Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Tue 06/21/2005 View Mon 06/20/2005 View Sun 06/19/2005 View Sat 06/18/2005 View Fri 06/17/2005 View Thu 06/16/2005 View Wed 06/15/2005
1
2005-06-21 Home Front: WoT
Rice makes vibrant appeal for democracy in Middle East
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Fred 2005-06-21 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11129 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Did she use tac nukes?
Posted by gromgoru 2005-06-21 07:54||   2005-06-21 07:54|| Front Page Top

#2 When I saw "vibrant" in the title along with Rice's name, I figured the press was commenting more on her wardrobe than her speech. Glad to see I was wrong.
Posted by Dar">Dar  2005-06-21 14:13||   2005-06-21 14:13|| Front Page Top

#3 Be careful what you wish for, Condi. I'm sure Hezbollah and Hamas and the Islamic Brotherhood would love to see democratic elections take place across the board in the Middle East.
Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-21 15:02||   2005-06-21 15:02|| Front Page Top

#4 And should Hezbollah and Hamas and the Islamic Brotherhood win those elections, what would be the effective difference compared to the situation now?
Posted by trailing wife 2005-06-21 18:30||   2005-06-21 18:30|| Front Page Top

#5 tw, you can't be serious. Mubarekk, the King of Jordan, the Saudi Princes, even old weasel neck himself in Syria - corrupt and self-serving as they are - are a heck of a lot more West friendly than the aforementioned alternatives and the masses who would support them if the tyrants and their military were "voted out." Iraq at this stage is still at an experimental level re: whether or not democracy is a good fit for Muslims. I'd say the verdict is out at this point, wouldn't you? A benign strongman or a Pro West oligarchy can be useful for keeping burgeoning uneducated sectarian populations under control so they don't do harm to themselves or to others.
Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-21 19:01||   2005-06-21 19:01|| Front Page Top

#6 I got a big hole in Manhattan that says you're wrong about the Saudis, TG.
Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-06-21 19:02||   2005-06-21 19:02|| Front Page Top

#7 There was a movie, once upon a time about 1980, called Brubaker. The essence of the movie was the struggle between pragmatism and principle. I belabored an opinion on this in a rant here on the 'burg, just recently - so I won't repeat it all, again.

My ex-wifey and I argued about Brubaker for years. Guess which side we each took? Lol. Enough with the State Dept-style future apology BS. Let's do it right. One set of rules, just what that Constitution thingy talks about, play it straight, win or lose. That's what America should be all about, nothing more, nothing less. It's worth dying for. The other, isn't.
Posted by .com 2005-06-21 19:10||   2005-06-21 19:10|| Front Page Top

#8 The Saudis are playing both sides to stay in power -they're no saints obviously - but I contend they are far more pro West than if we let the Saudi masses have a democracy. Then we'd have a duely elected radical pro-OBL gov't in power. The House of Saud did not order 9/11.

For another thing, the Saudi princes could have put a screetching halt to the USA's war efforts and propelled our economy into rapid de-aceleration if they chose to do so, simply by closing off the spigot to US oil company interests. Instead the House of Saud has been fairly co-operative behind the scenes by keeping OPEC on a straight and narrow "neutral" path. I think a democracy in Saudi Arabia could be very very bad for the USA. That's why President after President have made the House of Saud an exception to the rule when there's US criticism about political events in the ME.
Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-21 19:35||   2005-06-21 19:35|| Front Page Top

#9 TG - There's this narrow strip of land...

It's ancient history around here that the Saudis ain't our buds. They serve themselves. They have been at war with the US since 1973. A low-grade slow-burn financial and diplomatic sabotage some might call it, if you're silly enough to think of them as allies, lol - wotta load! I call it war.

The Special Relationship hit the skids with Bush - or haven't you paid attention? I don't have 20 links to offer regards our investigation of the Saudi Embassy financial records, etc, but you're out in left field here - with the State Dept's seditionists. Are you really Mikey S in disguise?

RB didn't begin when you showed up. This is a common misconception among certain visitors. In your best Garret Morris News for the Hearing Impaired:

One is worth DYING for. The OTHER, isn't.

