Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Libya updates

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • DE I really like your posts usually but could you please stop using SMS stuff like 'ppl' and 'pls'. It always irritates and undermines the impact of your statements.
    For Gallifrey! For Victory! For the end of time itself!!

    Comment


    • I sort of agree with this the Islamists will end up in control in Lybia and Egypt and then democracy ends or gets curtailed to keep their parties in power.
      Originally from Sochi, Russia.

      Comment


      • Really depends on how their consititution gets written up. If the Islamists can get into power they can also fall from power ;)

        Comment


        • Centurion to the senators of Rome(while putting his hand on the hilt of the sword):''Senators,this made Caesar what he is,this will keep him what he is and more.''

          The Constitution is a piece of paper,rugged enough not to be useful as toilet paper.They'll need willpower,guns and numbers,all of which the Islamists have more than needed.
          Those who know don't speak
          He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Mihais View Post
            Centurion to the senators of Rome(while putting his hand on the hilt of the sword):''Senators,this made Caesar what he is,this will keep him what he is and more.''
            Google can't find this quote, where's it from ?

            Yes, i understand what you're saying just wanted to know the context in which that statement was made.

            Originally posted by Mihais View Post
            The Constitution is a piece of paper,rugged enough not to be useful as toilet paper.They'll need willpower,guns and numbers,all of which the Islamists have more than needed.
            Americans have influence with the army otherwise they wouldn't have dropped their support for Mubarak ;)

            If the secular lot can come up with a coherent message they will attract the most funding from abroad.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
              Google can't find this quote, where's it from ?
              Probably attributable to Gaius Scribonius Curio the Younger, tribune in 50 BC and praetor in 49 BC. Iirc there was one instance in 50 BC where he made such a speech in the senate - with drawn sword though. The context was the civil war about to break out between Caesar and Pompey shortly after, and Curio took Caesar's side, later fleeing Rome to Caesar's camp at Ravenna with Marc Anthony.

              While Curio garnered support for Caesar with such speeches, Caesar's nominees in the election later in 50 BC still lost out majorly to Pompey, ultimately leading to the consuls supporting Pompey over Caesar. Curio's function was to work the political angle so that Caesar stayed in power as general of his army and "governor" of the territories that army occupied well beyond his official tenure that had ended in spring 50 BC. He posed this as a defusing tactic in which he proposed that Caesar and Pompey should step down from their offices concurrently, of course well knowing that Pompey wouldn't agree to that and that this sudden proposal would majorly confuse the opposing party, opening up friction within that party to exploit.

              Tacitus later claimed that Gaius Julius Caesar had bribed Curio to do that speech and others and that he had openly supported him politically only in exchange for Caesar paying off his debts. Officially it couldn't be proven at the time. The man connecting both was Marc Anthony, Curio's successor with whom both Curio and Caesar supposedly had affairs at one point or another.

              All just like modern politics, isn't it?

              For ontopic sake, Gaius Scribonius Curio the Younger died fighting against soldiers of the Numidian kingdom who entered the war on Pompey's side the next year. The Numidian Kingdom consisted of the Berber tribes of Tripolitania, southern Tunisia and eastern Algeria.
              Last edited by kato; 18 Sep 11,, 15:45.

              Comment


              • Trust the barbarian Germanic efficiency.

                Speaking of the Numidians,nature of warfare hasn't changed much in that part of the world for 2000 years.Just as politics didn't changed.Human nature seems pretty constant.But at least king Juba died bravely.Let's how Mu'ammar dies.


                DE,since it's speaking in parables day I say there too many variables with your argument.First ,to quote the Spartans,there is the ''If''. Then it's this-''with iron ,not gold the Romans win their victories''.That may be apocryphal.More certain is the guy that throws the sword onto the scales.Same context.

                About the famous Egyptian army,you expect quite a lot from them.They may tilt the balance if they there is enough strength in the secular faction.But to keep it in check forever...
                Btw,I wouldn't put too much faith in the Americans either.The very reason this latent revolt happened now is precisely because they showed weakness.''Great empires are not kept by timidity''
                Those who know don't speak
                He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                Comment


                • Originally posted by kato View Post
                  For ontopic sake, Gaius Scribonius Curio the Younger died fighting against soldiers of the Numidian kingdom who entered the war on Pompey's side the next year. The Numidian Kingdom consisted of the Berber tribes of Tripolitania, southern Tunisia and eastern Algeria.
                  So the Numidians are the Islamists and the Caesar here represents the present egyptian army ?

                  Did the Numidians win that war and presumably their independence ?

                  Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                  The Constitution is a piece of paper,rugged enough not to be useful as toilet paper.They'll need willpower,guns and numbers,all of which the Islamists have more than needed.
                  Idea is their constitution becomes a living document and not just a piece of paper like the one they have presently.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                    DE,since it's speaking in parables day I say there too many variables with your argument.First ,to quote the Spartans,there is the ''If''. Then it's this-''with iron ,not gold the Romans win their victories''.That may be apocryphal.More certain is the guy that throws the sword onto the scales.Same context.
                    ok

                    Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                    About the famous Egyptian army,you expect quite a lot from them.They may tilt the balance if they there is enough strength in the secular faction.But to keep it in check forever...
                    Egyptian army like all armies wants stability. The faction that offers the best argument there will win the handover. That country needs growth & jobs more than it needs religion, i'll be damned if the Islamists can offer a better solution here than the secular faction.

                    Ideally the army goes back to the barracks, otherwise overturning Mubarak served no purpose.

                    Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                    Btw,I wouldn't put too much faith in the Americans either.The very reason this latent revolt happened now is precisely because they showed weakness.''Great empires are not kept by timidity''
                    So americans will work with whatever new adminstration comes into force.

                    I don't know if its showing weakness or a gamble, Mubarak got rolled because they dropped their support. What is strength for you ? hold onto him at all costs even if it means locking up tons of ppl. Been there, done that.

                    You still think democracy hasn't got a chance in hell in the islamic world, don't you :)

                    Turkey & Indonesia are existing examples. See no problems with adding to that list. Its good the elections got delayed in Egypt, they were supposed to be held by now, too early for the secular factions to get themselves organised and present a viable oppostion to the Islamists. if elections were held today you would be right that the Islamists would take over. So that means they ain't going to be held until the time is right and in a way the result is somewhat more sure ;)

                    Comment


                    • Nope,the Numidians are here for the fun of it.Caesar is the islamists.

                      So far,nothing is changed,so no reason to give more chances to secularism.You can have all the democracy you want,in itself that's meaningless,possibly dangerous.Btw,very democratic of you to keep postponing the vote until you believe your guys have a better stand.

                      You assume the army can reject Islamism forever.No army is better than the society it comes from,at least not by much.
                      What do you want and what Abdul in the streets of Cairo wants are 2 different worlds.Then you need to consider what Abdul THINKS he wants.

                      The point is revolution happened because the Americans were perceived as weak.The fact that rebellion in Bahrain was crushed suggests that at least a few of them had a contingency plan.But elsewhere their reaction was an improvisation.The Americans aren't a rising star in the ME and that's a conviction that took some time to become entrenched.You can call their policy anything you want,but you can't rule the area with soft power alone.Of course the US policy will adapt and deal with the new regimes or consider the revolutionaries in some countries.But there is a new balance of power there,and it doesn't favor the West.
                      Those who know don't speak
                      He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                        Btw,very democratic of you to keep postponing the vote until you believe your guys have a better stand.
                        Lets call it -- waiting till all parties are ready for the race to begin

                        Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                        You assume the army can reject Islamism forever.No army is better than the society it comes from,at least not by much.
                        Still you're saying that the majority want some islamic state and therefore the army has to acknowledge it. This is Egypt we're talking about here, the literal & cultural capital of the Arab world. There will be a number of viewpoints the main thing is they be represented instead of being suppressed.

