Middle East Elections - Democracy Marches On

[rcne]

Lets recap stirrings of democracy via elections in the Middle East.

Egypt and Syria are facing pressure to reform their election procedures and will have the freest elections in decades.

Lebanon has had a Syria free election.

Kuwait has elected women to Council and will have women voting in future elections.

Afghanistan and Palestinian have elected by votes and not by force their representative governments.

Iran still has a Democracy movement and is hopefully moving away from the Mullahs toward a moderate rule.

All a result of the Iraqi stained finger of courage by those voting in the first free Iraqi election.

I know the reality over there is different from here, but I can still see progress being made by the people, who are after all the ones who must step forward into their future.

For the first time in my lifetime, I can see a chance for peace in the Middle East.

[Libertarian]

There is a high chance for peace, but the US pushing for democratic reform and the people of those countires pushing for it is two very different things. If the people and government are the ones who reform that is what should happen. But when Western power, such as the US, pushes its own ideals on others, it leads to many problems, and not the least of is dependence on the US for support.

[Nono]

Quote by: rcne I can see a chance for peace in the Middle East.

Well that's what they said back in '77. Don't hold your breath.

Shortly thereafter the Iranians rose up and overthrew the Shah, and Iran -- so many years before the others -- started having real elections (well, more real than any of the others).
Yet you talk about an Iranian "democracy movement". So you see, rcne, marking ballots does not a democracy make.

(As for Afhganistan and "representative government", you make me laugh.)

[IndieC]

Yes, but i'm afraid that the US invasion of Iraq is still unjustified in my opinion. Forcing democracy on people is not the way to move forward, the revolution has to come from within. I don't think there will be very much peace in the middle-east for a long long time though, the differences between Palestineans and Israelis are too deep, and the hate for each other too strong. However, i hope that you are right, and peace will ensue...

[IndieC]

On other thing, Lebanon has not held a Syria-free election, it is holding an election, and one of the main parties is pro-Syria, so it isn't Syria-free.

[RickSp]

The neocons have a habit of running victory laps before the race even gets started.

Iraq may be slipping ever closer to civil war. Violence, after initially dropping, has ramped steadily upward. The insurgency which was supposed to have been broken by the elections continues to grow more sophisticated.

The "elected" representatives of elections run by and under US terms and rules remain fractious and ineffectual. Basic civil services in Iraq such as water and electricity remain inadequate or unavailable.

The Isreali/Palestinian peace progress remains stalled as Bush seems to taking direction from Sharon.

Karzai remains effectively the mayor of Kabul as warlordism returns over much of Afghanistan. Significant inroads are being made by a resurgent Taliban.

Pakistan's Pervez Musharraf continues to tenuously hold power despite strong growth by Islamist parties. He has survived several assasination attempts. If Musharraf falls, Islamists with ties to Bin Laden will acquire atomic weapons. Bin Laden is still believed to be operating out of Pakistan.

This week Hezbollah swept elections in southern Lebanon.

The outbreak of democracy in the Middle East is wildly overstated.

[IndieC]

And greatly exagerrated, yes, theer is a side to both arguments, and to be honest, kits just looks like the same old Middle-East to me, with an added false sense of legitimacy. Basically, Israel's ideas have spread to some of the Arab nations, why not hold elections and make it look legit? Sounds cool doesn't it?

[Libertarian]

Both sides want to win. The democratic western wants to win, and the Arab nations want to keep there ways of government and neither side will give in. Democracy does not fit all societys. They have had thousands of years of government and we have only had a coupple hundread.

[rcne]

Ricksp, I think as Iraqi forces take on more and more of their own security the possibility for civil war recedes further and further into the depths of possibility.

In other words, the chances now are far less than they were then.

I don't think its time for a victory lap - yet, nor do I think that our reality is their reality, but I do see a difference in the area for less dictatorship, either by a person or by a religion.

[Nono]

Quote by: Rick The neocons have a habit of running victory laps before the race even gets started.

Right, as exemplified by Paul "The-war-will-pay-for-itself" Wolfowitz.

And you're so right about Pakistan. If there were real elections there, Osama himself might be drafted as president by popular demand.

The US mouths words like "freedom" and "democracy" and people like rcne nod happily. Unfortunately, the world isn't two-dimensional.

[RickSp]

Quote by: rcne Ricksp, I think as Iraqi forces take on more and more of their own security the possibility for civil war recedes further and further into the depths of possibility. In other words, the chances now are far less than they were then.

The violence has actually gotten more sectarian and not less following the election. So regardless of what you may think, the sectarian conflict is growing.

We will soon be reaching a grim milestone. Within the next month or so, more American soliders will have been killed following the "handover of sovereignty" than before. 811 Americans have died since the handover as compared to 866 before. Since the election, another 245 American soldiers have died or almost twice as many as had been killed when our Flight Suit in Chief Declared "Mission Accomplished."

[Nono]

And here's a thought: Has anyone seen any photos of those American dead in the US media? Hard to come by, eh? Compare this with Vietnam 30-40 years ago.
The American media are pulling the old forelock bigtime these days. Pathetic.

[ibm]

Quote by: Nono And here's a thought: Has anyone seen any photos of those American dead in the US media? Hard to come by, eh? Compare this with Vietnam 30-40 years ago. The American media are pulling the old forelock bigtime these days. Pathetic.

noted that, too. one explanation is that the media and the government more often act under the same or smilar sponsorships nowadays.

and what is democracy? is the mere fact that people are given a ballot true democracy? how much are we people truly involved in public policy-making today even domestically?

vote <> democracy. the cubans and chinese vote, too.

[RickSp]

Quote by: Nono And here's a thought: Has anyone seen any photos of those American dead in the US media? Hard to come by, eh? Compare this with Vietnam 30-40 years ago. The American media are pulling the old forelock bigtime these days. Pathetic.

There is a real irony. Iraq is just too dangerous for the media. Most either stay in the Green Zone and report on briefings or go out as embeds with flak jackets and helmets in the back of Bradleys, lead by the hand (or nose) by the military. Nobody understands how bad it is because no one is really covering it.

Ironically Vietnam was safer for journalists, so the images and stories got out. When people deny that Iraq and Vietnam are comparable, it is tempting to say, that's right, in some respects Iraq is much worse. It is bizarre to compare the safety of journalists in Iraq under Saddam to what it is in "liberated" Iraq today.

Overall I understand that twice as many journalists from around the world have been covering the Jackson trial than are covering all of Iraq.

[rcne]

I don't know about that - do you not remember the beheadings? As far as loses go - compare to any war the bloodiest day and our loses in Iraq are minimal.

The supporters of the Status Quo are the ones with the veiled view of the world as it really is.

And RickSP, the violence of bombing a funeral is justified in some way? The world is getting safer, and will continue to get safer as the Middle East faces its own future and its own security.

Iraq is the most modern society of the Mid East, and yet they are well below the civilization level of the western world.

The current progress, and that is what it is - progress, will stabilize that region.

'Some say that I am a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.' John Lennon

[RickSp]

Quote by: rcne The world is getting safer, and will continue to get safer as the Middle East faces its own future and its own security. The current progress, and that is what it is - progress, will stabilize that region. 'Some say that I am a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.' John Lennon

The Bush administration has made it clear that it is not "reality-based", a characteristic that you appear to share.