Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[albitz]

Are you saying theres no oil that we need in the middle east ? :-/

[tunnie]

Are you saying theres no oil that we need in the middle east ? :-/

Not in Egypt, Tunisia ect. West will let those places tear them selves apart, nothing there for us.

[tunnie]

First thing after USA battling buying way into Iraq, they started piping the oil out...

[Dishevelled Den]

For too long, many nations, including the US, have tolerated, even excused, oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability. Oppression has become common, but stability has never arrived. We must take a different approach.

We must help the reformers of the Middle East as they work for freedom, and strive to build a community of peaceful, democratic nations.

There's no doubt that some form of different thinking has to be brought to bear Nick.

It appears to me that events may already be running at a pace beyond that which is reasonable for the orderly transition of power in not only Egypt, but the region in general.

[Dishevelled Den]

Are you saying theres no oil that we need in the middle east ? :-/

Not in Egypt, Tunisia ect. West will let those places tear them selves apart, nothing there for us.

The problem with that T is if the situation in those particular countries did descend into anarchy the knock-on effect within the region in general would, without doubt, involve us at some future point.

[Nickbat]

For too long, many nations, including the US, have tolerated, even excused, oppression in the Middle East in the name of stability. Oppression has become common, but stability has never arrived. We must take a different approach.

We must help the reformers of the Middle East as they work for freedom, and strive to build a community of peaceful, democratic nations.

There's no doubt that some form of different thinking has to be brought to bear Nick.

It appears to me that events may already be running at a pace beyond that which is reasonable for the orderly transition of power in not only Egypt, but the region in general.

I must admit that i was a bit naughty posting that, for it was not my words, but rather a paraphrase of a speech made by George W. Bush. Although he is always portrayed as a fool by lefties (like every Republican POTUS) his words ring true at this moment in time. 

[tunnie]

Are you saying theres no oil that we need in the middle east ? :-/

Not in Egypt, Tunisia ect. West will let those places tear them selves apart, nothing there for us.

The problem with that T is if the situation in those particular countries did descend into anarchy the knock-on effect within the region in general would, without doubt, involve us at some future point.

But the big players won't be keen, Iraq, we (US) went in cause they wanted to, without UN/EU go ahead.

Now, EU/UN would want backing of a major power, but everyone will dig their heals in. Be bad for PR, bad for the bank balance, with no serious amounts of oil to steal, no one wants in.

[Dishevelled Den]

Are you saying theres no oil that we need in the middle east ? :-/

Not in Egypt, Tunisia ect. West will let those places tear them selves apart, nothing there for us.

The problem with that T is if the situation in those particular countries did descend into anarchy the knock-on effect within the region in general would, without doubt, involve us at some future point.

But the big players won't be keen, Iraq, we (US) went in cause they wanted to, without UN/EU go ahead.

Now, EU/UN would want backing of a major power, but everyone will dig their heals in. Be bad for PR, bad for the bank balance, with no serious amounts of oil to steal, no one wants in.

Yes I think it's quite reasonable to say that there's little taste for further involvement in yet more international conflict by those already involved in Iraq/Afghanistan, however events may overtake desires.

Should Israel involve herself in the region militarily - either as a result of pre-emptive action or in response to being attacked - it's more than likely that the US (and perhaps this country) will be obliged to step in to prevent the deterioration of the security situation to the point where nuclear weapons will be likely to be deployed.

The nett result of an escalation to this degree would not only threaten stability in the immediate region but in the Middle East in general.

One such undesirable consequence of this, over and above rocketing oil prices/availability, would be the installation of overtly religious fundamentalists in power in many countries across the region - with all that this would imply for future stability of those nations and our continued relations with them.

[Dishevelled Den]

I must admit that i was a bit naughty posting that, for it was not my words, but rather a paraphrase of a speech made by George W. Bush. Although he is always portrayed as a fool by lefties (like every Republican POTUS) his words ring true at this moment in time. 

Was that made pre or post 9/11?

Whilst many still remain undecided about GWB (he was in my view poorly served by some in his administration) I would consider both Ronald Reagan and Dwight D. Eisenhower far from being foolish.

[Banjax]

those long winter nights will fly by with those page-turners Z 

Yes BJ beside being inspired by Lizzie to look again at some recent history I really feel the need to try to understand a bit more of this particular crisis and how a different outcome may well have altered the region as it presently sits.

I love the tactile experience of actually holding a book although I'm flirting with the idea of a Kindle - but would really need to see one in operation before spending the money.

