Ho, Ho, Ngo Dinh Diem!

I know what you're trying to do with your Spanish example, but you must admit, those Spaniards are rather swarthy themselves. Their hot-blooded Latin temperments made Franco a godsend.

sglover's joke aside, throughout history Spain's problems with civil violence and its tendency towards reactionary authoritarian rule have often been blamed on its Moorish heritage, so that doesn't quite make your point.

"Couldn't it possibly be the case that high levels of ethnic and sectarian pluralism are intrinsically difficult for polities to overcome?"

Like, say, the high levels of ethnic and sectarian pluralism in the United States of America? I don't mean to be snarky; in fact, our relative stability is much harder-won than most people appreciate [e.g. that Civil War thing, but also racism, nativism, etc.]. But maybe there are some lessons here?

If the U.S. Army is unable to maintain order in Iraq, there's no reason to assume the Iraqi Army can either.

Like, say, the high levels of ethnic and sectarian pluralism in the United States of America?

Well, yes, exactly like that. After all, American history since the constitution includes a good 70-80 period of coping with the presence of persons of African descent primarily through the institution of chattel slavery. Then we got ~100 years of apartheid. In the meantime, there was some essentially genocidal expropriation of the Native American population, an extremely bloody civil war, etc.

David W. writes: "If the U.S. Army is unable to maintain order in Iraq, there's no reason to assume the Iraqi Army can either."

At this point, it is hard to imagine. But the unstated idea here is that the Iraqi army would be much less squeamish about the techniques used to impose order than our boys. Obviously Peters doesn't say that (much less endorse it), but that's why you install a strongman. If the strongman has to torture and murder a whole lot of people to impose order, so be it.

Wasn't it obvious that this was a possible (and even likely) outcome of invading Iraq? For all our government's talk of democracy promotion, the problem they obviously faced was that the likeliest outcomes were a democracy that elects a Shiite government friendly to Iran, or a dictatorial strongman friendly to us. Which outcome do you think our leaders prefer?

We could, after all, just leave Iraq. How about that? How about leaving Iraq to the Iraqis?

Indeed, ethnic and sectarian violence have a long Western tradition as well.

Even the saintly Swiss had a Catholic-Protestant civil war in the nineteenth century.

Can't we just blame Spain on the Moors (or as Costanza would have it, the Moops)? That way, we can keep telling ourselves that our problems in Iraq are just due to the fact that Arabs are children who only understand force.

Some moron at Ross Douthat's place responded to my arguments about the Webb stupidity by claiming Canadian politics is boring. I didn't have my skates on, so I didn't deck him. But, in fact, it might be useful if Americans knew something about a multi-ethnic former British colony with ill-distributed fossil fuels.

And I thought it was anti-war liberals and malingering paleocons who viewed Arabs as a sub-Western species incapable of freedom and its burdens.

Of course Matt is right. Iraq never had time to cohere around a strong set of national institutions or national identity. Nation building is often a long and hard process. And there is little appetite for it in the post-Cold War world. As Mr. Moynihan said (and I keep repeating), "there will be fifty new countries in fifty years."

But this doesn't mean that America will withdraw from Iraq completely, even after partition seems pre-ordained to almost everyone. As we all know by now, Iraq sits atop the second largest oil reserves in the world, and as long as oil remains the lifeblood of the American and world economy it just isn't possible to go.

The good, white, European folks of Yugoslavia might also have something to say on the whole subject of running a multiethnic, nonsectarian government.

The crucial problem here is not that certain ethnic groups are incapable of running a democracy. The problem is that far too many American political figures took the wrong lessons home from the end of the Cold War. A great many folks, particularly the devotees of Saint Ronald, concluded that there is a universal human desire for freedom and pluralistic democracy, as such concepts are conceived by Americans. It's difficult for me to imagine how an educated person with even a vague awareness of human history, even 20th century European history, would draw such a conclusion.

In 1989, there were two sets of adjacent nations with deep historical ties separated by an artificial barrier. One side was under Soviet repression and the other side wasn't. The differences were stark, and the choices were clear. It was a unique situation.

Now, in the Arab world, there are various different groups of states with various levels of state repression and various levels of Islamic law. The wealthiest, most secure and peaceful nations are decidedly NOT the ones that are experimenting with democracy.