Clear enough for you? Oh, and thank you ooooooh so much for the equivocation, accommodation, and State Dept Wank-o-Matic Retirement Fund refresher sentiments. I'm sure it's appreciated - somewhere - I'm guessing Foggy Bottom, but I could be wrong.
Posted by .com 2005-06-21 20:00||   2005-06-21 20:00|| Front Page Top

#10 If we had a duly elected pro-OBL government in Arabia then we could squish it like the Taliban.

The Sauds did not order the hit on the WTC, but they paid for it and they are p[aying for the madrassas in Pakland and Arlington that are raising the jihadis of tomorrow.

Notice this President doesn't make exceptions for criticizing the Sauds. Democracy would not be bad in Arabia. It would be the start of the Arabs growing up. Their choice how it goes. Right now Arabs kill Americans but nothing happens to them. Time to turn that around.
Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-06-21 20:27||   2005-06-21 20:27|| Front Page Top

#11 Here's a handy bit - see #3, Dave D's 8 Options. Thanks to Dubya, we're trying on #4, you see, and it won't work worth warm spit if we don't mean WTF we say. In a number of ways, ol' Dubya, that bible-totin' IdiotChimpHitler guy, is trying, some might say desperately, to save them from themselves. I've always had rather bad luck with that approach, myself - as a solo, but perhaps, as a policy of national will from the US, it can work. I'm willing to give it a try - and support him in the effort - I can live very well with that, in fact. It's a certainty that it won't work, if undermined by becoming what we hate and revile in others: duplicitous, back-stabbing, lying, double-dealing whores.
Posted by .com 2005-06-21 20:29||   2005-06-21 20:29|| Front Page Top

#12 Mrs D - Overlapped with you - good clean concise points, kudos.
Posted by .com 2005-06-21 20:31||   2005-06-21 20:31|| Front Page Top

#13 Thanks and thanks for your perspective. I'm glad you got to know them up close and personal so I wouldn't have to.
Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-06-21 20:41||   2005-06-21 20:41|| Front Page Top

#14 Aw shit, there goes dinner, lol! ;-)
Posted by .com 2005-06-21 20:43||   2005-06-21 20:43|| Front Page Top

#15 If we had a duly elected pro-OBL government in Arabia then we could squish it like the Taliban
Ummm, right, the Taliban sure are squished. What we have in Afghanistan is a tenuous situation not any resounding squishing by any means and this situation could have/still can become very unstable very quickly were it not for our much maligned "soft" allies with troops there and but for the co-operation of a certain military strongman, named Musharref, who lets us make incursions into Pakland territory and air space and but for the neutrality of many nasty Afghan warlords with whom we've had to play footsie and whose "agricultural"crops we must pretend do not exist.

As for squishing a pro-OBL Saudi Arabian elected gov't - sorry I can't get on board with your rose colored easy victory - for one thing, we'd fly our airplanes and drive our tanks on what - peanut butter - to deliver big squishing of S.A.?

GWB has been fairly careful about not treading on Saudi princes toes. If GWB was so much firmer than previous Presidents,as you claim, then he would have done regime change of the House of Saud instead of powering US jets and tanks with Saudi fuel to remove Saddam. Also only close friends of GWB - like the Saudi royalty on numerous occasions - get invited to his Crawford ranch. Sorry not much spanking of the Sods that I see by this Admin. and that's perfectly fine by me.
Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-21 21:09||   2005-06-21 21:09|| Front Page Top

#16 Wooo, I'm dizzy!

TG - First you propose sleazy arrangements ("corrupt and self-serving as they are - are a heck of a lot more West friendly") then you decry them ("a certain military strongman, named Musharref"). As for the Taleban - geez luise - you're such a stickler - wanna put up of shut up? I offer the Afghani elections as proof you're full of shit. You got, what?, "insurgency" (known by straight-talking folks as terrorists) play footsie in the lawless border regions? That's it?

You speak like a true trooper of the State Dept - duplicitious: GWB does shit never done before (which you don't like, given your accomodation arguments) - yet he's done little or nothing to oppose Saudi duplicity? Sheesh. Wotta load.

