called predominantly Muslim nation states. No it wouldn't, the vast majority of Muslim states in existance are secular states, with secularized constitutions, and nominal democratic instituions. What lacks in the Muslim world apart from a few exceptions is constitutionalism (actually abiding by the rules of the constitution).As it stands today there are no real "Islamic states", as in Islam there is only one state the Ummah. The very existance of "states" is un-Islamic and presents a HUGE challenges to Muslims. |
|||
b95000
Senior Member Joined: 11 July 2005 Location: United States Status: Offline Points: 1328 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
|
||
Thanks Nico, for that throughtful treatment. I would say about the above comment - though most Muslims may have discredited violence even 6% thought the London tube murders were justified. That amounts to 100,000 British Muslims. That's a lot of people if only a nominal percentage...that is problematic.. I agree to your thoughts on abiding by constitutional law and the Muslim view of the nation-state which I haven't seen discussed her much yet - although I'm pretty new here. |
|||
Bruce
Then you will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. |
|||
Post Reply | Page <123 |
Tweet
|
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |