History Community ~ All Empires Homepage


This is the Archive on WORLD Historia, the old original forum.

 You cannot post here - you can only read.

 

Here is the link to the new forum:

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Forum LockedWhy do Arab countries lose wars?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 9>
Author
Mira View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2005
Location: United Arab Emirates
Status: Offline
Points: 697
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mira Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2006 at 06:20
Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

Quote Schmidt(the investigator) is quoted under oath as saying he concluded that Rumsfeld did not specifically order the interrogation methods used on Kahtani, but that Rumsfeld’s approval of broad policies permitted abuses to take place. MSNBC


So what you have is a bunch of broad policies. No direct orders or anything that suggests that he approved of what happened at Abu Ghraib in any sense of the word. You can criticize the policies, but even if someone was under the same policies at Abu Ghraib, went completely out of line and shoved a stick up a prisoner's ass, it is Rumsfeld that ordered it? No


By your logic, bin Laden becomes completely innocent of all accusations against him.  Please allow me to elaborate:  bin Laden called for a holy war against the infidels.  He didn't "specifically" say how; he just approved of a "broad policy" of war.  So if somebody went completely out of line and flew planes into the Twin Towers, does that make bin Laden responsible?

Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

Back to your main point, you implied that this type of abuse is currently going on all over Iraq. Where?


I don't think I really said that.  I'm sure different types of abuses are going on all over Iraq, not necessarily identical to Abu Ghraib, but as bad or worse, nonetheless.  Fallujah is a good example, I believe.

Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

A side note from your article,al-Kahtani that got harsher interrogation at Guantanamo sang like a bird.

Quote The Pentagon has said Kahtani gave interrogators information on Osama bin Laden’s health and methods of evading capture, and on al-Qaida’s infiltration routes.


One source I read said he was a "treasure trove" of information.


Obviously - they still can't find bin Laden.  Useful "treasure trove" of a Qahtani, I'd say.

Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

I don't know, cattus. Is it my English, or are you experiencing selective blindness here? I think we've already established that Saddam was a criminal, even when you still had him as an ally.


No Mira, your english is fine. It is your lack of cognitive thinking that I have a problem with. Yes it has been pretty much established that Saddam was/is a criminal. What you have not established is that the U.S. is a criminal and equal to Saddam at that.


I think you're the one who is blinded from seeing that.

You don't think your government(s) is criminal?  Look at all the destruction you've brought to the East.  From WWII, to Vietnam, and then Afghanistan and now Iraq.

Nuclear bombs here, Agent Orange (and all the other colors) there, depleted uranium ... What are you doing to people?

Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

Not sure why this is relevant now. Did it bother the U.S. that Saddam was a bad person? Ofcourse it did.


Sure.  He got more weapons to commit his atrocities.

Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

Diplomacy and ties can get complicated. You put alot of weight in what Michael Moran says. He makes the point I already have earlier and even says it would be naive to think otherwise. From your source as you say(it actually is yours)..

Quote Yes, the West needed Josef Stalin to defeat Hitler. Yes, there were times during the Cold War when supporting one villain (Cambodia’s Lon Nol, for instance) would have been better than the alternative (Pol Pot). So yes, there are times when any nation must hold its nose and shake hands with the devil for the long-term good of the planet. MSNBC


"For the long-term good of the planet."  Interesting.  So what good did America's alliance with Saddam have?

Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

Quote Who exactly gave you the authority?


Res. 1441 and the congress of the U.S.


Your congress doesn't rule the world, FYI.  Your congress can give you authority to do something within your own borders, not attack a sovereign state.

Resolution 1441?  Aren't you ashamed of bringing that up?  The resolution was about the WMDs.  Where are they?

Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

What positive news from returning soldiers are you willing to provide, cattus?

You want to tell us about the "troubled soldiers" returning from Iraq?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/16/national/16stress.html?hp& amp; amp;ex=1103259600&en=76ccd089725f8a3c&ei=5094& amp;partner=homepa ge



I dont understand why you posted that. I said I could post "those" like Omar's (iraqthemodel). Battle fatigue and stress from war and being far from home happens. That nytimes piece you posted does not negate the good being done, infact it paints a humanistic picture of the soldiers in Iraq unlike the monsters that they should be.


