Lebanese Government Resigns

[A_Wanderer]

apositive action, it may end in free and fair elections and the pullout of Syrian troops - another step in a long battle. Power to the people!

Lebanon's Prime Minister Says His Government Resigns

Mon Feb 28,11:59 AM ET
BEIRUT (Reuters) - Lebanon's Syrian-backed Prime Minister Omar Karami, under popular pressure after the assassination of an ex-prime minister, said Monday his government was resigning

"Out of concern that the government does not become an obstacle to the good of the country, I announce the resignation of the government I had the honor to lead," Karami told parliament in Beirut.

link

link

 

[U2democrat]

I saw this. Let's hope it ends up being a good thing

 

[deep]

Let's hope it ends up being a good thing

i agree


should be a good thing

 

[VertigoGal]

first in the ukraine, and now this---it seems that peaceful demonstrations and global pressure *can* achieve results in some situations. I hope this ends up being a step towards free/fair elections.

 

[verte76]

I agree, this, as well as the recent events in Ukraine, show that peaceful protests and global pressure can achieve results. I hope this results in more peace, democracy and stability in that troubled part of the world.

 

[melon]

It shows that diplomacy can work, as long as Bush doesn't spend all his time in the UN undermining it (i.e., demanding weapons inspectors, then saying that they're not doing it fast enough).

Melon

 

[nbcrusader]

Or, Bush's influence in the Middle East will accelerate free democracies...

 

[melon]

Or, Bush's influence in the Middle East will accelerate free democracies...

I agree with more hard-handed approach to diplomacy. We do need to be a bit aggressive when talking to nations.

I didn't agree with his approach to Iraq. I thought it was a reprehensible mess. On that note, I wish Iraq the best in its recovery.

I think the hard-handed approach to diplomacy came out of lessons learned from the mess that was Iraq.

Melon

 

[BVS]

Or, Bush's influence in the Middle East will accelerate free democracies...

influence? or occupation?

 

[Sherry Darling]

This is most cool indeed. Last summe I wrote a paper on "people power revolutions" (ie, Ukraine, Serbia, etc). Looks like I have another chapter to write. Here's hoping they can take the next step to good governance.

SD

 

[drhark]

Good news indeed.

I love the sound of falling dominos

 

[yolland]

Peaceful protests?!? Diplomacy??!?

Sure, those factors played some part in this, but an assassination was what ultimately got the ball rolling! It's heartening that the public responded the way it did, but what a price to pay for a moment's unity.

Of course, hopefully that dynamic will continue, but that remains to be seen. It would be easier to be optimistic if this really were the culmination of months or years of diplomacy and peaceful demonstrations, but it's not.

 

[Teta040]

Now if Ariel Sharon would only resign, I'd say it was working. Pro-Israel I have always been, but I despise this man. He, Bush and Putin all took power using illegal means, and all are guilty of moral crimes. Or supporting them. The Unholy Truimvirate. Sharon, though, holds the unique distinction of being the only Israeli politician convicted in a Jewish court of indirectly massacering people, and he was barred from politics for a decade. You know, it would take a lot for the Knesset to do that, to one of its own.

 

[drhark]

He, Bush and Putin all took power using illegal means, and all are guilty of moral crimes. Or supporting them

Can we put the 2000 election to rest please?

You make some points worthy of argument but the comment about Bush "taking power using illegal means" makes me want to disregard your entire post

 

[all_i_want]

why? it is true.

 

[all_i_want]

oh and for the lebanese, good job. good job showing that invasion is not essential to bring freedom just because you happen to be in the middle east.

there are lessons to be learned here, mr president.

 

[verte76]

teta040, I agree 100% about Sharon. I am pro-Israel also, but I can't stand Sharon. Neither can some Israelis, even though I know someone is about to post about the fact that he was elected. The guy also has a massacre on his hands. I wouldn't want this guy running my country.

 

[all_i_want]

we've touched sharon over here:

http://forum.interference.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=109767&pagenumber=2

for your enjoyment

 

[ladywithspinninghead]

Great news, but what`s next?
Is the President, who will be appointing the interim government, pro-Syrian too?

At least there`s elections coming up in May...

 

[drhark]

oh and for the lebanese, good job. good job showing that invasion is not essential to bring freedom just because you happen to be in the middle east.

there are lessons to be learned here, mr president.

To the contrary, I would strongly argue that this would not have occurred without the invasion of Iraq.

You can't prove either side of this argument so I'll leave it at that.
But if more pro democratic events like this keep occurring it will be increasingly difficult to chalk it up to coincidence.

 

[all_i_want]

to me, it says that diplomacy and international pressure can work - just as it did in ukraine.

'But if more pro democratic events like this keep occurring it will be increasingly difficult to chalk it up to coincidence.'

so does that mean any democratic movements in the middle east will be credited to bush now?

if iran overthrows its theocracy in the next 5-10 years, should we thank mr bush for that?

what happens if saudis decide they dont wanna live in a theocratic monarchy anymore? saudi arabia is a key US ally after all. will mr bush support a revolution there?

but ill admit one thing. people in these countries probably realized that if they dont act, speak up and change their governments, bullies like bush will have their justification and they would gladly invade their country, and then make them pay for the services they bring. after all, in middle east, its all about the oil!

give me a break.

 

[A_Wanderer]

No, it has nothing to do with diplomacy and international pressure in the UN mould, it has everything to do with the US making the ME more unstable.

Stability is Saddam Hussein, Hosni Mubbarak and Bashir Assad. By upsetting the balance and introducing principles of democratic governance for the Iraqi people those same principles can become accepted in the region. This is the Bush doctrine in action whether you like it or not. One reason for invading Iraq was that it is a catalyst for change.