People get really angry -- mad with anger -- if you humiliate them, take their stuff, or start killing their neighbors and family members. It doesn't take much to flip the feud/war switch in testosterone-addled brains, especially if there's a perceived "otherness" in the opposing group. Layer in a pinch of ethnic, religious, sports or business rivalry and humans go approximately ape.

And they love the feeling, for a good bloody while, which must hook molecularly into the brain like cocaine.

And, yeah, people lack the moral maturity to refrain from coveting and grabbing other people's stuff, but that's hardly a trait limited to the Arab world. Sheesh.

Homework:
Watch to see if cars flip and burn on High St. in Columbus if Michigan wins.

Other people's stuff, like oil, I meant to say.

Couldn't it possibly be the case that high levels of ethnic and sectarian pluralism are intrinsically difficult for polities to overcome?

Yes. Exactly right.

Which is why I'm at a loss to understand why Matthew thinks our situation in Iraq is such a failure. It's not a failure; it is EXACTLY AS EXPECTED. My expectations have never been that Iraq would turn into Belgium overnight. Why anyone else did I have no idea.

Which is why I'm at a loss to understand why Matthew thinks our situation in Iraq is such a failure. It's not a failure; it is EXACTLY AS EXPECTED. My expectations have never been that Iraq would turn into Belgium overnight. Why anyone else did I have no idea.

I fail to see any contradiction between the fact that Iraq is a failure and the fact that Iraq is going "EXACTLY AS EXPECTED"

But the unstated idea here is that the Iraqi army would be much less squeamish about the techniques used to impose order than our boys. Obviously Peters doesn't say that (much less endorse it), but that's why you install a strongman.

I´m sceptical.
For a military coup to succeed a strongman would need the support and loyalty of a significant portion of the army. Hopefully strong enough to "quickly" defeat all other factions.
(To avoid more outside support to militias opposed to the coup.) Otherwise it would just become another militia in a civil war.

How likely is it that ordinary Shiite soldiers in army units would fight against other Shiites? Or Sunni soldiers against other Sunnis?

Understand, I´m not saying that these soldiers don´t exist. I´m simply saying that a strongman would need to have "loyal" soldiers concentrated in "his" units. He would have to trust these units to follow his orders. If half of the soldiers in an army unit desert or rebel then that unit is essentially worthless. And he would need "his" officers" to command those units.

I suspect the current Iraqi "government" parties are already on the look-out for something like that. Not because they feared a coup but simply because all of the factions/parties in the government fear that a rival might become too strong. That includes rivalries between Shia parties too.

And I´ve read that the Iraqi army today is only lightly equipped. Almost no tanks and heavy weapons, no air force or helicopters, no supply corps. Not good for a coup too. A strongman would like superior firepower on his side.

I think it´s unlikely that Peters is advocating supporting the Iranian-leaning Shiite SCIRI party (Badr corps militia) or the Shiite Sadr movement (Mahdi army). :)

So it seems to me that he´s calling for the recreation of the (mostly Sunni) Republican Guards. Probably - like in the past - equipped with superior weapons. That would deal with the Sunni insurgency and they wouldn´t hesitate fighting against Shia militias. But where to find a strongman.... :)

"as an Army officer remarked to me... Saddam's starting to look good" WTF I thought only us treasonous lefty traitors loved Saddam. So... Ralph- we could still free him yeah... and maybe get Rummy to get him some really neat weapons to surpress the bad guys yeah... cue the twilite zone music

Up here in Canada, Conrad Black wrote a similar article suggesting that if the situation in Iraq doesn’t improve soon the United States should impose upon the country “a strongman or junta preferable to Saddam Hussein.”

In fact, why don’t we take this idea to its logical conclusion?

If the United States needs a strongman, why go through the trouble of finding someone preferable to Saddam Hussein? Why not just bring Saddam back to power?

There are numerous advantageous to this idea. First of all, Saddam is currently unemployed. He has a good resume: he’s already proven he can govern Iraq as a strongman. He has a great deal support among the Sunni population, who are the strongest supporters of the insurgency. Moreover, unlike other Iraqi political figures, Saddam knows how to deal with the Bush administration: he and Donald Rumsfeld are old negotiating buddies. Furthermore, Saddam could serve the same function now that he did in the 1980s, as a bulwark against Iranian expansions; in fact, now that Iran is a top worry for the United States, it needs Saddam more than ever.

Of course, there are some drawbacks to bringing back Saddam. He is currently on trial for serious crimes. But hey, the same could be said of Conrad Black.