IraqTheModel?  Lol, the guy has a link to FoxNews.  Gimme a break.
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2657
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2006 at 11:41

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Resolution 1441?  Aren't you ashamed of bringing that up?  The resolution was about the WMDs.  Where are they?

Specifically the inspection for them.  Saddam did not comply.  The UN gave us the casus belli we needed, whether they ended up regretting it later or not.

Member of IAEA
Back to Top
Mira View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2005
Location: United Arab Emirates
Status: Offline
Points: 697
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mira Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2006 at 17:53
Originally posted by Genghis Genghis wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Resolution 1441?  Aren't you ashamed of bringing that up?  The resolution was about the WMDs.  Where are they?

Specifically the inspection for them.  Saddam did not comply.  The UN gave us the casus belli we needed, whether they ended up regretting it later or not.



You are wrong.

Three days before the deadline, Saddam Hussein accepted Res. 1441 and agreed to comply.
Back to Top
Cellular View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended
Avatar

Joined: 10-Sep-2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 85
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Cellular Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2006 at 19:09
Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Originally posted by bg_turk bg_turk wrote:

Mira,

Quote

If Israel was able to wipe-out all Palestinians, they would have done so long time ago.

I personally do not believe Israel has as a purpose to wipe out all Palestinians,but simply to ensure its survival. 20 percent of the citizens of Israel today are of Palestinian origin, if the purpose of Israel was to wipe them out, why would it give them citizenship?


Yes, I guess you're right.  They can't and don't want to wipe out all Palestinians.  It is technically impossible (unless they follow the American example in Hiroshima.)  The point is, Israel may not want to eliminate the Palestinians, but it also can't win a war against them.

Originally posted by bg_turk bg_turk wrote:

Quote

Europeans are more civilized when it comes to war, I guess.

This is simply not true. I hope you are aware of the Frency occupation of Algeria and its war of independence (between 300,000 - 1 million died, 2-3 million were made refugees).



Oh!  You're absolutely right.  Europeans may not be any better, but I still think they've shown better respect for human rights in the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

Afghanistan-now  tell me, why exactly was that such a horrible thing? Afghanistan harbors terrorists, and does not hand over Osama bin Laden. This is not a good reason to attack?

You think any invasion of a islamic country is a war on islam. While muslims slaughter christians everyday in Sudan no one speaks of this War on christianity, but this is exactly what Osama and al Queda, as well as many other extremists have claimed, a world under islam.

 

You believe the US is on its knees? Your crazy, a couple hit and run attacks and then hiding in the desert is not going to ever defeat the US, but will only delay their own defeat. Has anyone ever came to think that once the attacks on the US stop, the quicker they will pull out? The US government always talks of progress untill they can pull out, and more attacks do just the opposite.

 

Photo shows a Mexican flag flown above an upside-down U.S. flag during a high school student protest over immigration reform. http://www.snopes.com/photos/politics/mexicoflag.asp
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2657
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 26-Apr-2006 at 22:38
Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Originally posted by Genghis Genghis wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Resolution 1441?  Aren't you ashamed of bringing that up?  The resolution was about the WMDs.  Where are they?

Specifically the inspection for them.  Saddam did not comply.  The UN gave us the casus belli we needed, whether they ended up regretting it later or not.



You are wrong.

Three days before the deadline, Saddam Hussein accepted Res. 1441 and agreed to comply.

He accepted the Resolution on November 13th, 2002, but there was a given deadline for full compliance he didn't meet.   March 17th, 2003.

Unless you're talking about one of the other myriad deadlines.

Member of IAEA
Back to Top
cattus View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Status: Offline
Points: 1803
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote cattus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Apr-2006 at 02:52
Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

By your logic, bin Laden becomes completely innocent of all accusations against him. Please allow me to elaborate: bin Laden called for a holy war against the infidels. He didn't "specifically" say how; he just approved of a "broad policy" of war. So if somebody went completely out of line and flew planes into the Twin Towers, does that make bin Laden responsible?


Only you would try to argue that,Mira. And now your going to the side bringing up WW2 and Vietnam. You've continued to imply that torture continues(without proof) in Iraq, ignoring that people were punished for Abu Ghraib. How is the U.S. NOW as evil as Saddam was?

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

IraqTheModel? Lol, the guy has a link to FoxNews.


