Regime change

[spartak]

I can't see the logic of either argument. If saddam were going to press any button he would have done so by now and until convincing evidence that he has the capabiolity emerges (and I don't mean some **** and bull dreamt up by Mossad) I fail to see how the region would benefit from this action or how removing the last remaining Arab supporters of the Us would genuinely serve US long term interests?

And I don't think you can compare the Palestinians and thre Iraqis in any shape way or form. In case you hadn't noticed the Palestinians have the effects of a shared culture and race to fall back upon plus the experiance of the need to cooperate and work together that the diaspora created.

Sorry but your argument stinks worse than venom does.

[Kontiki]

Funny, I don't really see how "democracy" and "pro-American" are necessarily related...

I tend to think, for example, that if Saudi Arabia became truly democratic, it would become stunningly anti-American.

[spartak]

That's a very good point....

[Garth Vader]

Funny, I don't really see how "democracy" and "pro-American" are necessarily related...


Neither do I. I suspect any democratic Iraq would be anti-American as well, so the US will never allow a democratic Iraq. So I don't see why the US should kill thousands of Iraquis to replace one dictator with another.

[el freako]

Well it allowed a democratic Italy and Germany, and they are not supporting the US at the moment.

I agree with Ned (that's a first!) if the US stepped in and put a truely democratic regime in place in Iraq it would be an enourmous boost to the image of America and a great boon to it's long-term security.
By doing so the US would regain a lot of the respect it has lost since a similar effort in the 1940's and 1950's.
If such a regime, by it's very existance, led to the fall of repressive regimes in the rest of the gulf that would be a added bonus.
Sure the short to medium term economic consequences would be bad, but the west has been though things like this before and we would recover.
Moreover democracy would probably lead to a massive boom (one that would make the asian one look modest) in the middle-east 20-30 years down the road.

If you look at the long-term (a couple of decades) then the benefits would vastly outweigh the costs.

[spartak]

But isn't not going to happy., Interveening is just going to make matters worse. There is no happy ending waiting to happen.

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by el freako
Well it allowed a democratic Italy and Germany, and they are not supporting the US at the moment.

There's a huge difference between Italy/Germany post WWII and Iraq. For one thing, the western European states weren't vastly different from the US culturally, and they had traditions (albiet of varying lengths) of democracy prior to falling under dictatorial rule. For another, there weren't deep-rooted anti-American feelings across western Europe. Not to mention that post WWII Europe had the spectre of Soviet domination, whereas the big thing in the ME would be Islamic fundamentalism, which definitely isn't feared by the locals to the same degree that communism was feared by the west.

[el freako]

Originally posted by Kontiki


There's a huge difference between Italy/Germany post WWII and Iraq. For one thing, the western European states weren't vastly different from the US culturally, and they had traditions (albiet of varying lengths) of democracy prior to falling under dictatorial rule. For another, there weren't deep-rooted anti-American feelings across western Europe. Not to mention that post WWII Europe had the spectre of Soviet domination, whereas the big thing in the ME would be Islamic fundamentalism, which definitely isn't feared by the locals to the same degree that communism was feared by the west.

All of these are semi-valid points except the last.
Communism was probably feared about as much in europe after the second world war as fundamentalist islam is in arabia now - i.e. mainly by those who have wealth and power.

However, democracy is not cultural-specific you know - just look at Japan, India, Spain and Botswana, they all have established democracies that followed no tradition of such a system.
I'm not saying it would be easy to put in place the institutions for a proper democractic society in a post-invasion Iraq (indeed it would probably entail a period of occupation lasting in years) but then nothing worthwhile is ever easy.

[spartak]

Originally posted by el freako


(indeed it would probably entail a period of occupation lasting in years)

A new vietnam for the new millenium.

Exactly shows why its not worth the effort.

[Jac de Molay]

I'm beginning to believe that continuance of democracy in the US depends on the suppression of democracy elsewhere in the world. An article in today's NY Times op-ed touches upon the same subject.

Even if a "truly democratic" regime were put in place in Iraq, it would be a mere shadow of a true democratic model. Any parties or leaders vieing for power would subject to the US "stamp of approval" before presenting themselves to the Iraqi electorate. What if the majority supported Islamic hardliners? Or another, albeit less malignant, dictator? Talking democracy is one thing. But if the product is not to our liking, do we force the Iraqi people to exchange it for another?

Dave

[el freako]

Originally posted by Spartak


A new vietnam for the new millenium.

Exactly shows why its not worth the effort.

Please name the outside nation that is looking to 'liberte' the people.



DetroitDave,

That's an extremely good point, and sadly it's happened before in Algeria.

[Kontiki]

My point is exactly what DetroitDave said in his last post, and what I said in my first post. I'm not questioning whether or not you can have democracy in Iraq, I'm merely pointing out that a truly democratic system in Iraq (or just about any Arab state) is not necessarily going to be pro-American. In fact, there would be a good chance that it would be anti-American. DetroitDave hit it right on the head - the "democratic" Iraq the US envisions would really just be race between US approved leaders. This was also what I meant by criticizing the comparison between post-war Germany and Italy and Iraq. The US could be confident that such democracies would embrace western values, if not necessarily the US outright, but such may not be case in the ME.