dagblog - Comments for "Not all the middle east is pleased"

Book was Answering only to

Flavius — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 17:09:43 +0000

In reply to Thanks for the apology which

Book was Answering only to God".

Thanks for the apology which

Flavius — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 16:51:55 +0000

In reply to I am depressed; I'm sorry I

Thanks for the apology which is accepted

My larger point was meant to be that you might still believe in the CIA as 'protecting us from Shias',

Nah. Don't automatically trust or distrust all members of the CIA ; Shia, Islamists, Iranians or any other group Well , almost any other group . As the old joke goes all generalizations are unsound, except this one.

In particular re the Iranians my agnosticism was reinforced by a book by a couple of reporters who moved to Teheran when Khatami was elected to cover the birth of a new , liberal Iran - and stayed to cover its crib death at the hands of Kamenei..Particularly ironic since Shiism differs from Sunni doctrine in deprecating the role of a supreme religious leader.

I am depressed; I'm sorry I

we are stardust — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:18:46 +0000

In reply to Stardust. In the link you

I am depressed; I'm sorry I didn't mention that you were speculating. My larger point was meant to be that you might still believe in the CIA as 'protecting us from Shias', as though young Shiites would naturally hook to Islamists, and that Iranians are violent extremists. Remember, too, that 'our partners in peace', the Saudis, comprised most of the 9/11 highjackers.

Stardust. In the link you

Flavius — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 14:38:00 +0000

In reply to Canuck, I left you this

Stardust. In the link you wrote

When I consider Flavius’s trust that the CIA has hipped Obama to certain facts that cause him to reverse his position of support for those seeking democracy in Bahrain, for instance, it depresses me.

Don't be depressed ..What I wrote was

JUST FOR DISCUSSION,ASSUME YOU''RE PRESIDENT, AND ARE TOLD BY THE CIA THAT THE BRAVE YOUNG SHIAS CHALLENGING THE BAHRAIN MONARCHY IF SUCCESSFUL WOULD ALLY THEMSELVES WITH IRAN AND TOGETHER THEY WOULD NURTURE TERRORISTS WHO WOULD BLOW UP THE SEARS TOWER

For a coffee rap, that's a

acanuck — Sun, 20 Mar 2011 04:51:00 +0000

In reply to Canuck, I left you this

For a coffee rap, that's a good one. Spot on. Thanks, I would have missed it.

Canuck, I left you this

we are stardust — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 22:24:29 +0000

In reply to No question, the West has the

Canuck, I left you this comment early this morning; might be a coffee rap...or not. ;o)

http://dagblog.com/comment/reply/9447/111002

No question, the West has the

acanuck — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 22:04:53 +0000

In reply to Given revolutionary history,

No question, the West has the most military might at hand to do the job efficiently. But France, Britain and Italy have past roles in North Africa to live down and/or financial/oil interests in Libya itself. The Arab states most cited as coalition partners are Qatar and the Emirates, both members of the Gulf Co-operation Council that just greenlighted Saudi Arabia's crackdown on Bahraini protests. So the U.S. and Canada actually come across as the most impartial, least hypocritical participants in the no-fly operation.

To be credible, the coalition needs Arab and/or Muslim states to take part. Problem is, looking around, most are still on the despotic side of the ledger. Egypt's military would gain support among its pro-democracy activists if it moved decisively against Gaddafi, but it is playing this very cautiously. I just read that it abstained on the Arab League vote calling for a no-fly zone. On the other hand, it is reported to be "secretly" supplying the rebels with arms and ammo. That's certainly positive (given the bloodbath that their defeat would entail). Maybe Egypt will get more involved as it warms to the task.

Given revolutionary history,

Orion — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 21:12:33 +0000

In reply to Germany's refusal to take

Given revolutionary history, pushing a newly self-liberated Egypt towards a military role at this point in the game sounds like a bad idea. Without a solid constitution in place and a build up of civil society, you could just push them into a Napoleon situation. Egyptians are only just now taking the first steps toward building a liberal government. While they may have a colonial past and their own scarred domestic relations with Muslims, Europeans are best (with Americans less so because we're already involved deeply in two conflicts) suited to take on such a role. Of course, Europeans are used to Americans doing this sort of thing.

I fold! :)

Bruce Levine — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 13:04:59 +0000

In reply to I'll see your Goldberg and

I fold! :)

I'll see your Goldberg and

Flavius — Sat, 19 Mar 2011 12:53:42 +0000

In reply to I'll see your Juan Cole, and

I'll see your Goldberg and raise you one Auden

From For the Time Being. The slaughter of the innocent.

Herod speaks

Civilization must be saved even if this sending for the military as I suppose it does.How dreary. Why is it that in the end civilization always has to call in these professional tidiers to whom it is all one whether it be Pythagoras or a homicidal lunatic they are are instructed to exterminate.O dear, Why couldn't this wretched infant be born somewhere else? Why can't people be sensible? I don't want to be horrid...........I've tried to be good. I brush my teeth every night.I haven't had sex for a month. I object. I'm a liberal. I want everyone to be happy . I wish I had never been born.