Yes, in the link section along with Yahoo,BBC,MSNBC..
He is not sponsored by Fox.
Guess you wont listen to Iraqis that have good things to say.

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Resolution 1441? Aren't you ashamed of bringing that up? The resolution was about the WMDs. Where are they?


No. Whether he actually had WMDs or not, it shows the U.S. was not the only country that believed Saddam had weapons. Ofcourse some would not follow through because of underhand deals or just plain chicken.
Back to Top
Mira View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2005
Location: United Arab Emirates
Status: Offline
Points: 697
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mira Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Apr-2006 at 07:18
Originally posted by Genghis Genghis wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Originally posted by Genghis Genghis wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Resolution 1441?  Aren't you ashamed of bringing that up?  The resolution was about the WMDs.  Where are they?

Specifically the inspection for them.  Saddam did not comply.  The UN gave us the casus belli we needed, whether they ended up regretting it later or not.



You are wrong.

Three days before the deadline, Saddam Hussein accepted Res. 1441 and agreed to comply.

He accepted the Resolution on November 13th, 2002, but there was a given deadline for full compliance he didn't meet.   March 17th, 2003.

Unless you're talking about one of the other myriad deadlines.



You are wrong, again.  Are you sure your government didn't lie to you as usual?  It was big news here when he accepted the resolution BEFORE the second deadline.

For the sake of the argument, let's say you the US wanted to enforce Resolution 1441.  Why was Saddam overthrown?  The Resolution makes no mention of a regime change.

The government of Saddam submitted a 12-thousand page report on the WMDs.  You rejected it, calling it a fraud.  Where is your biggest fraud now; the WMDs?

The new deadline was not a coincidence.  The US government realized that people will be performing Hajj in February, 2003.  Hajj is a sacred month where Muslims are not permitted to fight.  Choosing March 17, 2003, for a deadline was also not a coincidence, since the 'Aashura day celebrated by the Shia fell on March 15, of that year.
Back to Top
Mira View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Aug-2005
Location: United Arab Emirates
Status: Offline
Points: 697
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mira Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Apr-2006 at 07:23
Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

By your logic, bin Laden becomes completely innocent of all accusations against him. Please allow me to elaborate: bin Laden called for a holy war against the infidels. He didn't "specifically" say how; he just approved of a "broad policy" of war. So if somebody went completely out of line and flew planes into the Twin Towers, does that make bin Laden responsible?


Only you would try to argue that,Mira. And now your going to the side bringing up WW2 and Vietnam. You've continued to imply that torture continues(without proof) in Iraq, ignoring that people were punished for Abu Ghraib. How is the U.S. NOW as evil as Saddam was?


The fact that Iraqis are still resisting, and that some officials in the government are calling for the US troops to leave - that's an indication of how unwanted the US is.  They've only caused destruction and they're asking others to pay for it.  You fix your own mess.  Why should we pay for it?

Your Secretary of State comes here and asks us to double our contributions for the re-building of Afghanistan and Iraq.  Like hello?  We didn't unbuild to rebuild it again.  You did.

Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

IraqTheModel? Lol, the guy has a link to FoxNews.


Yes, in the link section along with Yahoo,BBC,MSNBC..
He is not sponsored by Fox.
Guess you wont listen to Iraqis that have good things to say.


He doesn't need to be sponsored by FoxNews.  The fact that he chose to link his blog to these news sites gives an idea of how and what he thinks.

Originally posted by cattus cattus wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Resolution 1441? Aren't you ashamed of bringing that up? The resolution was about the WMDs. Where are they?


No. Whether he actually had WMDs or not, it shows the U.S. was not the only country that believed Saddam had weapons. Ofcourse some would not follow through because of underhand deals or just plain chicken.


Or because they didn't want to lie like your government did?
Back to Top
Genghis View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar

Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2657
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Genghis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Apr-2006 at 20:56
Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Originally posted by Genghis Genghis wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Originally posted by Genghis Genghis wrote:

Originally posted by Mira Mira wrote:

Resolution 1441?  Aren't you ashamed of bringing that up?  The resolution was about the WMDs.  Where are they?

Specifically the inspection for them.  Saddam did not comply.  The UN gave us the casus belli we needed, whether they ended up regretting it later or not.



You are wrong.

Three days before the deadline, Saddam Hussein accepted Res. 1441 and agreed to comply.

