|
The Government of Bahrain has effectively declared war on its people. There's no way this can end well. Seriously, even if the Bahrain monarchy survives, it will only do so through a pile of its subjects' corpses and the end of any plausible claim it has to being a "moderate" state. It seems like it's trying to out-Iran Iran in terms of brutal suppression. Also, I never thought I'd see the day that Libya, of all places, felt the stirrings of revolt. I'm deeply skeptical that it'll go anywhere, but even the attempt shows that the Libyan people haven't been totally cowed by half a century of lunatic rule. Masha'allah, you protesters. Masha'allah.
|
# ¿ Feb 17, 2011 23:34 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 19, 2024 22:20 |
|
I've heard a pretty wide spectrum of things about the Middle East crisis from people I know IRL, from total ignorance to FOX News talking points to an active, intelligent understanding of the crisis. The thing is, the information is there for anyone that wants to pursue it, it's a question of desire to be informed more than ability. A lot of people in the first group just don't want to know (and most of the people in the second only want to know insofar as it allows them a better grasp of what talking points to give).
|
# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 02:27 |
|
tetsul posted:How could that not end well for them? "People, I'm sure some of you have heard of a instability happening with our neighbors as people looking for freedom and democratic reform face off against their authoritative dictator. But don't worry, I, your authoritative dictator, have sent your sons and brothers to destroy those peaceful protesters." The way it ends "well" is by cowing them through violence. "Well" is in quotation marks for obvious reasons: it's a horrendous outcome for everyone else and only a short-term "win" for the regime. The thing is, this isn't sending "the people's" sons and daughters against them. By most accounts, this is a revolt dominated by Bahrain's 70% Shia majority and the military is mostly composed by Bahrain's 30% Sunni minority protecting the interests of Bahrain's Sunni ruling elite. The military knows that their social group would really lose out in a successful revolution and the government can play up the whole "sectarian strife" thing to keep them motivated: "These aren't your brothers and sisters you're fighting, they're schismatic heretics" etc. (Of course, there's only so much you can play that card against the overwhelming supermajority of your country) EDIT: Screwed up the numbers. Bahrain is apparently close to 15% non-Muslim, and something like 25% Sunni and 60% Shia. Patter Song fucked around with this message at 03:21 on Feb 18, 2011 |
# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 03:17 |
|
I'd caution about being too optimistic about Libya yet. The complete lack of movement in Tripoli is worrisome for the long term future of the revolt.
Patter Song fucked around with this message at 20:21 on Feb 18, 2011 |
# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 20:16 |
|
farraday posted:No, the problem isn't that Saudi Arabia is hosed, it's that Saudi Arabia will attempt/is attempting to repress protesters in neighboring states, which is a big loving deal in foreign relations. Even if they try and do so under the radar I wouldn't be surprised if it was discovered rather rapidly. If I might make a 1789 analogy, Saudi Arabia is playing Austria to Egypt's France: S. Arabia is the bulwark of reaction and the Old Regime and is very intent on suppressing revolution and disruption in its neighbors.
|
# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 20:23 |
|
farraday posted:Semi facetiously, in Libya what date are we calculating from for the Time-taken-to-depose-your-autocrat race? ~March 3rd or so, right? Something like that? In all seriousness, stay safe, Galewolf. Sounds like the calm before the storm there in Tripoli.
|
# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 21:13 |
|
Potrzebie posted:but I'm not sure where China fits. China's support for its friends Sudan and Burma, two of the worst regimes on the planet.
|
# ¿ Feb 18, 2011 23:40 |
|
Samurai Sanders posted:One thing I want to know is, how many police officers will refuse to fire on unarmed civilians if they are ordered to? Surely a whole lot of them can look at that crowd and not see a faceless crowd, but rather a bunch of people who could easily be their family and friends. It's a small country after all. Which is why the Bahraini government has been trying so hard to make this into a sectarian struggle between the supermajority Shia ordinary population and the mostly Sunni security/government forces. It's a lot easier to tell the soldiers that the people on the street are heretical splittists in the pocket of Iran who will compromise Bahrain's independence and frame it as a struggle that way than to have the security forces think of the people they're shooting as "Bahraini."
|
# ¿ Feb 19, 2011 21:12 |
|
Watching Libya pick up the pieces should this turn out successfully (still not sold until Tripoli gets in on the game) will be fascinating. Unlike in Egypt, where Mubarak was simply the leading man in his regime, Qadaffi (or however he chooses to spell his name this week) truly is the Libyan regime. In Egypt, they had a structure in place (that will be considerably renovated, but still present) that they can work with. In Libya, bringing down Qadaffi will bring down everything and Libya will need to have its entire political system rebuilt from the ground up.
|
# ¿ Feb 20, 2011 23:28 |
|
Good point re: monarchist flag. Maybe if Libya does have a successful revolution, they can finally get a new flag.
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 00:05 |
|
"Libya is not Tunisia. Libya is not Egypt. Libya has oil. Oil is the ONLY thing that keeps Libya together." This guy has a very, very low opinion of his countrymen. "I'll be honest. We are all armed."
