Heavy protests continued in Iraq on Thursday, and reports that officials
planned a major crackdown seemed to be coming to pass in at least some
areas, with police setting fire to protest camps in the city of Basra, and using live ammunition to shoot protesters.
This is hardly the first time the government has tried live ammunition
in an attempt to end protests, and as usual, it seems to have only led
to the protesters showing up in greater numbers. Even in Basra, where
most of the violence was, demonstrators again were able to close the
port.
With major protests pretty much everywhere in Iraq every day, and the
only major port closed recently, Iraqi officials are warning of economic
woes if the unrest continues. Of course, if Iraqi officials had
delivered on promises of reform that ended the first round of protests,
there likely never would’ve been a second round, nor another failed
attempt to get around reforms with violent crackdowns.
Fridays are almost always the biggest protests in Iraq in any given
week, and that looks likely to be the same again this time. It is likely
that top clerics will be offering sermons very critical of the
crackdowns as well during Friday, in keeping with past calls for
restraint.
Lucky for Iraqis that USA gave them “democracy” at gun-point. Their lives are so much better now.
Yes, democracy is incompatible with Islam,
it was and is a waste to even try.
People do tend to not like any form of government imposed on then by a foreign military power.
Agreed,
but there have been exceptions, Germany, Japan and S Korea.
However, Islamic countries are particularly immune to democratic
self governance.
“However, Islamic countries are particularly immune to democratic self governance.”
Compared to which other countries of similar age of government (e.g. since ceasing to be colonies of western regimes), size, population?
Not relevant Thomas, Islamic countries are incompatible with democratic self govt. Has nothing to do with “size, population” and everything to do with culture. Turkey and Lebanon gave it a shot but just look how they are heading back down the same old path.
But if you must have examples, just look at the former eastern bloc nations after the break up of the USSR, they in general, want a democratic system after years of dictatorial suppression.
There are a number of Muslim democracies — Indonesia comes to mind — that aren’t doing any worse than some other post-Soviet or post-colonial countries trying to implement democracy. There are mobs, coups, civil wars, etc., in “democratic” countries of all religions.
Your claim is more properly phrased as “I really, really, REALLY, REAAAAAALLLY WANT Islamic countries to be incompatible with democratic self govt so I don’t have to go looking for other explanations that don’t fit my biases as well.
Not true, Indonesia is the best example because it is outside the ME and had the benefit (?) of a harsh Suharto rule taming disparate groups into a democratic govt.
You cannot name another Islamic country to accomplish the same without a strong (brutal) leader imposing it. Indonesia is only the exception, for now.
Eastern bloc countries, South Korea 1955 (pop. under 30 million),
Hong Kong, Singapore, Italy (pop. 1950 46.5 million), were all similar to Iraq today with a pop. of 39.6 million. The difference was they did not have to overcome the stifling effects of shariah and Islamic fundamentalist rule.
Your claim is more properly phrased as
“No, there is no distinctive difference between non-Islamic and Islamic counties when it comes to democracy”.
Which is flatly ludicrous on it’s face.
Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Saudi, Morocco, Yemen, the gulf states, it is universal, except for Indonesia and to a lesser extent Malaysia.
When hard times hit, democracy is the most easily disrupted by the populace – that’s why it’s usually temporary.
Shariah law is the most disruptive force in the ME and wherever it is applied.
That’s strange because all three Western religions have peacefully co-existed in the Middle East for centuries. In fact, Einstein praised Arabs for their treatment of those practicing his religion..
They “co-exist” only when other religions are relegated to 2nd class status.
Show me a Muslim nation that elected a Hindu or Christian to leadership.
Show me a Hindu, Buddhist, Protestant, Catholic or other nation that elected a person as the leader of their nation. For example, did the Hebrew nation elect a Muslim to lead the country?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Arab_members_of_the_Knesset
Show me a Hindu, Buddhist, Protestant, Catholic or Jewish nation that elected a person as the leader of their nation.
by your external standards!
Show me your “standards” that refute it.
Disruptive to who? Invaders?
All of the people forced to live under it.
That’s strange Jews, Christians and Muslims all have peacefully co-existed in the Middle East for centuries. In fact, Einstein praised Arabs for their treatment of Jews.
Also, in the Middle East when you have countries carved by Colonial Powers, with not a lot of regard for ethnic and religious differences (like Protestant/Catholic historically in Europe), it makes an amicable, democratic government difficult to be established or to last. It’s the old, “You can’t please all the people, all of the time” when some of those differences exist from the beginning. For example, Kurdish, Sunni and Shia Iraq.
Rubbish,
shariah law is antithetical to democracy, individual freedom and equality for minorities..
Trash,
That’s the history. Furthermore, God did not give the world (trumpets now!!!) DEMOCRACY.
How is shariah compatible with democratic govt and individual liberty,
give examples.
Turkey just had free and fair elections and just because a leader is there who doesn’t 100% agree with us, doesn’t mean they aren’t as democratic as before. If anything, coup attempts drive democratic States to draconian anti-democratic counter-measures.
Erdogan is ruining Turkish secular democracy,
try opposing him in Turkey and see what that would get you.
Look what’s happening to Trump for opposing the Deep State. Why look all the way to Turkey?
Democracy wasn’t imposed on South Korea but Germany and Japan? we’ll see long term.
So, the democratic republic of SK just sprang into existence in spite of the American occupation and Korean War? Funny.
“Long term” re. Germany and Japan, lol, it’s only been 75 years!
South Korea wasn’t occupied.
Correct, not technically, but since the K War ALL Korean troops were under the supreme command of an American officer up until 1994.
And if you don’t think that is a defacto occupation, I can’t help you.
When military is invited in, it’s not an Occupation, but thanks anyway
When another nation
has control of your armed forces, you are essentially occupied.
when another nation willingly gives overall control of their armed forces to an ally, they are not occupied. For example, Eisenhower was supreme allied commander in Europe, but Britain wasn’t occupied.
“Willingly”, too funny.
The choice was either the USA or
the tender mercies of a Commie Red China.
SK followed US orders into the 1980’s.