Regards the military aspects of that 40km strip of land, you obviously have ZERO military knowledge or understanding. There are many ways to approach it - especially with Iraq, Bahrain, Qatar rather conveniently located nearby with lots 'n lots of troop and materiel movement occurring on a regular basis through the mud puddle known as the Persian Gulf.

You're info and wisdom challenged in many important ways, sonny.
Posted by .com 2005-06-21 21:23||   2005-06-21 21:23|| Front Page Top

#17 TG,

Took me a while to recover from the effects of the thought of our personnel in Afghanistan being protected by our soft allies.

Here's what Condi had to say to the Arab world about the Saud's country while in Cairo

"In Saudi Arabia, brave citizens are demanding accountable government. And some good first steps toward openness have been taken with recent municipal elections. Yet many people pay an unfair price for exercising their basic rights. Three individuals in particular are currently imprisoned for peacefully petitioning their government. That should not be a crime in any country."

Not quite how .com or I would put it, but I think this counts as treading on toes.
Posted by Mrs. Davis 2005-06-21 21:30||   2005-06-21 21:30|| Front Page Top

#18 GWB does shit never done before (which you don't like, given your accomodation arguments) - yet he's done little or nothing to oppose Saudi duplicity? Sheesh. Wotta load.
Let me draw your attention to fuzzy wuzzy not very sh*t disturbing comments made by Crown Prince Abdullah and President George W. Bush in the joint statement released from Crawford, Texas 4/25/05:
Today, we renewed our personal friendship and that between our nations. Our friendship begins with the recognition that our nations have proud and very distinct histories.The United States respects Saudi Arabia as the birthplace of Islam, one of the world's great religions, and as the symbolic center of the Islamic faith as custodian of Islam's two holy places in Makkah and Madinah.
Saudi Arabia reiterates its call on all those who teach and propagate the Islamic faith to adhere strictly to the Islamic message of peace, moderation, and tolerance; and reject that which deviates from those principles.Both countries agree that this message of peace, moderation, and tolerance must extend to those of all faiths and practices. The two nations reaffirm the principles agreed to during the international conference on counter-terrorism hosted by the Kingdom in February 2005. These principles were enshrined in the "Riyadh Declaration" which calls for "fostering values of understanding, tolerance, dialogue, co-existence, and the rapprochement between cultures …… [and] for fighting any form of thinking that promotes hatred, incites violence, and condones terrorist crimes”. While the United States considers that nations will create institutions that reflect the history, culture, and traditions of their societies, it does not seek to impose its own style of government on the government and people of Saudi Arabia. The United States applauds the recently held elections in the Kingdom for representatives to municipal councils and looks for even wider participation in accordance with the Kingdom's reform program.The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the United States are close partners in many important endeavors. We welcome the renewed determination of Saudi Arabia to pursue economic reform and its quest to join the World Trade Organization (WTO). We will work together as partners to complete our negotiations and with other WTO members in Geneva with the aim of welcoming Saudi Arabia into the WTO before the end of 2005.Both nations pledge to continue their cooperation so that the oil supply from Saudi Arabia will be available and secure. The United States appreciates Saudi Arabia's strong commitment to accelerating investment and expanding its production capacity to help provide stability and adequately supply the market.
Blah, blah, blah

As for Afghanistan, their elections mean exactly what - that Afghans took time away from tending their poppy fields or doing their honor killings to vote for that famous statesman, Karzari, whose favorite line whenever he's near a microphone is don't forget to give Afghanistan as much American tax dollars as you're giving to Iraq. I'm glad that Afghanistan is no longer an AQ training camp, but you've got to be smoking some powerful weed to think that Afghanistan is a raging democracy success story and that we have squished the bad guys to death. They're hiding in the hills in the Afghan/Pakland border where they can't do too much harm. If we did not have the help of that tyrant, Musharref, we would have accomplished squat. We'll never get in the faces of Afghan warlords, because our coalition forces would be overwhelmed and none of the "freed" Afghans would blink an eye - well maybe Karazani would because he'd be losing his gravy train. Why do you think we have US military body guards watching out for Mushareff's life around the clock - because he's allowing us to keep the lid on Afghanistan with a small number of troops.