I agree Z, we tend to ignore vast swathes of history until it pops up to perhaps bite us in the rear - the future of Egypt is on a knife edge - i hope that a tyrant isn't replaced by fundamentalists, i hope and believe that the vast majority of Egyptians won't tolerate anything less than a fair, free election and return a liberal leader.....time will tell. Until then, the west should examine all their relationships and where they prop up dictators to control muslim extremists - maybe the choice isn't between 2 evils as we've all been led to believe, maybe we should be advocating the democracy we readily spout, let the peoples of any nation decide what they think is best and let the chips fall where they may - trying to control our interests in every part of the world is going to cost us heavily sooner rather than later 

[Banjax]

I must admit that i was a bit naughty posting that, for it was not my words, but rather a paraphrase of a speech made by George W. Bush. Although he is always portrayed as a fool by lefties (like every Republican POTUS) his words ring true at this moment in time. 

Was that made pre or post 9/11?

Whilst many still remain undecided about GWB (he was in my view poorly served by some in his administration) I would consider both Ronald Reagan and Dwight D. Eisenhower far from being foolish.

Ronnie Ray-gun, Zulu? Really? You're getting soft in your old age - the man was a buffoon in my opinion 

[Dishevelled Den]

Ronnie Ray-gun, Zulu? Really? You're getting soft in your old age - the man was a buffoon in my opinion 

Ooh I don't know BJ, in these remarks back in '64 he touched on many issues, while specific to the situation at the time of an election in the US, the fundamental of these issues still has resonance today, indeed he could have been describing the effects of untrammelled power as exhibited by the EU or the direction of recent governments here.

Barry Goldwater, a long time GOP senator (Republican) was seeking office as President of the US.  An ultra conservative, he was defeated by Lyndon Johnston (LBJ) a Democrat, in a landslide victory which also removed many Republicans from office.


[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHoOfcFM33c&feature=related[/media]

[Lizzie_Zoom]

I have come on here this morning and seen how this thread has gone.  The opinions stated are very interesting, and cover the many complex issues of the Middle East.

I am not going to drone on about how I see it (yet!).  I will only say that I think it is best if the Western powers stay right out of it!  The Middle East, as British history proves, is a dangerous and complex place full of religious conflict going back centuries.  Israel and the Arab states are at each others throats and all it needs to really spark everything off is for the USA, and allies, to go in thinking they can (Yet again) change everything to their advantage.  It will end in another disaster for the West!

With Suez in 1956 the USSR came very close to becoming involved due to the actions of the British, French and Israel's.  Just because the USSR has expired does not mean that Russian 'interests' in the region still exist; in addition of course you have Iran.............!!

No, the USA must stay out!

[Dishevelled Den]

I have come on here this morning and seen how this thread has gone.  The opinions stated are very interesting, and cover the many complex issues of the Middle East.

I am not going to drone on about how I see it (yet!).  I will only say that I think it is best if the Western powers stay right out of it!  The Middle East, as British history proves, is a dangerous and complex place full of religious conflict going back centuries.  Israel and the Arab states are at each others throats and all it needs to really spark everything off is for the USA, and allies, to go in thinking they can (Yet again) change everything to their advantage.  It will end in another disaster for the West!

With Suez in 1956 the USSR came very close to becoming involved due to the actions of the British, French and Israel's.  Just because the USSR has expired does not mean that Russian 'interests' in the region still exist; in addition of course you have Iran.............!!

No, the USA must stay out!

Yes, there is no doubt that any intervention by Western powers (the US in particular) may well undesirable results and I think you're right, the lessons of history - particularly of recent history - should be well remembered.

As there is at least one nuclear power in the region, intervention (preferably not of the unilateral variety) may be the lesser of many evils, in the short term at least, should the situation deteriorate to the point where it became apparent that those weapons would be likely to be deployed or threatened to be deployed.

The current events as we see them unfolding in Egypt and latterly in Tunisia could well be the harbinger of conflict in the region that will eventually evolve into international conflict. 

[albitz]

You can bet your bottom dollar that the U.S. is working behind the scenes to try to steer events towards an outcome which is suitable to them/the western world/ and the middle east itself.
The thought of Egypt falling into the hands of extremists will make their blood run cold. It could be the spark that sets of the powderkeg in the middle east, or at least makes Israel more nervous and vulnerable and therefore more likely to react aggressively. It cant be avoided imo, while there are forces working to achieve an extremist outcome (probably backed by Iran) then the west has little option but to counter that.
Its how they go about it which is the important thing.