He accepted the Resolution on November 13th, 2002, but there was a given deadline for full compliance he didn't meet.   March 17th, 2003.

Unless you're talking about one of the other myriad deadlines.



You are wrong, again.  Are you sure your government didn't lie to you as usual?  It was big news here when he accepted the resolution BEFORE the second deadline.

For the sake of the argument, let's say you the US wanted to enforce Resolution 1441.  Why was Saddam overthrown?  The Resolution makes no mention of a regime change.

The government of Saddam submitted a 12-thousand page report on the WMDs.  You rejected it, calling it a fraud.  Where is your biggest fraud now; the WMDs?

The new deadline was not a coincidence.  The US government realized that people will be performing Hajj in February, 2003.  Hajj is a sacred month where Muslims are not permitted to fight.  Choosing March 17, 2003, for a deadline was also not a coincidence, since the 'Aashura day celebrated by the Shia fell on March 15, of that year.

I think we're talking about different deadlines.  Which deadline are you talking about?  What did he have to do and when?  I was talking about the March 17th one.

Member of IAEA
Back to Top
zibi View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 25-Mar-2006
Location: Israel
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote zibi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Apr-2006 at 19:21

I would like to draw the attention of thous how see the Arab guerilla as a winning force to the fact that they are fighting against low obaiding coutries. Arab guerilla can succed only against westren forces, Israel included.

When Siria ruled Lebanon thier was no Guerilla fighters because the Sirains tactics was the Arab one: THAHER. Meaning, revange. any Guerilla fighter knew that his family will pay the price of his dids. Any one how lives in the orient knows how important the family to it's members, and that he will not compromise his family security for any cost.

But' when it comes to Americans or Israelies, the families are secure, and the "freedom fighters" can operate freely. In the moment the civilizied forces will loose a bit of the civilization, and act according to the arab Thaher rules, the pucture will turn.

But, in that case the western forces will loose it's morales, and I do not know what is worse.

 

I am a Zionist
Back to Top
Super Goat (^_^) View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 22-Oct-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 180
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Super Goat (^_^) Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Apr-2006 at 19:36
Quote But' when it comes to Americans or Israelies, the families are secure, and the "freedom fighters" can operate freely.

Im sure a palestinian suicide bomber knows that if he carries out the mission, then his families house is likely to be demolished and his family rendered homeless. So i doubt this can be considered "secure."

And syria was a stablizing force in Lebonon, so there wasn't the same urge to fight them as with the israelis.
Back to Top
zibi View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 25-Mar-2006
Location: Israel
Status: Offline
Points: 0
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote zibi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Apr-2006 at 16:53

Hello Super Goat,

Some few years ago you were right, the family's house was demolished and the bomber's family was homeless for some few hours. Some "good" organizations saw it as their holy duty to take care of this families, and in no time they were given a brand new vila and a monthly rent of US 800.00. So, this system was not very helpfull. Then, some of the good souls went to the Israeli High court and claimed that it is "unhuman" to demolish murderers houses, and the Israeli high court agreed.

The "Westren" Human values are more importent then western lives. That excatly what I said before. It is very confortable to fight against west values.

About the Lebanese, I do not have to argue with you about that. Just look at any paper in your country. How the Syrians kill key figures in Lebanon, when they say something against the Syrians. But if you think it is not important enough for the Lebanese, how am I to argue. 

I am a Zionist
Back to Top
Battle_Hymn View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jun-2006
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Battle_Hymn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 17:03
First Crusader War..
 
Saladin sayin to ppl;
 
Look this Frenks,look how they fightin for their religion..
 
if u wanna Freedom first u need to be together ALWAYS..
 
Tariqat wars big problem for Arabs ..
 
Sad thing always innocent ppl dyin..
 
And Word War 1 ..
 
Two Arabic young sayin this to our officers..
 
You Turks can find a leader for defendin your country..But here they'll attack to other arabs for beein leader..
 
PS : but in 3 years period USA lost more soldiers than Vietnams 3 years period.


Edited by Battle_Hymn - 08-Jun-2006 at 17:07

This nation has never lived without independence. We cannot and shall not live without it. Either independence or death.
Ataturk

Back to Top
tsar View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain

Suspended

Joined: 12-May-2006
Location: Bulgaria
Status: Offline
Points: 132
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote tsar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jun-2006 at 19:44
Originally posted by Battle_Hymn Battle_Hymn wrote:

PS : but in 3 years period USA lost more soldiers than Vietnams 3 years period.

