Gaddafi, Hussain and Assad?

[cuttsie]

Yes, but it doesn't serve as justification. Down that road lies desolation.

You are right now that the despots have been over thrown [by us] The three Countries are now desolated .

[geared]

It may be that each of the Emirates are ruled by like minded people and so the UAE can work.

 

The boundaries of the various emirates were drawn up roughly along tribal lines.

I think it works because they are free to run their own house, while they're all part of the same country no-one feels like their being told what to do by some guy from a tribe they've got an ancient grievance with.

[Alan Ladd]

This process started under Blair and Bush. In their arrogance they felt that the population of the Middle east would rise up and welcome them as liberators, that they would be able to impose democracy and the populace would thank them.

 

The fact is the culture and religion of the middle east, diverse as it was, will never accept western style democracy. Many of these people are tribal, with a subservient attitude to tribal elders easily transferred to dictators on a national scale.

 

All this is further rooted by the teachings of Islam, the subservience of women, largely accepted by the majority of females, further hardens the attitude against democracy.

 

Blair and Bush and their respective parties, the parliaments and legislative houses of the west that were lied to by these men, have opened Pandoras box, we have no idea how to rectify a situation that we have caused.

 

Gaddaffi was insane, Hussain, was entirely corrupted by power, Assad is possibly the most normal of the three. For the everyday man and woman in the street, who did their jobs, brought up their kids, life under the dictators was preferable to this current evil that pervades the Middle east and threatens us directly.

[-Boomer-]

Is it now getting clear that not only Iraq ,Libya ,and Syria as well as the rest of the World was better of with the despots in charge than they now are with the spread of Islamic terror gangs .

 

What makes you think things weren't happening with despots in charge?

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 13:49 ----------

 

This process started under Blair and Bush. In their arrogance they felt that the population of the Middle east would rise up and welcome them as liberators, that they would be able to impose democracy and the populace would thank them.

 

The fact is the culture and religion of the middle east, diverse as it was, will never accept western style democracy. Many of these people are tribal, with a subservient attitude to tribal elders easily transferred to dictators on a national scale.

 

All this is further rooted by the teachings of Islam, the subservience of women, largely accepted by the majority of females, further hardens the attitude against democracy.

 

Blair and Bush and their respective parties, the parliaments and legislative houses of the west that were lied to by these men, have opened Pandoras box, we have no idea how to rectify a situation that we have caused.

 

Gaddaffi was insane, Hussain, was entirely corrupted by power, Assad is possibly the most normal of the three. For the everyday man and woman in the street, who did their jobs, brought up their kids, life under the dictators was preferable to this current evil that pervades the Middle east and threatens us directly.

 

So what about China, Chechnya, Sudan, Nigeria, Egypt and many other countries too. And what about Blair and Bush in Syria, I suppose that's all there fault too? Don't know you banging on about anyway considering Cameron and Hague wanted to arm al qaeda and IS in Syria last year

[ukdobby]

Is it now getting clear that not only Iraq ,Libya ,and Syria as well as the rest of the World was better of with the despots in charge than they now are with the spread of Islamic terror gangs .

 

Never happened when they were our colonies,now they're not the people still want to come to the UK.

[Alan Ladd]

What makes you think things weren't happening with despots in charge?

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 13:49 ----------

 

 

So what about China, Chechnya, Sudan, Nigeria, Egypt and many other countries too. And what about Blair and Bush in Syria, I suppose that's all there fault too? Don't know you banging on about anyway considering Cameron and Hague wanted to arm al qaeda and IS in Syria last year

 

The countries you name all have different systems, China is an oligarchy, Nigeria is a functioning democracy as evidenced by its peaceful change of power a few weeks ago. Egypt has a form of democracy but headed by a Mubarak style head of state with opposition parties banned.

 

Therefore that part of your question does not address the point I made.

 

Regarding the arming of the Syrian opposition, that did indeed seem to be the policy of the western governments and NATO, and had it succeeded would have played right into the hands of ISIS. That part of your question seems to be right.

 

The overall point I made is that the current situation was started by Blair and Bush when they overthrew Hussein as part of their illegal unwarranted attack upon a sovereign country. They based their reason for doing so on lies and as such are directly responsible for the deaths of over 1m people and counting.

 

In this country the Labour party were involved in the lies.

 

All this will come out when the Chilcott enquiry publishes.

 

Bear in mind when you come to vote that a vote for Labour is a vote for aggression and the committing of war crimes that stand second only to the holocaust in the last 100 years.

 

---------- Post added 23-04-2015 at 15:35 ----------

 

Never happened when they were our colonies,now they're not the people still want to come to the UK.

 

Iraq and Syria where never our colonies,we held a League of Nations Mandate over Iraq for about 10 years after the first world war we never had much to do with Syria as the French held a mandate over that country until after 2nd world war.

 

They were both part of the Ottoman empire previous to that and therefore had no exposure to democracy, education or advanced social institutions.

 

Libya was run by Italy for a number years, but was also under Ottoman adminsitration for several hundred years.

Edited April 23, 2015 by Alan Ladd

[Chris_Sleeps]

You are right now that the despots have been over thrown [by us] The three Countries are now desolated .

We haven't overthrown Assad.

The Lybians overthrew Gaddafi with air support from "us".

Hussain is the only one "we" did remove directly.

 

This process started under Blair and Bush.

If you think that then you ignore history. The Middle East has been a geo-political flashpoint for many many years. The Ottoman Empire kept the region stable but nobody feels sad about winning World War 1.

[cuttsie]

We haven't overthrown Assad.

The Lybians overthrew Gaddafi with air support from "us".

Hussain is the only one "we" did remove directly.

 

 

If you think that then you ignore history. The Middle East has been a geo-political flashpoint for many many years. The Ottoman Empire kept the region stable but nobody feels sad about winning World War 1.

The Ottoman Empire committed genocide against the Armenians [one point three million murdered, raped and enslaved because they where Christians.]

If that is what bringing stability involves then they did a good job:mad:

[Chris_Sleeps]

The Ottoman Empire committed genocide against the Armenians

Saddam commited genocide against the Kurds, and yet he gets your applause.

[cuttsie]

Saddam commited genocide against the Kurds, and yet he gets your applause.

If you can show me where I have applauded the DESPOT!! Saddam Hussain then I would be ashamed of myself.

On th other hand you are heaping praise on the Ottoman Empire , An Empire along with its religion that has over the last one hundred and twenty years brought nothing but misery to the World.