I'm a pragmatist, not an appeasor. And holding an election does not a functioning democracy make so save your rah rah. I like to deal with reality.
Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-21 22:17||   2005-06-21 22:17|| Front Page Top

#19 huh?
Posted by muck4doo 2005-06-21 22:34|| http://meatismurder.blogspot.com/]">[http://meatismurder.blogspot.com/]  2005-06-21 22:34|| Front Page Top

#20 rex? SayDoom!? IToldYouSo? Cloon? 'zat you?

So many. Sigh.

You mistake diplo-speak for policy - look at the actual actions. Blah, blah, blah is right. If you weren't a disingenuous straw-man specialist, you would've posted the link, instead of quoting the thing. The size of your post does not impress anyone, being fluffed up as it is with the massive quote. Not that I have anything against good fluffers, mind you,

Everyone on Afghanistan grows poppies. Okaaaay.

You Want What You Want When You Want It. Anything else is worthy of your scorn, nobody knows what you do, you have the answers, and just coincidentally, GWB is the villian. Riiight. Gotcha. Yeah, you're a pragmatist, alright, you'll vote for what, for whom? Nobody's perfect, except you. Cool. BDS.

There's a great old Mr Tibbs movie on. Seen it before, but hey, I've heard your shopworn shit, too. Yawn & G'nite, wanker.
Posted by .com 2005-06-21 22:36||   2005-06-21 22:36|| Front Page Top

#21 GWB is the villian. Riiight
No as a matter of fact GWB is doing what he should do with despots, tyrants who help us. But what you and Mrs. Davis suggest is naive and dangerous.
Posted by Thotch Glesing2372 2005-06-21 23:07||   2005-06-21 23:07|| Front Page Top

#22 TG - You're schizophrenic. You say:

"GWB is doing what he should with depots, tyrants who help us."

Then you say:

"But what you and Mrs. Davis suggest is naive and dangerous."

Duh, son - this is what GWB is saying, not just us - or didn't you actually read what Dr Rice said? I did. I even got to see video excerpts of it - and there was no mistaking the message to the asshats of the world. BTW, this story ran yesterday - unfortunately, I was the only one to comment on it, but at least I'm consistent.

You're not. I've pointed out some examples, I'm sure there are more. Your attitude is, indeed, that of the State Dept: We know best.

I submit that you do not. We have paid dearly, many times over for supporting tyrants and despots. It's just fucking wrong. We should be and do precisely what we claim to believe in. You're glaringly wrong about this. We can be right and do what needs to be done - both. Yeah, it's harder, but it's not something the next or the next or the next Pres in the Big Chair has to apologize for. Time to do it right, just as it's always been. Just because it hasn't been done in a long long time doesn't make me wrong. It makes US wrong for taking so long to get back on track.
Posted by .com 2005-06-21 23:57||   2005-06-21 23:57|| Front Page Top

#23 Mrs Davis drank the GOP Kool-Aid if she really believes Kinda Sleezy Rice smacked the Saudis. She wouldn't dare-too many flights from Texas to Jeddah would be cancelled
Posted by NotMikeMoore 2005-06-22 00:00||   2005-06-22 00:00|| Front Page Top

00:00 NotMikeMoore
23:59 CrazyFool
23:59 .com
23:59 RJ Schwarz
23:57 .com
23:56 Steve White
23:53 intrinsicpilot
23:53 RJ Schwarz
23:50 CrazyFool
23:49 RJ Schwarz
23:44 mojo
23:44 RJ Schwarz
23:43 muck4doo
23:41 RJ Schwarz
23:39 CrazyFool
23:37 AJackson
23:30 NotMikeMoore
23:28 buwaya
23:26 NotMikeMoore
23:22 NotMikeMoore
23:12 NotMikeMoore
23:09 NotMikeMoore
23:07 Thotch Glesing2372
23:05 NotMikeMoore









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com