i was wondering why there was suddenly so much disapproval by the arab states against the invasion of Iraq.

I reached the conclusion that the arab states hate the idea of a poweful democratic state as their neighbour. Imagine Iraq with 'freedom', 'democracy', and oilpower. Wouldn't you get nervous if you were a dictatorship such as saudi arabia? You would not only lose the most favourite pet status you had with the US, but a muslim democracy would gain it. I would be scared shitless. What if the saudis suddenly start demanding the same rights as the Iraqis.

Yes, I do not think that the arab league cares about the iraqis. They see the potential threat of a powerful democracy amongst them.

The arab dictators are all old pickels. Maybe 30 years ago, when they were fresh dictators and terrorists, they could through some crap to the equation. But now, they're all decorative head of states with automatiic theft accounts.

they mainly worry about their own seat. They have to balance the sentiment of their own civilians with their own greed. Talk is cheap. This goes especially for the very rich small oil states, In egypt, syria etc.. less money and more idealism is at stake. However egypt receives money from the united stated for behaving like a good boy and be a relatively good neighbour to israel. Not that egypt civilians agree with that or see anything from this money, but civilians are the least important in this game...

There is nothing sudden about disapproval from Arab states. Their legitimacy is tenuously supported on maintaining the image of being Arab leaders and not American lackeys. As the Iraq war and occupation degenerate into the quagmire many foresaw, several states will have a choice between resisting America's regional agenda, and facing potentially lethal civil instability. The Arab world is not going to tolerate al-nakba al-thaani.

Many who had little appreciation for both the complexities of the mideast and simple human nature will display surprise as things unravel. They have no excuse.

That America's mandate among Arabs is at an end has been made abundantly clear not only from the statements of radicals and terrorists over recent years, but from even moderate governments. There was briefly a hope (I never considered it possible) that a lightning war and acquiescence of Iraqis would allow a fait accompli before the Arab world could react to the change. This window of oppurtunity to pull a fast one is now completely gone.

America's agenda is hopelessly isolated. Jordan is facing the unknown as covert assistance to US forces continues to dangerously antagonize domestic opinion. Kuwait, the sheikhdom some would expect to be coziest with Washington is not committing a single soldier to America's intervention. Saudi Arabia is expelling US troops. Iraq's borders are being crossed by insurgents. Rumsfeld is making thinly veiled threats of war against Syria and Iran. Many Iraqi combattants are now fighting not for Saddam, but for more enduring ethnic, tribal, and nationalistic causes.

If that isn't enough- Afghanistan is not nearing a successful outcome, and will demand attention.

When Washington declares their invasion complete, Iraq will slip through their fingers, and become the hotbed of several competing agendas. The world outside, still indignant about America's shortsighted blundering and arrogance, will be reticent to help pick up the pieces.

And it's all downhill from there- But don't feign surprise, all you who have fallen under the neoconservative spell. This fiasco was obvious: No mandate, no friends, and ultimately, insufficient blood and treasure to take on a region as in the bygone age of empires.

spuriousmonkey

May be you have something here. Perhaps they feel one Turkey is enough. Kingship and Mullahship is the way to go...:)

I don't understand either part of your statement, km.

Who thinks "1 Turkey is enough"?
Is Iran not dissatisfied with theocracy?
Do you consider Saudi Arabia and Jordan strong monarchies?

would the arab states prefer the rule of saddam hussien or the rule of the UN to continue? I think they would prefer the UN. That is what they are going to get in the long run. In the short run it is the US putting its service men into the grinder doing everyone else's dirty work. We come of taking crap for it? What would have happened in the balkans if we were not there? Would the serbs be the new nazis? All those opposed to this war are sending a message that tyrants and mass murduers are acceptable. Are they REALLY? if they are why doing the us just join iraq and put up several death camps for these protesters that are supporting iraq.

Exacerbating a problem with a wrong-headed approach does not mean that all other solutions had no merit. We have opened Pandora's box, and the results will reverberate for generations. I do not blame the Busheviks for problems such as tyrrany and terrorism. I blame the Busheviks for making them both much worse in our time (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=17938).

Me thinks:

Arabs dont care much for Turkey, its democracy, the people, the culture and specifically the idea of compromises since Atta Turk days. Therefore they dont wish to repeat that in Iraq or Iran and so on. Arabs are a bunch of proud people with long on cutting off toungues and short on compromises. So it is no wonder, their common thought processes have not evolved to the changes over time.

Iraq is run by Sadam's family (Kingship)
Iran is run by Mullahs (Mullahship)
Jordan (Kingship with Mullah control)
Syria (Same)
Saudi (Kingship with severe case of identity crisis, was not 13/19 saudis in 9/11?)

Democracy, freedom of speech? Personal Spiritual growth...give me a break....

BTW: There is no right headed approach. If you had the knowledge of WWI and WWI and I could send you back in time, could you have prevented either one?

The events are set in motion long time ago. Some are: Russia's occupation of Afghanistan and Iran's Mullah revolution. We all know where it is going. A holy war that will last for 10 to 12 years before people would come to their senses.

The universe unfolds as it should. There is not much you or I can do about in such complex cause-effect factors. It is the Chaos theory in play.

spuriousmonkey, you nailed it.

Yes, he is correct current regimes are afraid of democracy. But spurious did not point out that the US is more afraid of democracy in the Mideast than Arab populations: Arabs simply will not buy America's convoluted and self-serving agenda.

The real American agenda is in front of you for all to see. Iraq, left alone would have developed a lot of WMDs. While Sadam is specifically not a threat to America, it would have posed a great threat to Israel, the Kingdom of Saudi and exported terrorism in the reason by proxy through Mullahs.

So, sooner or later that needed to be solved and here we are.

...with threats multiplying :mad: