Where are the benefits in past Middle East regime changes?

[billethkid]

A few days ago I read a post on the subject of Syria that suggested in each case where a dictator or "bad" guy was removed/toppled there was no clear identity of who/what would take over.

Afghanistan/Iraq....still trying to figure out who is in charge of the country. Egypt.....look who got in after that change....and how long it lasted....and now still in turmoil.

It certainly appears, like it or not these countries may well have been better off with their dictators or bad guys. They were a known entity....like it or not they kept the country stabil (a relative condition) under their form of governing.

Look at N. Korea, Iran et al.....run by folks we do not approve of for very many reasons.

I was in East Berlin shortly after the wall came down. The biggest complaint from the citizens of East Germany was, under communism, like it or not, they knew where the next days bread or other needs were going to come from and when. Under the new rulses of freedom they were not happy as there was no order. In their case they were fortunate as there was no doubt the situation would eventually evolve to a Germany that was in place.

In the Middle East there is no assurance that what gets into power will be any better, if at all, than what was ousted.

Can anybody look at the images of the children in the bombed out areas with no food or dwelling and say they are better off? They will be in time? Of course not.....the reality of the people is being over shadowed by the power of the few as usual.

Before we start touting regime change we should at least get back to a point where we can demonstrate we can take care of our own before we start selling a better way of life to others.

The old saying of the devil you know is better than the one you don't know is so very appropriate in these countries as demonstrated by what has followed ousting the incumbent leadership.

And even talking about regime change in Syria is rather farsical and naieve without knowing what comes after....like Egypt/Afghanistan/Iraq/et al.

Isn't it obvious?

btk

[BarryRX]

A very thought provoking post! We believe that our system of government is the best. We cannot understand why everyone else wouldn't want to be just like us. Yet they look at us and see that all of our freedoms has made us a morally corrupt nation (their point of view, not mine). They see we have a justice system that often seems not to work too well, a healthcare system that gets less for every dollar spent then almost every other 1st world country, and an education system that graduates illiterates, and a society that seems to produce a whole bunch of crazies that like to shoot up malls and schools. They, for whatever reason, are willing to give up a lot of freedoms to trade for stability. I'm not sure that we aren't moving in the same direction with the 12 year old Patriot Act, NSA eavesdropping, etc. so, to finally answer your question, I don't think we have seen the spread of democracy that was predicted with the "Arab spring". We have just seen one petty tyrant replaced with another.

[Golfingnut]

Often it's been the case in history that the Devil you DON'T know is worse than the one you do know. The Shah of Iran is a great example.
He Westernized Iran, giving rights to women that included the ability to go to college, have careers, etc. Now, Iran is back in the Middle Ages with no rights for women and fewer for men.

And you have a problem with allowing women the right to educate themselves?

:22yikes:

[Bavarian]

I think that we in the West should not try to impose our ways and values on the East. If you read reports from Christian Religious leaders in these Countries, they tell us to stay out and let their politicians settle things. They do need help in food, clothing and Shelter, both homes and rebuilding their Churches.

When I was in High School, one Brother said the best Government is a benign dictatorship, emphasis on benign.

All I have seen that we intervene, things get worse.

We made a World Cruise in 2008, and saw for ourselves out bad the people have it, per our standards. But that is their way of life.

[donb9006]

A few days ago I read a post on the subject of Syria that suggested in each case where a dictator or "bad" guy was removed/toppled there was no clear identity of who/what would take over.

Afghanistan/Iraq....still trying to figure out who is in charge of the country. Egypt.....look who got in after that change....and how long it lasted....and now still in turmoil.

It certainly appears, like it or not these countries may well have been better off with their dictators or bad guys. They were a known entity....like it or not they kept the country stabil (a relative condition) under their form of governing.

Look at N. Korea, Iran et al.....run by folks we do not approve of for very many reasons.

I was in East Berlin shortly after the wall came down. The biggest complaint from the citizens of East Germany was, under communism, like it or not, they knew where the next days bread or other needs were going to come from and when. Under the new rulses of freedom they were not happy as there was no order. In their case they were fortunate as there was no doubt the situation would eventually evolve to a Germany that was in place.

In the Middle East there is no assurance that what gets into power will be any better, if at all, than what was ousted.

