Quote:
Originally posted by Lurch@Sep 7 2004, 07:23 PM
In other words, I don't think a true democracy in Iraq would be palatable to US interests if the election was really democratic b/c I don't think the majority of Iraqi's are pro-US. The US really have put themselves between a rock and a hard place in this one.
For example, what does the US do if a hard-line cleric runs for office and wins in a landslide? Do they stay, clean up the mess they made, spend billions and politely accept their pfo letter? I think there is a potentially mistaken belief in the US gov't that people in Iraq really do want a western style society - what if they really do want something like Taliban-lite?
|
And that is very hard for an American to understand. They find it hard to believe that anyone would want to live under a system other than the one they live under. I still get the old "you must be happy to not have to live in a socialist country like Canada" line from quite a few people. If they only knew how good Canada was and how good Canadians have it, they would be beating down the doors to move up there.
But this is a concept foreign (pardon the pun) to them because they are so focused on America (some call it self-absorbed, but I think its more to do with the way they are deluged with pro-American media and ONLY news on America) and think it is the only place in the world where freedom reigns supreme. They are shocked to hear that other countries have more freedoms and more guaranteed advantages toward having a chance at a fair and healthy life.
Americans (Westerners in general really) have a very hard time trying to undrstand the Muslim way of thinking. Because we have this huge seperation between church and state, and our clergy have very little role in the daily lives we lead, it is difficult to come to grips with the idea of religion having such a controlling factor in our day-to-day lives and being so dedicated to your beliefs. This is a religion where you pray seven times a day and dedicate your life to following. Most Westerners don't pray seven times a week (not including time at the track or on the rug in the boss' office) and go to church on only religious holidays. So to understand that the religious leader should also be the leader of the country, well that just doesn't make sense to those in the West. Based on the upbringing of these people, it is very likely that a Cleric will indeed be selected to lead in an open election. This would not align itself with what the US wants, hence them not push for a true democracy.
This is also why the House of Saud wants to keep bin Laden out of the country. There are many fundamentalists in Saudia Arabia that would follow the vision of bin Laden and push for the creation of the Middle Easter caliph like Mohammed had build 1400 years ago. bin Laden could very easily find himself thrust into that religious leadership that could ouster the House of Saud. For this reason the Sauds do everything they can to keep him out of the country and continue to cooperate with the Americans. If bin Laden ever got a foot hold in Saudia Arabia it would be a massive problem that the US would have problems dealing with. Unification of the tribes of Islam is the last thing anyone in the world needs at the moment. If people think they are tough to deal with now, imagine what it would be like dealing with a religious zealot (one worse than George Bush) in power with a following of drones to do his will. Saddam Hussein is a p*ssycat in comparison.