RSS
Twitter
Facebook
YouTubePresident Obama called for democracy in the middle east during a visit in Cairo, Egypt.
Did he think through what he was asking for ? The consequences ?
http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/06/04/obama-mid-east-speech-supports-rights-democracy
Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Everyday Chit Chat
Obama Mid-East Speech Supports Rights, Democracy
[191 posts] [20 contributors]
Topic Rating:
(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:
Rate this topic:
-
catnfiddle
Giant Corncob District
Login to Send PM
Are you saying he was wrong to support democracy in the Middle East? That has been a part of diplomacy going back as far as I can remember (which goes back to Carter, since I was too young to care much about Ford or Nixon). Or is it just his timing that is disagreeable?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Antonio
Login to Send PM
catnfiddle wrote >>
Are you saying he was wrong to support democracy in the Middle East? That has been a part of diplomacy going back as far as I can remember (which goes back to Carter, since I was too young to care much about Ford or Nixon). Or is it just his timing that is disagreeable?I can't recall a president of the US going to another middle east country advocating a complete restructure and dismantling of their governmental system. ( Iraq ) is the exception, we did invade it.
Maybe he didn't think it would actually happen and things look to be out of control and nobody knows how this is going to end up.
There is something about stability with these regimes regardless how distateful they are.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Parker
Franklinton
Login to Send PM
Antonio wrote >>
catnfiddle wrote >>
Are you saying he was wrong to support democracy in the Middle East? That has been a part of diplomacy going back as far as I can remember (which goes back to Carter, since I was too young to care much about Ford or Nixon). Or is it just his timing that is disagreeable?I can't recall a president of the US going to another middle east country advocating a complete restructure and dismantling of their governmental system. ( Iraq ) is the exception, we did invade it.
Maybe he didn't think it would actually happen and things look to be out of control and nobody knows how this is going to end up.
There is something about stability with these regimes regardless how distateful they are.Things aren't out of control in Egypt, the military is in control. This is a precarious state to be in but it avoids the chaos to which Antonio alludes. It also avoids the snap elections mandated in the constitution, which provides time for the opposition to strategize and freely build coalitions. We will see what happens. More to Antonio's point, I think no one knows where these rebellions/revolutions are heading but it seems they are effective. It is amazing that some have been nearly bloodless. I think most who expected this day to come thought things would be more like Libya, which being brutally suppressed.
Antonio, are you giving Obama credit for the Egyptian revolution?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Parker
Franklinton
Login to Send PM
I think Iraq adequately demonstrates that a US President has done so. No need to discount that as an example. We now have two different models of prompting change in a Middle Eastern state: one by force, the other by diplomacy. We have the opportunity to see which will succeed or fail. With any luck, they both will succeed!
Posted 1 year ago # -
rustbelt
Login to Send PM
I can't recall a president of the US going to another middle east country advocating a complete restructure and dismantling of their governmental system. ( Iraq ) is the exception, we did invade it.
No offense, but are you kidding me? The U.S. has been directly & indirectly meddling in other countries' affairs, not just the Middle East, for decades.
This includes our direct support & actions in toppling governments, including democratically elected ones (when the democracy in charge did not fit our "national interests").
Our actions in the 21st century are no different, except sometimes (and only sometimes) they are slightly more subtle.
Posted 1 year ago # -
rus
Login to Send PM
Egypt is still kinda dicey...
http://af.reuters.com/article/egyptNews/idAFLDE71M1CU20110223?sp=true
Lots more to play out in that story, it seems.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Antonio
Login to Send PM
rustbelt wrote >>
I can't recall a president of the US going to another middle east country advocating a complete restructure and dismantling of their governmental system. ( Iraq ) is the exception, we did invade it.
No offense, but are you kidding me? The U.S. has been directly & indirectly meddling in other countries' affairs, not just the Middle East, for decades.
This includes our direct support & actions in toppling governments, including democratically elected ones (when the democracy in charge did not fit our "national interests").
Our actions in the 21st century are no different, except sometimes (and only sometimes) they are slightly more subtle.Did a sitting US president say this on their own soil is what I asked ?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Twixlen
Westgate, Columbus
Login to Send PM
GAH. I just had a post eaten by the internet monsters....
I think to say it was Obama as catalyst both gives him too much credit & the people not enough.
Remember, it started in Tunisia, with the man that set himself on fire in protest; spurring protests in that country, spurring a man in Egypt to set himself on fire. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12204999
The middle east has been a tinder for a while - with the advent of technology, people were discovering the world, and discovering that they weren't alone in their anger with their respective leaders. These are dictators that have been in power for decades, enforcing "emergency rule" and allowing greater and greater poverty to grow amongst the people.
Also remember that the middle east is mostly young people - in particular, under 30's.
Add to the repression and lack of jobs and poverty, a recent sudden spike in grain prices - when people could hardly afford food as it was - and it's a firestorm.
I'm amazed that Egypt didn't have larger bloodshed, though the real test is to come with legitimate elections & the creation of a government that is ruled by the will of the people.
Libya is the real battleground - Gaddafi will not go quietly; he's too wrapped in his own delusions.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Antonio
Login to Send PM
Twixlen wrote >>
GAH. I just had a post eaten by the internet monsters....
I think to say it was Obama as catalyst both gives him too much credit & the people not enough.
Remember, it started in Tunisia, with the man that set himself on fire in protest; spurring protests in that country, spurring a man in Egypt to set himself on fire. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12204999
The middle east has been a tinder for a while - with the advent of technology, people were discovering the world, and discovering that they weren't alone in their anger with their respective leaders. These are dictators that have been in power for decades, enforcing "emergency rule" and allowing greater and greater poverty to grow amongst the people.
Also remember that the middle east is mostly young people - in particular, under 30's.
Add to the repression and lack of jobs and poverty, a recent sudden spike in grain prices - when people could hardly afford food as it was - and it's a firestorm.
I'm amazed that Egypt didn't have larger bloodshed, though the real test is to come with legitimate elections & the creation of a government that is ruled by the will of the people.
Libya is the real battleground - Gaddafi will not go quietly; he's too wrapped in his own delusions.Libya is at the moment, I think the British MI6 are going to kill him if his own citizens don't get him first. Payback for Lockerbie.
I waiting for Saudia Arabia to explode.
Posted 1 year ago # -
kit444
Elsewhere
Login to Send PM
Antonio wrote >>
rustbelt wrote >>
I can't recall a president of the US going to another middle east country advocating a complete restructure and dismantling of their governmental system. ( Iraq ) is the exception, we did invade it.
No offense, but are you kidding me? The U.S. has been directly & indirectly meddling in other countries' affairs, not just the Middle East, for decades.
This includes our direct support & actions in toppling governments, including democratically elected ones (when the democracy in charge did not fit our "national interests").
Our actions in the 21st century are no different, except sometimes (and only sometimes) they are slightly more subtle.Did a sitting US president say this on their own soil is what I asked ?
Didn't Reagan do the same thing in Moscow in 1988?
Posted 1 year ago # -
kit444
Elsewhere
Login to Send PM
kit444 wrote >>
Antonio wrote >>
rustbelt wrote >>
I can't recall a president of the US going to another middle east country advocating a complete restructure and dismantling of their governmental system. ( Iraq ) is the exception, we did invade it.
No offense, but are you kidding me? The U.S. has been directly & indirectly meddling in other countries' affairs, not just the Middle East, for decades.
This includes our direct support & actions in toppling governments, including democratically elected ones (when the democracy in charge did not fit our "national interests").
Our actions in the 21st century are no different, except sometimes (and only sometimes) they are slightly more subtle.Did a sitting US president say this on their own soil is what I asked ?
Didn't Reagan do the same thing in Moscow in 1988?
Reagan's speech at Moscow State University in 1988:
http://www.school-for-champions.com/speeches/reagan_moscow.htm
"Freedom is the right to question, and change the established way of doing things. It is the continuing revolution of the marketplace. It is the understanding that allows us to recognize shortcomings and seek solutions. It is the right to put forth an idea, scoffed at by the experts, and watch it catch fire among the people. It is the right to stick - to dream - to follow your dream, or stick to your conscience, even if you're the only one in a sea of doubters.
Freedom is the recognition that no single person, no single authority of government has a monopoly on the truth, but that every individual life is infinitely precious, that every one of us put on this world has been put there for a reason and has something to offer."
ETA: Is the distinction simply that Egypt is an Arab country and not as sophisticated for democracy as a country like Russia, which had been under autocratic rule of one form or another for all of its history?
Posted 1 year ago # -
Antonio
Login to Send PM
kit444 wrote >>
kit444 wrote >>
Antonio wrote >>
rustbelt wrote >>
I can't recall a president of the US going to another middle east country advocating a complete restructure and dismantling of their governmental system. ( Iraq ) is the exception, we did invade it.
No offense, but are you kidding me? The U.S. has been directly & indirectly meddling in other countries' affairs, not just the Middle East, for decades.
This includes our direct support & actions in toppling governments, including democratically elected ones (when the democracy in charge did not fit our "national interests").
Our actions in the 21st century are no different, except sometimes (and only sometimes) they are slightly more subtle.Did a sitting US president say this on their own soil is what I asked ?
Didn't Reagan do the same thing in Moscow in 1988?
Reagan's speech at Moscow State University in 1988:
http://www.school-for-champions.com/speeches/reagan_moscow.htm
"Freedom is the right to question, and change the established way of doing things. It is the continuing revolution of the marketplace. It is the understanding that allows us to recognize shortcomings and seek solutions. It is the right to put forth an idea, scoffed at by the experts, and watch it catch fire among the people. It is the right to stick - to dream - to follow your dream, or stick to your conscience, even if you're the only one in a sea of doubters.
Freedom is the recognition that no single person, no single authority of government has a monopoly on the truth, but that every individual life is infinitely precious, that every one of us put on this world has been put there for a reason and has something to offer."With the advent of Gorbachev, the Soviet Union was headed in that direction. It was a safe call for Reagan to give this speech.
The Middle East is a completely differnt animal to deal with.