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 00:22 |
|
Well, I finally know how to pronounce "Jamahiriya."
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 00:27 |
|
"Muammar al-Qaddaffi is not a traditional, classic president." Biggest understatement of the decade. EDIT: is he SERIOUSLY claiming that the African mercenaries are in the protestors employ?
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 00:35 |
|
Speech over, and Al Jazeera immediately boils it down to, "Well, the protestors do have tanks, and Qaddaffi claims that the revolt's due to drugs and separatists."
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 00:41 |
|
Brown Moses posted:BBC saying it was retarded. You mean Libyan opposition isn't fueled by drug-crazed separatists, foreign agents, and exiles? Who knew?
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 00:52 |
|
So, can anyone think of a precedent for a country's UN delegation coming out for that regime's ouster? I find that absolutely mind-boggling.
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 20:40 |
|
Oh, man, this guy on Al Jazeera. Imprisoned by the Libyan government for 18 years (4 years in solitary), and seems almost embarrassed to talk about it because what the government is doing to people now makes his suffering seem minor by comparison. Poor guy. To suffer 18 years in jail, then to look and see what the government is doing now and think "this is much worse than what I went through" is amazing. Also, "Qaddaffi and his family are not humans. They are devils." I like this guy.
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 20:45 |
|
Libyan deputy ambassador to the UN, do you have a message for Muammar al-Qaddafi? Libyan deputy ambassador: .
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 21:49 |
|
Samurai Sanders posted:I've only been glancing at this thread and the news from time to time, but I can't understand why these governments aren't saying "but....but Israel!" to try and regain order. Isn't that what they normally do when faced with hard domestic problems? Would it not work somehow, or do they have some other plan? "The boy that cried ." Over the past half-century, the people of the Middle East have discovered that their regimes have no interest in actually helping the Palestinians, and are using the plight of the Palestinians for their own benefit. The Arabs are sick of "but Israel!" They want a government that actually worries about their interests and maybe cares about the Palestinians enough to treat the Palestinians' suffering as more than a PR campaign.
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 21:58 |
|
Sivias posted:What is going to happen when Gadaffi is gone? By whatever means will inevitably oust him - will the people trust the military to hold an interim government like we saw in Egypt? That's really one of the fundamental differences between the two. In Egypt, Mubarak was the frontman for the corrupt oligarchy that had been ruling the country since before he got there. Removing Mubarak is a great move, but it doesn't destroy the fundamental structure of Egypt (and allows a transition to be peaceful). In Libya, Qadaffi IS the regime. Remove him and there's nothing, Libya will need to build a new order from scratch.
|
# ¿ Feb 21, 2011 23:17 |
|
"I went to talk to the young people in Green Square. I wanted to spend the night with them, but it started raining. I want you to know that I am in Tripoli, not in Venezuela. Do not believe the imperialist media." -A soon-to-be-dead man
|
# ¿ Feb 22, 2011 01:36 |
|
Suntory BOSS posted:Dismantled by the US/UK and IAEA in 2003, I believe. Lucky thing to, or Qaddafi would be nuking crowds of unarmed protesters to maintain his hold on power. His WMDs only consisted of chemical weapons. Your point still holds: he'd have gladly gassed all of Tripoli to hold on to power.
|
# ¿ Feb 22, 2011 01:39 |
|
Suntory BOSS posted:It just occurred to me that these protests would certainly have taken down Saddam Hussein by now, had the US not invaded. I honestly doubt that Saddam would've gone down that easily, for the same reason that Syria hasn't risen up in any real way. Saddam would've responded in a manner that makes Qaddafi look like a kitten, and would've had the advantage of the ability to stir up sectarian strife that the King of Bahrain is doing (telling the mostly-Sunni government/military that they will lose all their privileges and power if the mostly-Shia protestors take over). Saddam clearly proved over the years that he had no compunction to resort to truly ghastly tactics (Halajba is a pretty good analogy to what Qaddafi's doing now, and having helicopters mow down protestors was pretty much patented by his response to the post-Gulf War uprisings).
|
# ¿ Feb 22, 2011 06:48 |
|
Worth pointing out that Bahrain has half a million citizens, but the number of people in the country is roughly twice that. 100k is still almost unfathomable, though.
|
# ¿ Feb 22, 2011 19:12 |
|
Libyan naval vessel near Malta wants to defect.
|
# ¿ Feb 22, 2011 20:20 |
|
Krypt-OOO-Nite!! posted:Did Clinton just start praising the way Bahrain has handled their protests or did I misshear the news (BBC) cut away as she started talking so I'm not 100% sure. She was praising King Hamad ceasing shooting people in the streets and King Hamad's promise to release several hundred political prisoners.
|
# ¿ Feb 22, 2011 21:02 |
|
farraday posted:One of the most interesting parts of the Libyan protests has been the rapid disintegration of the government. The regime seems to be unraveling from the ground up, which is both incredible and terrifying. At this point, I think the people like the aforementioned Interior Minister are more concerned about achieving the status of "Not people the new regime will want to execute." There might be an element of conscience involved, but I think that this is the primary motivator.