Yeah due to the vietcongs hit and run tactics.
Back to Top
Battle_Hymn View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 08-Jun-2006
Location: Turkey
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Battle_Hymn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jun-2006 at 05:05
Originally posted by tsar tsar wrote:

Originally posted by Battle_Hymn Battle_Hymn wrote:

PS : but in 3 years period USA lost more soldiers than Vietnams 3 years period.

Yeah due to the vietcongs hit and run tactics.
 
Yea..
 
if u guys wanna understand very well
 
 
u ppl can see one thing nothing changed in 1000 years..

This nation has never lived without independence. We cannot and shall not live without it. Either independence or death.
Ataturk

Back to Top
Kapikulu View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Berlin
Status: Offline
Points: 1921
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Kapikulu Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jun-2006 at 11:46

I had given this example many times before in Arab-Israeli War threads, and now I will give again...

It is from Ryszard Kapuscinski, a Polish war journalist who went to various conflict areas around the world...

"From what I see, Israeli people were all running to the front and get mobilized for war while Arab men in Syria were all smoking their water pipes just 20 kilometers behind the frontline in Golan"...

Maybe determination was one of the most important reason...
 
Second, I would put superior Israeli Western equipments against Arabs' weaker Soviet equipments...
 
Third was the tactical abilities of Israeli commanders against their Arab counterparts.
 
Fourth, Israeli intelligence, Mossad, which was functioning excellently while Arab intelligence were sleeping inside Israel and didn't even bother to make counter-intelligence attempts, even if done, couldn't be successful.
We gave up your happiness
Your hope would be enough;
we couldn't find neither;
we made up sorrows for ourselves;
we couldn't be consoled;

A Strange Orhan Veli
Back to Top
Bulldog View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 17-May-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 2775
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bulldog Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Jun-2006 at 17:33
Common, the Arabs won in Algeria after a long hard battle in which they say they suffered a genocide by the French.
      “What we do for ourselves dies with us. What we do for others and the world remains and is immortal.”
Albert Pine

Back to Top
Dampier View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 04-Feb-2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 749
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dampier Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18-Jun-2006 at 16:22
For more watch "The Battle of Algiers".
Back to Top
Corlanx View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard


Joined: 23-Jul-2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 28
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Corlanx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2006 at 08:27

Let’s try to answer this rasist question!

The arabs are losing wars now, because they are economically backward; that means technologically and industrially backward too. We're speaking here about the arab world, not some small country or population that get some high living standard trading oil (and just that), oil that it is extracted and refined with non-arab technology (but not always western . . .).

And they’re backward economically, because they're backward socially: the sad reality these societies were not able to incorporate modernity's features like democracy, individual freedoms and human rights, economical freedoms, political notions and institutions like secularism and religious freedom, but economical liberalism too, make them unable to compete not only with the west, but with any other ethno-cultural entity or country, like china, india, russia and japan.  

Economical success is proportional and influenced by all these societal features. A good exemple is the fact the arab societies deprive themselves of ~ 50 p. of their work force and creativity, by discriminating women (more than others).

Of course, for that societal gap, the west and russia share a limited responsibility, but it’s obvious a irrelevant one, and the proof is that all the other big cultural and power centers are continuously getting better when compared with the west. The only positive feature arab countries can show us, is their demography; but that's also a complication for a too fragile economy.  

Anyway, a really strange idea to suggest that arabs (or any other ethnicity) are somehow destined to lose wars . . .  

 



Edited by Corlanx - 25-Jul-2006 at 08:31
Back to Top
xristar View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 05-Nov-2005
Location: Greece
Status: Offline
Points: 1028
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote xristar Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Jul-2006 at 10:56
Have you read the previous posts?
Arabs are not backwards socially, as much as you think. You know Afghanistan is different than Lebanon or Jordan.
True, with little money the arab nations cannot have good equipment etc.
Plus, the arabs had no patron to teach them how to fight (USA or USSR), they had to learn alone how to use their weapons.

Defeat allows no explanation
Victory needs none.
It insults the dead when you treat life carelessly.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 34567 9>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.