Don't take my word for it, the Lebanese Druze Leader Walid Jumblatt who is not a pro-American stooge by any stretch of the imagination said the same damn thing.

"I was cynical about Iraq. But when I saw the Iraqi people voting three weeks ago, eight million of them, it was the start of a new Arab world. The Berlin Wall has fallen."

 

[drhark]

to me, it says that diplomacy and international pressure can work - just as it did in ukraine.

'But if more pro democratic events like this keep occurring it will be increasingly difficult to chalk it up to coincidence.'

so does that mean any democratic movements in the middle east will be credited to bush now?
Yes, a strong argument will be made.

if iran overthrows its theocracy in the next 5-10 years, should we thank mr bush for that?

Yes, absolutely

what happens if saudis decide they dont wanna live in a theocratic monarchy anymore? saudi arabia is a key US ally after all. will mr bush support a revolution there?

Yes, he will support a democratic revolution but not a theocratic revolution as in Iran

but ill admit one thing. people in these countries probably realized that if they dont act, speak up and change their governments, bullies like bush will have their justification and they would gladly invade their country, and then make them pay for the services they bring. after all, in middle east, its all about the oil!

Yeah that's it! Revolt because if you don't, Bush will invade!

give me a break.

Hey hey hey..... one break........commmmminnn uuuuuup! (David Lee Roth)

 

[all_i_want]

well, it seems mr bush got all his bases covered... whatever he does from now on he cant go wrong with you guys!

if none of those happen, he'll be able to say, 'we need invade a couple of more places, maybe then theyll learn what freedom and liberal democracy means!'

and if they do, he'll take all the credit?

either way, he wins, we lose.

there must be some way out of this paradox... itd be great if all middle eastern states told US to get the hell out of their countries (including iraq) and held FREE elections... but that'll never happen.

anyway, im tired now. i wish mr bush and his supporters good luck in their quest to ensure american world domination in the next 50 years. unfortunately we dont live in a perfect world.

 

[financeguy]

we've touched sharon over here:

http://forum.interference.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=109767&pagenumber=2

for your enjoyment

Yep complete with the usual "Oh once you criticize Sharon you are an anti-Semite" from the usual suspects. Israel is the one country exempt from criticism in certain quarters - you can criticize practically any government but once you criticize Israel in any way that's it, forget about it you're obviously just anti-Semite.

 

[STING2]

oh and for the lebanese, good job. good job showing that invasion is not essential to bring freedom just because you happen to be in the middle east.

there are lessons to be learned here, mr president.

Really, take a guess at what Saddam would have done with such a demonstration!

I can go into detail about Saddam's own security system as well as the size and strength of his military and the futile attempts by Iraqi's to overthrow him during his 25 years in power.

Sometimes the only way to remove certain regimes is through military force.

 

[all_i_want]

no administration can stand against its people and stay in power. even the biggest tyrants felt the need to say they were 'there for their people'. revolutions are not easy. but they can not be imposed by foreign powers either.

i believe when a nation truly believes in itself it has the power to overcome incredible hardships. they could find the strenght in their faith, in their national identity or in a leader.

many revolutions have happened without american intervension. there are very good examples for revolutions where freedom was WON by the people, not handed over by a foreign power.

 

[drhark]

Yep complete with the usual "Oh once you criticize Sharon you are an anti-Semite" from the usual suspects. Israel is the one country exempt from criticism in certain quarters - you can criticize practically any government but once you criticize Israel in any way that's it, forget about it you're obviously just anti-Semite.

My God that's such BS. Nobody called anyone an anti-Semite

 

[drhark]

either way, he wins, we lose.

there must be some way out of this paradox... itd be great if all middle eastern states told US to get the hell out of their countries (including iraq) and held FREE elections... but that'll never happen.

anyway, im tired now. i wish mr bush and his supporters good luck in their quest to ensure american world domination in the next 50 years. unfortunately we dont live in a perfect world.

No, you don't lose, we all win.

But your political beliefs will be proven wrong which is a small price to pay for world peace.

P.S. Can I pay you a visit when the Bush World Domination Tour comes to your hometown?

 

[STING2]

no administration can stand against its people and stay in power. even the biggest tyrants felt the need to say they were 'there for their people'. revolutions are not easy. but they can not be imposed by foreign powers either.

i believe when a nation truly believes in itself it has the power to overcome incredible hardships. they could find the strenght in their faith, in their national identity or in a leader.

many revolutions have happened without american intervension. there are very good examples for revolutions where freedom was WON by the people, not handed over by a foreign power.

Saddam stood and would still be standing against the majority of the Iraqi people had it not been for the invasion of Iraq and the overthrow of Saddam by the coalition.

All the good feeling in the world cannot stop a tank from rolling over a house and everyone inside it. Idealism is necessary, but it will not succeed if people have no realistic capability to combat the forces they face. Revolutions that succeed without major violence do so because the "Military" did not side with the government in power. Saddam's Republican guards were loyal to Saddam nearly to the very end, and what remains of the special Republican Guard continues to attack Iraqi's and coalition forces all across the country nearly two years after the invasion.

Iraq had a standing military of over 400,000 two years ago that was ready to crush any form of revolt to Saddam's rule from inside Iraq as it had done for nearly 25 years. Over half a million Iraqi's were murdered by Saddam and Saddam would have no problem murdering everyone in a town of 10,000 people in order to get 10 Revolutionary's.

There are some dictatorships that are suceptible to revolt from within the country, but there are other's like Saddam's regime that are immune to revolt from within. Absent foreign intervention, only Saddam's Republican Guards could have overthrown him. I can go into greater detail on this. Ken Pollacks "The Threatening Storm" talks at length about this particular point and provides the most impressive historical analysis on the history of Saddam's regime, that I have ever seen.