Can anybody look at the images of the children in the bombed out areas with no food or dwelling and say they are better off? They will be in time? Of course not.....the reality of the people is being over shadowed by the power of the few as usual.

Before we start touting regime change we should at least get back to a point where we can demonstrate we can take care of our own before we start selling a better way of life to others.

The old saying of the devil you know is better than the one you don't know is so very appropriate in these countries as demonstrated by what has followed ousting the incumbent leadership.

And even talking about regime change in Syria is rather farsical and naieve without knowing what comes after....like Egypt/Afghanistan/Iraq/et al.

Isn't it obvious?

btk

Trust me...ONLY a government friendly to the US gets to run these countries. They're being destabilized, their governments removed, becoming militarily impotent...for a reason.

A very thought provoking post! We believe that our system of government is the best. We cannot understand why everyone else wouldn't want to be just like us. Yet they look at us and see that all of our freedoms has made us a morally corrupt nation (their point of view, not mine). They see we have a justice system that often seems not to work too well, a healthcare system that gets less for every dollar spent then almost every other 1st world country, and an education system that graduates illiterates, and a society that seems to produce a whole bunch of crazies that like to shoot up malls and schools. They, for whatever reason, are willing to give up a lot of freedoms to trade for stability. I'm not sure that we aren't moving in the same direction with the 12 year old Patriot Act, NSA eavesdropping, etc. so, to finally answer your question, I don't think we have seen the spread of democracy that was predicted with the "Arab spring". We have just seen one petty tyrant replaced with another.

So, after all that...what is so great about our system?

The more important point...they have no organized military. They can't fight us. Someone plays chess...

[l2ridehd]

The so called "Arab spring" was a complete failure and only reported as a success by our leftest media. In Libya and Egypt both countries were taken over by rebels who ended up being the Muslim brotherhood. Both now have strong Al Queda positions. As for no organized military that will only take some time. And will it be organized military or organized terrorists training camps?

There have been actions against the established government starting in 2010 in Tunisia, Algeria, Lebanon, Jordan, Oman, Mauritania, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Morocco, Sudan, Palestinian Authority, Iraq, Bahrain, Libya, Kuwait, Western Sahara and Iranian Kazakhstan.

In not one instance from the above was the results more friendly to the US. And in several it was a real change to non US partisanship. In not one instance did the results end up with any form of democratic government. In not one instance did the results end up with more freedom for the people. In several the actions resulted in less freedom for the people, more Sharia law so less rights for women and children.

Around the world there are women rights group who protest things like abortion rights, work equality, and many other issues of the day. And yet there is zero action to protest the rights of the women and children who's right to education, marriage equality, right to dress as they want, and so many other very basic needs that they lose when Sharia law is imposed on them. It seems we turn our back on these blatant losses of human rights.

So IMHO we have seen a great deal of loss and not any benefits to the changes in regime in the middle East.

[DaleMN]

Tick...tock. :doh:

[graciegirl]

The so called "Arab spring" was a complete failure and only reported as a success by our leftest media. In Libya and Egypt both countries were taken over by rebels who ended up being the Muslim brotherhood. Both now have strong Al Queda positions. As for no organized military that will only take some time. And will it be organized military or organized terrorists training camps?

There have been actions against the established government starting in 2010 in Tunisia, Algeria, Lebanon, Jordan, Oman, Mauritania, Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Syria, Morocco, Sudan, Palestinian Authority, Iraq, Bahrain, Libya, Kuwait, Western Sahara and Iranian Kazakhstan.

In not one instance from the above was the results more friendly to the US. And in several it was a real change to non US partisanship. In not one instance did the results end up with any form of democratic government. In not one instance did the results end up with more freedom for the people. In several the actions resulted in less freedom for the people, more Sharia law so less rights for women and children.

Around the world there are women rights group who protest things like abortion rights, work equality, and many other issues of the day. And yet there is zero action to protest the rights of the women and children who's right to education, marriage equality, right to dress as they want, and so many other very basic needs that they lose when Sharia law is imposed on them. It seems we turn our back on these blatant losses of human rights.

So IMHO we have seen a great deal of loss and not any benefits to the changes in regime in the middle East.

Another very thought provoking post.