                        The Islamists lose their allure when they are no longer perceived as perscuted.

                        Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                        What do you want and what Abdul in the streets of Cairo wants are 2 different worlds.Then you need to consider what Abdul THINKS he wants.
                        We will have the answer when the elections are held.

                        Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                        The point is revolution happened because the Americans were perceived as weak.The fact that rebellion in Bahrain was crushed suggests that at least a few of them had a contingency plan.But elsewhere their reaction was an improvisation.The Americans aren't a rising star in the ME and that's a conviction that took some time to become entrenched.You can call their policy anything you want,but you can't rule the area with soft power alone.Of course the US policy will adapt and deal with the new regimes or consider the revolutionaries in some countries.
                        ok

                        Originally posted by Mihais View Post
                        But there is a new balance of power there,and it doesn't favor the West.
                        If you mean do everything the West wants then no, but if you meant the exact opposite then i don't think that is necessarily true either. In fact its this thinking thats kept those dictators in power all these decades, because the alternative was unknown and consdered necessarily worse. Its funny in a way because it implies explicitly that you don't trust democracy to actually work. Which is hipprocritical when we hear the platitudes about freedom etc.

                        I think the reality will be less favourable but not disastrous. You're going to have to work with them like everybody else and can no longer take them for granted.

                        Main question : Will these new regimes be able to upset the existing power equations in place ? have my doubts and think no.
                        Last edited by Double Edge; 19 Sep 11,, 22:10.

                        Comment


                        • Was watching Aref Nayed speak on BBC's Hardtalk, he's the head of the NTC's stabilisation commitee. He does not like the adjective 'islamist' because he considers it polarising, divisive and it lumps many different strains into one and prefers 'muslim' be used eg muslim brotherhood is muslim rather than islamist. He wants a more nuanced approach.

                          Here is an earlier nytimes article about Aref Nayed..

                          A Man of God and Technology, Trying to Steady Libya | NY Times | Sept 16 2011

                          The Saturday Profile
                          A Man of God and Technology, Trying to Steady Libya
                          By ANNE BARNARD
                          Published: September 16, 2011

                          AREF NAYED was sipping cappuccino in the soaring marble lobby of the Corinthia Hotel near Tripoli’s seafront, quoting Montesquieu on law and Augustine on forgiveness in a conversation that had begun with earthier subjects, like the challenges of restoring Libya’s water supply and counting its dead.

                          He held forth on how Bedouin poetry shaped a moderate Islam in Libya, and he was just starting to explain the relevance to Libyan politics of the mathematical theory of complexity — it had to do with something called “flocking phenomena” — when his cellphone rang.

                          “I have to take this,” he said, glancing at the number. “Somebody wants to surrender.”

                          An associate of Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, the deposed Libyan leader, wanted safety guarantees before turning himself in. Mr. Nayed wanted to make it happen, and not just because fostering reconciliation is one of his many jobs for Libya’s de facto government.

                          He is also a Muslim theologian who, in addition to running a technology business, spent his time before the Libyan rebellion writing erudite papers arguing that compassion is the paramount value in Islam, that pious Muslims can thrive within a liberal secular state and that even the most righteous ones should adopt a “humble recognition” of their own fallibility.

                          Now, as the Transitional National Council’s coordinator of a Libyan stabilization team being asked to solve problems like fuel shortages and human rights abuses, he suddenly finds himself in an ideal laboratory to test his signature theological propositions — and to try to make them government policy.

                          “I don’t think there should be a witch hunt, purges or cleansings,” he said Monday at the hotel cafe, adding that those who committed crimes under Colonel Qaddafi should be tried. “Any time you deal with human beings with that kind of terminology, you end up with unfairness and persecution.”

                          But Mr. Nayed must himself navigate the shoals of a society that still lacks consensus on what kinds of dealings with the old government are forgivable.

