...

BK>>  That's how I see it. They were lining up against a bad
BK>>  government. There is nothing for us to do there, but stand back
BK>> and let it happen.

 RW> INdeed, which is what we should have been doing all along
 RW> instead of pouring millions in.

 Well... yeah. And we should pull the 5th fleet out of Bahrain.
 They have the same sort of protests, and are killing the
 protestors. We don't need to be getting tied to that.

 ...

 RW>> EH?  1979-80 didn't look like a friendly democratic regime
 RW>> to me.  I grant they were growing that direction.  IN fact,

BK>>  By 2001 they were supporting the US in the WOT. However, Bush
BK>> needed enemies more than he needed allies.

 RW> MIght be, but still imho appeared to be another despotic
 RW> state, iow a theocracy.

 So is Israel, but that doesn't stop us from supporting them.
 Iran was on the way to democracy. Who knows how much of the
 detour is due to Bush trashing them.

 RW>> I've argued this for years.  Part of U.S. intervention
 RW>> should be the assistance in building a stable
 RW>> constitutional democracy.  THat should be an assumption
 RW>> going in, and an expectation of those who ask our help.
 RW>> Anything else and the troops and equipment stay home.

BK>>  Exactly what I am thinking.

 RW> That imho is the only justifiable reason for any war which
 RW> is not for the purpose of directly defending U.S. teritory.

 Total agreement.

>

BK>>> Since mid Dec of last year, Tunisia and Egypt have had
BK>>>  successful rebellions. Jordan, Algeria, Yemen and Bahrain have
BK>>> been subject to enough protests to force the governments to make
BK>>> changes.

 RW>> RIght, and that one could still blow up even though the
 RW>> vote is in.  There's still some pretty bad blood in Sudan.

 True. The US needs to talk to the leaders there, and let them
 know, if they go for democracy they get full support.

BK>>  Yep. It could. Which is why the US needs to get out of Iraq and
BK>> Afghanisan, so we can have a credible military to support
BK>>  democratic govts when the locals establish them.

 RW> wHole region is still a powderkeg, and likely to get worse
 RW> as climate conditions change.

 Yeah, but climate change is a fraud don't you know. Ask the
 Australians swimming in their streets, or the Chinese enjoying
 their extended dry spell, or the African nations now getting
 ready to fight over the Nile water.

 ...

BK>>> democracy. Supporting a country on the basis of how it suits our
BK>>> needs is how we lose countries. It's how we are losing in Iraq  and
BK>>> Afghanistan. It's how Iran and Venezuala turned against us.  It's
BK>>> how we lost in Vietnam.

 RW> Agreed, to a point.  Local self determination is always
 RW> preferrable, but i have the same objections to a
 RW> "christian" theocracy, or any other theocracy for that
 RW> matter. 

 I agree. As I said, mix government and religion and it's bad for
 both.

BK>>>  We need to look at one thing only, what is best for the people
BK>>> there.

 RW>> Indeed, that should be the biggest factor in our decision.

 RW> But it rarely is, it's usually commercial interests that
 RW> carry the day.

 Need to also declare any corporate involvement in suppressing
 human rights won't be tolerated, and we don't care what country
 that corporation is from.

 RW>> Agreed, so that's the next question, who's version of
 RW>> "islamic " or sharia are we going with?  I wouldn't support
 RW>> the Wahhabi version at all.

BK>>  Which takes us back to the Wahabi, and the Saudis, being the  prime
BK>> source of anti-US terror.

 RW> OF course it does, and the ease with which they can coopt
 RW> democracy movements over there.

 Just today reading the reason Al Qaeda has been totally silent
 on Egypt, it's a denial of everything Al Qaeda stands for. Seems
 Al Qaeda hates the Muslim Brotherhood. The MB renounced
 violence, and this revolution was pulled off peacefully. Al
 Qaeda stands for violent revolution, and this shows them up
 badly.

BK>>>  Isn't it interesting that the biggest claim of superiority we  can
BK>>> make against a related religion is that we *IGNORE* our own
BK>>> religious teachings and traditions.

 RW>> Indeed, but there again, what are "our own?"  MOst of us
 RW>> granted are Christian in one form or another.  For those of

BK>>  This is a Christian culture, even for those who are not
BK>>  Christians themselves.

 RW> Essentially yes.

 ...

BK>>  True. And now the evangelical extremists are becoming a danger  to
BK>> this country. Read up on the Millitary Religious Freedom
BK>> Foundation.

 RW> I have, in fact I've read up on those isues for years.  My
 RW> period of ahteism sensitized me quite a bit to those
 RW> issues. See the tagline.

 Yeah. I've been watching that tagline for a long time.

BK>>>  Those who insist our society should be governed by our religious
BK>>> traditions and laws, going all the way back to the most ancient
BK>>> ones, can be no better in their conduct than the worst of
BK>>>  Islamic fundamentalism.

 RW>> YOu got that right!!!    What are we talking here?
 RW>> 14th amendment if I'm right (first cup of coffee) and
 RW>> proscription against cruel and unusual punishment.

BK>>  See the tagline.

 RW> NOted, cruel doesn't become unusual once practiced.

 RW> ...   RELIGIOUS FUNDAMENTALISM A THREAT ABROAD, A THREAT AT
 RW> HOME --- timEd 1.10.y2k+

BOB KLAHN bob.klahn@sev.org   http://home.toltbbs.com/bobklahn

... Jan 20, 2009 - The end of an error!
--- Via Silver Xpress V4.5/P [Reg]
 * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)