Let’s bring back Saddam – he’s rested and ready.

Of course, there are some drawbacks to bringing back Saddam. He is currently on trial for serious crimes.

On the other hand, he could give Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld invaluable advice on mounting a defense in case they ever wind up sent to the Hague.

"My expectations have never been that Iraq would turn into Belgium overnight. Why anyone else did I have no idea."

Yeah, what was that idio Rumsfeld thinking of, threatening to dismiss anyone caught making post invasions plans....

That said, the problem with much of US policy is that so few people in government understand what's needed for a democracy. There are real economic and education thresholds that almost no country in the middle east meets (some meet the economic threshhold but even those mostly fall short in terms of education for lots of historical and cultural reasons). If a majority of a population is living hand to mouth and/or poorly educated then they'll usually make poor choices at the ballot box and having elections won't do much good.
If W really intended to spread democracy in the middle east (and the level of my doubts about that approach my level of doubts about the easter bunny) then he'd find the most fertile grounds for democracy (roughly Turkey, Tunisia and non-Hizbollah Lebanon pre Israeli destruction) and give lots of positive reinforcement and encouragement.
You don't make a tree grow by watering the leaves and you don't create democracy by holding an election once in a while.

lets hope the them sandniggers just learn from civilized cultures like the US and simply ethnically cleanse their country in the name of progress and democracy, hopefully they can even throw manifest destiny in the mix

"My expectations have never been that Iraq would turn into Belgium overnight."

One suspects that even after Iraq is partitioned, and much of the rest of the region has plunged into a sectarian civil war Al will still believe Iraq is on the way to becoming Belgium.

BTW, Al, Belgium is not exactly a land of inter-ethnic harmony.

My expectations have never been that Iraq would turn into Belgium overnight. Why anyone else did I have no idea.

Your expectations aren't at issue. The country's are. From the outset, it should have been clear that, in the absence of a necessary war, we would not want to stay in Iraq for the time necessary (say at least a decade and a half) to set up a functional pseuo-democratic country. There's a reason no politician will ever say the word "draft" except to deny that it could ever happen. Going to war knowing that you do not have and will not have the political capital to succeed at your plan is stupid. Except as regards the war's effect on your re-election.

Belgium, of all places. Belgium - the most sectarian, ethnically divided country in Europe, its violently seperatist and racist movements barely contained by a generally inept government.

Does anybody have proof that Al is not a left-wing concept artist from Portland Oregon?

A couple of quick points. People who argue that the US is a shining example of high levels of ethnic and sectarian pluralism being overcome gloss over a couple of key points.

Native Americans aside, the US is a country of immigrants and as a culture we have a relatively short, selective memory. What I mean is nobody is particularly entrenched to any one particular plot of land, as long as territory that we've claimed to be American remains nominally American (i.e. under American control) we don't care too much about what goes on there, which is why we're perfectly content to have Native Americans live on their reservations with separate rules from the rest of the state while India and Pakistan fight over Kashmir. Beyond that anyone can and is American...I've known a girl who was born and raised in Switzerland but when you ask her what she is she says English. She doesn't *feel* Swiss, just like a good friend of mine was born and raised in Germany but tells you she's Croation. You can't be a hyphenated German the way you can be a hyphenated American.

Furthermore, the way we've dealt with a plurality of cultures is by being segragated. On paper the US is very diverse, but by and large people tend to live in communities that look very much like themselves. Where differences do rub up against each other we often get violence. Granted, racially and ethnic violence tends to be the exception not the rule - I live in New York and there isn't a race riot every other day- but we do have racially and gender motivated crimes. I think what saves us from a regular barrage of riots like Watts is a common mythology (the American Dream) and the fact that most people feel don't feel entitled to a particular piece of land than (i.e. we don't have a lot of people squabbling over control of a Jerusalem like structure as in the case of Israel or the Middle East).

I knew I'd forget something and I did. What's interesting about Spain and the Basque movement is that while the Basques on the Spanish Side have had a history of violent separatist actions, the Basque on the French side have been relatively quiet.

Not that the junta/strongman idea isn't idiotic, but, with reference to Matthew's post header, it might be possible to do better than we did with Diem. Picking a member of the country's religious majority, say (the Shiites), rather than a member of an a religious minority (the Catholics) -- and a recent migrant from an area that was no longer inside the country, no less (Diem having been a member of the Catholic exodus from the Northern provinces of Binh Dinh which took place after the Communists took power in Hanoi in '54).