                          Critics grumble about his family’s contacts with the old government. His father, Ali Nayed, owned a large construction business that worked on military installations, schools and other projects for the government before Colonel Qaddafi confiscated his property in 1978. More recently, Aref Nayed had contracts with Libya’s central bank, though he said they ended in acrimony. His brother Rafik was appointed shortly before the revolution to manage the country’s sovereign wealth fund and has stayed on.

                          For Mr. Nayed, that simply proves the point that after 42 years in which Colonel Qaddafi dominated Libya’s entire economy, few can claim to be entirely pure.

                          “There was another choice — to leave the country forever — and I have a lot of respect for those who made that choice,” he said. But he cautions against writing off those who continue to work in Libya; exiles, too, face criticisms, from Libyans who say they are opportunists who do not understand the country’s recent sufferings.

                          Mr. Nayed, 49, stands out, even among the colorful characters in the Corinthia’s lobby, which has become common ground for fighters in camouflage, leftists and Islamists in identical gray business suits, rumpled aid workers, journalists and idealistic young students, all bustling about doing the business of the new Libya.

                          A tall, bulky man with a close-clipped beard and well-tailored suits, Mr. Nayed claims both Muslim Brotherhood members and Marxist feminists among his friends. He speaks with the nuance of a scholar and the polish of a politician — though he insists that he wants to return to preaching and teaching, not serve in office.

                          As Islamists and liberals vie for jobs and political influence, he tells his life story in a way that positions him as a bridge between them — as well as between loyalists and oppositionists, and between Islamists and Western states that are waiting warily to see what kind of leaders the NATO intervention has helped bring to power.

                          Mr. Nayed grew up in Tripoli, studied in the United States and Canada, and did business in Italy. He returned to Libya in the 1990s, pursuing business interests here and abroad. But even as he pursued engineering at his father’s insistence, he said, his heart was always in the study of philosophy, Sufi Islam and comparative religion.

                          IN recent years, as Colonel Qaddafi began lifting restrictions on religious teaching, Mr. Nayed helped restore and reopen a picturesque Islamic school in Tripoli’s old city and became involved in outreach to Christians and Jews.

                          After Pope Benedict XVI made controversial comments on Islam in Regensburg, Germany, in 2006, Mr. Nayed was one of 138 Muslim scholars who drafted a letter inviting Catholic-Muslim dialogue. He took part in a conference of clerics who recently reinterpreted the 14th-century scholar Ibn Taymiyya’s celebrated fatwa, or religious edict, on jihad, arguing that radical Islamists who use it to justify killing are misguided.

                          When the rebellion started in February, he and other clerics issued a fatwa calling on Libyans to resist Colonel Qaddafi. Two days later, he fled to Dubai, United Arab Emirates, where he runs Kalam Research & Media, perhaps best described as an Islamic theological research and policy organization.

                          It was the women in his life — his wife, sister and daughter — who pushed him to take the risk of joining the opposition, he said. When loyalists threatened his sister’s sons, he said, she told him, “If they kill them one by one, do not back off.”

                          Anti-Qaddafi leaders made him ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, and he became a public face of the revolution — a reassuring one for many in the West. When he was named to the stabilization team, a Vatican newsletter rejoiced that “an old friend of the Vatican” was an important figure in Libya, saying his appointment might help allay the church’s fears of a radical Islamist takeover.

                          YET some Libyans are wary of anyone who is a darling of the West. In Tripoli’s mosques and cafes, people are on the lookout for Libyan versions of Iraq’s Ahmad Chalabi — those vaulted to power more by ties to the West than by legitimacy among Libyans. One target of such criticism is the interim government’s prime minister, Mahmoud Jibril, who has appointed close associates and fellow members of the Warfalla tribe, among them Mr. Nayed.

                          Still, Mr. Nayed’s ideas appear to resonate with some Libyan leaders and citizens.