|
# ¿ Feb 22, 2011 21:22 |
|
Again, there's a big difference between Mubarak (front man and top guy in the regime that had held Egypt, through numerous forms, since 1952), and Qaddafi (is the Libyan regime). Mubarak was dispensable to the old Egyptian authority, Qaddafi is not. Egypt can begin a peaceful transition to a new structure built on top of the old structure, Libya will need to build a new structure from scratch: removing Qaddafi topples everything in the Libyan "government."
|
# ¿ Feb 22, 2011 23:10 |
|
BethelBAR posted:The Style Council. Seriously he wears some cutting edge outfits, he's only second to Mugabe in Meh, I think Hamid Karzai has them both beat. I've always gotten the impression that Karzai's the only one in Afghanistan that actually dresses like that.
|
# ¿ Feb 23, 2011 01:00 |
|
The real question, the only real question at this point, is how long CQ can keep this lunacy up. If he falls this week, there's no long-term problem (though the tragic deaths of thousands of Libyans is of course still an issue we need to remember). If he keeps fighting and slaughtering Libyans for the next month and tries to start an actual civil war like he's been calling for, Libya might end up with scars that will take generations to heal. On the plus side (and I need to think about this in a positive way or I'll go as crazy as Qaddafi from depression at the human condition), this will leave the Libyan people with a permanent distaste for autocracy and dictatorship, even more of one than Egypt. A people that associates dictatorship with "governments organizing bomb runs on their own cities, shipping in mercenaries to shoot their own people, and blasting their citizens with anti-aircraft weaponry" will be devoted to keeping a non-dictatorial government.
|
# ¿ Feb 23, 2011 23:26 |
|
Chief Savage Man posted:Started a pool with a few friends in my political science class on how Qaddafi dies. If he kills himself Hitler-style, I get forty bucks but if he dies any other way, I lose ten. Either way, there's no way this dude lives out the year. I don't see him entering the 'Oh poo poo, my people are going to kill me.' mode that most dictators do when their people go after them. He's definitely going down the Hitlerbunker lunatic path. Honestly, Qaddafi seems like the sort that wants to be martyred. I think he wants to be killed by the new Libyan government so he can die as some sort of bizarre testament to his "ideology."
|
# ¿ Feb 23, 2011 23:42 |
|
Yaos posted:Ah, so probably not even close to done. If Iran manages to fall, and from what I've read Iran is making all the same mistakes the others have made, I have to wonder what will happen with any potential allies that are left over. Iran falling is very unlikely, but in the event it did, the most dramatic effects would be on Syria. Syria's alliance of convenience with Iran (the two have little in common other than mutual fear/hatred of the USA and Israel) would not survive into a new government and the Syrian regime would be left truly isolated.
|
# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 07:09 |
|
Al-Saqr posted:Thank you so much my friend, I really appreciate this advice, Political Cartooning is something I almost never do and I'm used to character based stuff, I forgot that political images have to be more symbolic. Rather than a crown, how about the Keffiyeh favored by the Saudi royals?
|
# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 20:32 |
|
Al-Saqr posted:Too close to home, I dont feel like being snatched in the middle of the night just yet, the military suit/crown combination is general enough. Oh, I forgot where you are. Yeah, you'd be better off doing something attacking the Iranians.
|
# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 20:40 |
|
Is it just me, or is Yusuf Islam a bit...vapid?
|
# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 20:50 |
|
"If you carry a leaking bag of water, your back will get wet?" What the hell sort of proverb is that?
|
# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 21:05 |
|
After Libya (which I would've said was impossible a few weeks ago), I'm not writing off anything, but I highly doubt we'll see a major rising in any of the Gulf States apart from the ongoing one in Bahrain. (No, despite being on the Arabian Peninsula, Yemen is not a Gulf State) I will admit to being disappointed about the lack of a rising in Syria (which I would've personally thought far more unstable than Libya).
|
# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 23:08 |
|
So, question. While I think most people are agreed that the Libyans won't restore the monarchy, do you think they'd at least let the Crown Prince return from exile (as a private citizen)?
|
# ¿ Feb 24, 2011 23:34 |
|
Crazy Ted posted:So Qaddafi claims that Al Qaeda is behind the revolt by spiking Libyan coffee with acid and that Osama Bin Laden is receiving help from the United States? Correct, but you forgot the involvement of separatists.
|
# ¿ Feb 25, 2011 00:44 |
|
|
# ¿ Apr 19, 2024 22:20 |
|
BIG HORNY COW posted:State media is so tightly controlled there that nobody would even want to MENTION a crazy dictator being overthrown by the angry, poor masses. I decided to check if you were right. Let's see what North Korean state media is reporting today: quote:Anecdote about Kim Jong Il ... (In all fairness, today's news does include the slightly more newsworthy headline "One More Ancient Tomb With Murals Unearthed") EDIT: I just checked, through the entire three week Egyptian Revolution, for any mention. All I found was this: quote:Kim Jong Il Receives Egyptian Businessman Patter Song fucked around with this message at 04:13 on Feb 25, 2011 |
# ¿ Feb 25, 2011 04:05 |