Or is the reference here to the US-sanctioned coup which took Diem out of power in '63? That's apt in some ways, though Diem had less legitimacy than Maliki does, not having been selected by an elected parliament.

Surely that should be Da Dao, Ngo Dinh Diem?

Shorter MY: Ralph Peters is saying Iraq isn't ready for Democracy. Therefore he's racist. But the history of politics suggests that democracy is hard and depends on a whole lot of development and unusual circumstances that don't exist in Iraq. Therefore, he's right.

Shorter commenters: I expected this violence all along. I.e., Ralph is right. But I'll criticize him anyway.

Sk

Shorter Sk: My parents were siblings.

WALLOONIA FOR THE WALLOONS!

I suggested this very thing in a late-nite bull session. Friend mentioned that we should give Iraq back to Saddam, I laughed but occurred that the only short-term solution would be for a coup. ("solution" to mean a US domestic/political solution) Except that the coup would be engineered by the US, have only a few US officials involved and contract out the rest to shady characters. If it happened in the right way, there would be no fingerprints - hell, the US 'lost' a few billion dollars over the course of the war and a shitload of arms just last week.

For ordinary Iraqis, the results would be horrible, and I don't condone such a plan, but you have to know that if we are talking about it - THEY have batted it around as well. Or am I just completely off the reservation here?

Does anyone have links to articles that propose this type of solution?

sohbet

Arabam
Güzel Sözler
porno
sex
chat odaları
Oyun
Oyunlar
Oyun Oyna
Oyun
sextube
89
mobilya
sohbet
sohbet
sohbet
Site ekleSite Ekle
arkadaş
Mirc
türkce mirc
Sohbet
Sohbet
amerikan kapı
tosya ahsap
Pimapen
Oyunlar
Sohbet odası
forum
Resimleri
redtube
Sohbet Odaları
Bol Sohbet
arabam
pornotube
Aşk
Ahşap
Arkadaş
Aşk mesajları
Sevgi mesajları
Bayan Arkadaş
kapı
kapılar
EV
thank you grup

www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
Sağır Oda
dizi izle
www.r10.net küresel ısınmaya hayır seo yarışması
dizi izle
resim galerisi
haber
forum
küresel ısınma
küresel ısınma
küresel ısınma
r10 seo yarışması
r10 seo yarışması
r10 seo yarışması

mirc
mirç
mırc
mırç
mircturk
turkmirc
mirc indir
mirc yukle
mirch
mırch
mirc turk
turk mirc
mırcturk
turkmırc
mırc turk
turk mırc
turkiyemirc
türkiyemirc
turkiye mirc
türkiye mirc
mircturkiye
mirctürkiye
mirc turkiye
mircturk
turkmırc
muhabbet
forum
forum
turkforum
turkiyeforum
mirc
turkmirc
toplist
site ekle
pagerank
turkmirc
turkforum
sohbet
chat
sohbet odaları
bedava sohbet
bedava chat
türk
karar

chat
sohbet
komik video
aşk şiirleri
Tr Video
avrupa sohbet
89com
komik video
sohbet
muhabbet
chat
çet
bedava oyun
islami sohbet
Bol Sohbet
Sohbet
Bol Chat
Avrupa Sohbet
Kerizim Sohbet
chat
chatsohbet
çet
cet
komik video
kurtlar vadisi pusu
dizi izle
film izle
aşk şiirleri
bol sohbet
sohbet
chat
muhabbet
cinsel sohbet
sohbet
sohbet yerleri
oyunlar99
Bol Sohbet
chat
chat
sohbet
sohbet
seviyeli sohbet
göçmen sohbet
mynet sohbet
islam sohbet
yazılı sohbet
yazgülü sohbet
hollanda sohbet
bg sohbet
avrupa sohbet
alem sohbet
cinsel sohbet
liseli kizlar
kerizim
kameralı sohbet
sesli sohbet
canlı sohbet
bgsohbet
göçmen sohbet
cinsel sohbet
mynet sohbet
msn nickler
saç ekimi
sağlık bilgisi
mirc inndir
film inndir
bağ-kur sorgulama
bağ-kur ssk
bağkur
webcam oyunları
macera oyunları
3 boyutlu oyunlar
aksiyon oyunları
kız oyunları
spor oyunları
yarış oyunları
varmısın yokmusun

mirc