                          In his first address in Tripoli’s central Martyrs’ Square on Monday, Mustafa Abdel-Jalil, the Transitional National Council’s leader, called on crowds to be forgiving toward the rank-and-file soldiers who fought against the rebellion, saying they, too, were victims of the government.

                          Mr. Nayed argues in official meetings that anyone who committed crimes under Colonel Qaddafi should be tried but that calling all Qaddafi supporters a “fifth column” veers close to the language Colonel Qaddafi used to demonize opponents.

                          Mr. Nayed has grand hopes for Libya. He imagines it becoming a homegrown model for the Arab world. He sees Libyans, in their support for the NATO military intervention that aided a Libyan-led revolution, embracing the West without losing their dignity.

                          He says that Islamist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood are integral to Libyan society, and that so far they are competing for political influence without using tactics of intimidation.

                          And he says that Libyan women, whom he calls “quite pious, quite free and quite capable at the same time,” will hold high positions in the government, showing the region that such freedoms do not equate to “anti-religious secularism.”

                          “If we do a good job here,” Mr. Nayed said, “this could become an example for mutual respect, mutual compassion, mutual love amongst humanity.”
                          Last edited by Double Edge; 28 Sep 11,, 22:48.

                          Comment


                          • If Mr Nayed really wants to see this happen, although he doesn't seek office, he needs to be part of the initial set up. His talents are needed at these time and I'm sure he could take up his calling a little further down the line when Libya is on a more stable footing.

                            Comment


                            • The sooner cnutface camel jockey is killed the better , even in hiding he is still sending aid to the IRA

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                                Lets call it -- waiting till all parties are ready for the race to begin
                                Sorry DE,forgot about the this thread.WAB is guilty,there so many interesting things around.

                                We can wait all you want,if the conditions don't change,the SHTF even harder the longer you wait.

                                Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                                Still you're saying that the majority want some islamic state and therefore the army has to acknowledge it. This is Egypt we're talking about here, the literal & cultural capital of the Arab world. There will be a number of viewpoints the main thing is they be represented instead of being suppressed.
                                The riot started because those with 1$/day found they don't get another $ to meet the rising costs.That buck will still be missing and religion is something the desperate embrace at times,together with violence.Paradoxes of life and human nature.
                                Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                                The Islamists lose their allure when they are no longer perceived as perscuted.
                                Al Shabab in Somalia was actually quite popular because it restored a semblance of law and order.Islamists aren't only enfants terrible they also tend to have some competent administrators and some of the least corrupt.That's generally true for the first generation of revolutionaries.

                                Originally posted by Double Edge View Post
                                If you mean do everything the West wants then no, but if you meant the exact opposite then i don't think that is necessarily true either. In fact its this thinking thats kept those dictators in power all these decades, because the alternative was unknown and consdered necessarily worse. Its funny in a way because it implies explicitly that you don't trust democracy to actually work. Which is hipprocritical when we hear the platitudes about freedom etc.

                                I think the reality will be less favourable but not disastrous. You're going to have to work with them like everybody else and can no longer take them for granted.

                                Main question : Will these new regimes be able to upset the existing power equations in place ? have my doubts and think no.
                                To be a cynical a$$hole as always,I'll tell I don't give a damn about the good of others.I embrace democracy,freedom of speech and capitalism because they work in creating a prosperous and sustainable society.If communism was sustainable on the long term,I'd be a communist.If fascism was viable,I'd be a fascist.As it is I'm a fanatical libertarian.I don't care about -isms.The only thing I care for is the flag and the perpetuation&welfare of the nation behind it.
                                Power games still need to be played,democracy or not.Not taking them for granted is something that undermines the power,wealth and influence of our present allies.That's bad enough.
                                About undermining the balance of power,yes.Whomever comes to rule these places,it will have to gain popularity with petrodollars.It will have to consider their sympathies and enmities.It will create forced by events a new power center.Again,that's bad as it is,without even doing anything.
                                Those who know don't speak
                                He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X