Posted 1 year ago # -
kit444
Elsewhere
Login to Send PM
Antonio wrote >>
With the advent of Gorbachev, the Soviet Union was headed in that direction. It was a safe call for Reagan to give this speech.
The Middle East is a completely differnt animal to deal with.First of all, Reagan would have given that speech in Moscow in 1981 if he had the opportunity. Second, Russians in 1988 had about as much experience with democracy as the Egyptians do now.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Antonio
Login to Send PM
kit444 wrote >>
Antonio wrote >>
With the advent of Gorbachev, the Soviet Union was headed in that direction. It was a safe call for Reagan to give this speech.
The Middle East is a completely differnt animal to deal with.First of all, Reagan would have given that speech in Moscow in 1981 if he had the opportunity. Second, Russians in 1988 had about as much experience with democracy as the Egyptians do now.
You are entitled to your opinion. That's democracy.
Posted 1 year ago # -
rus
Login to Send PM
kit444 wrote >>
Antonio wrote >>
With the advent of Gorbachev, the Soviet Union was headed in that direction. It was a safe call for Reagan to give this speech.
The Middle East is a completely differnt animal to deal with.First of all, Reagan would have given that speech in Moscow in 1981 if he had the opportunity. Second, Russians in 1988 had about as much experience with democracy as the Egyptians do now.
Damn, but you're depressing today.
Posted 1 year ago # -
kit444
Elsewhere
Login to Send PM
Antonio wrote >>
kit444 wrote >>
Antonio wrote >>
With the advent of Gorbachev, the Soviet Union was headed in that direction. It was a safe call for Reagan to give this speech.
The Middle East is a completely differnt animal to deal with.First of all, Reagan would have given that speech in Moscow in 1981 if he had the opportunity. Second, Russians in 1988 had about as much experience with democracy as the Egyptians do now.
You are entitled to your opinion. That's democracy.
I don't think I stated an opinion, actually. The first sentence was an assumption about Reagan that I think most historians would agree with, and the second an accurate representation of Russian history.
My opinion is that it's never wrong for an American president to encourage people to seek freedom. It's not our place to decide who is worthy of it and who isn't.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Antonio
Login to Send PM
kit444 wrote >>
Antonio wrote >>
kit444 wrote >>
Antonio wrote >>
With the advent of Gorbachev, the Soviet Union was headed in that direction. It was a safe call for Reagan to give this speech.
The Middle East is a completely differnt animal to deal with.First of all, Reagan would have given that speech in Moscow in 1981 if he had the opportunity. Second, Russians in 1988 had about as much experience with democracy as the Egyptians do now.
You are entitled to your opinion. That's democracy.
I don't think I stated an opinion, actually. The first sentence was an assumption about Reagan that I think most historians would agree with, and the second an accurate representation of Russian history.
The end consequences must be thought out, it's like trying to control a wildfire. From what I'm witnessing out of the WH and state department they didn't.
My opinion is that it's never wrong for an American president to encourage people to seek freedom. It's not our place to decide who is worthy of it and who isn't.
Posted 1 year ago # -
kit444
Elsewhere
Login to Send PM
Antonio wrote >>
The end consequences must be thought out, it's like trying to control a wildfire. From what I'm witnessing out of the WH and state department they didn't.Your position is it was irresponsible for Obama to give a speech in Cairo encouraging democracy, but it was not irresponsible for Reagan to give a similiar speech in Moscow? (Accepting the premise that somehow one speech is responsible for the downfall of a government.) What were all the potential end consequences to a revolution in a nuclear superpower? As bad as Putin is, things could have turned out much worse in what was the Soviet Union.
Posted 1 year ago # -
Antonio
Login to Send PM
Antonio wrote >>
Twixlen wrote >>
GAH. I just had a post eaten by the internet monsters....
I think to say it was Obama as catalyst both gives him too much credit & the people not enough.
Remember, it started in Tunisia, with the man that set himself on fire in protest; spurring protests in that country, spurring a man in Egypt to set himself on fire. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-12204999
The middle east has been a tinder for a while - with the advent of technology, people were discovering the world, and discovering that they weren't alone in their anger with their respective leaders. These are dictators that have been in power for decades, enforcing "emergency rule" and allowing greater and greater poverty to grow amongst the people.
Also remember that the middle east is mostly young people - in particular, under 30's.
Add to the repression and lack of jobs and poverty, a recent sudden spike in grain prices - when people could hardly afford food as it was - and it's a firestorm.
I'm amazed that Egypt didn't have larger bloodshed, though the real test is to come with legitimate elections & the creation of a government that is ruled by the will of the people.
Libya is the real battleground - Gaddafi will not go quietly; he's too wrapped in his own delusions.Libya is at the moment, I think the British MI6 are going to kill him if his own citizens don't get him first. Payback for Lockerbie.
I waiting for Saudia Arabia to explode.http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110223/wl_nm/us_libya_protests_lockerbie_2
Posted 1 year ago #
You must log in to post.
Launched in August 2010, TheMetropreneur.com is a local online resource devoted to small business development and entrepreneurship. Its aim is to tell the stories of Central Ohio's business community, foster regional economic development and assist entrepreneurs with its resource-heavy focus.