Have arabs gone stupid or what?

[Safriz]

I was in syria in 2001. It was a functional country.I didnt see pelple dropping dead out of hunger.I didnt see people shooting each other on streets,and it was the so called Asad regime back then.
I was never in Libya,but same story.A prosperous functional country under Qazafi regime.
I was in Egypt around same time. The country was very prosperous.Food was cheap. I could see peace and rule of law,their currency was strong and it was Husni Mubarak on the throne.
I was in tunisia many times. Same story.A prosperous functional country,and a liberal one.
In all the three countries i memtioned i saw women with burqa and i saw women in tight jeans with cleavages hanging out.
That means nobody was imposing their religion or idiology on the other.

So why in the world the people of these countries chose to listen to foreign propoganda and throw their countries into utter and total anarchy?
What they had was peace and prosperity,what they have now is civil war,chaos and people killing each other.
There is a saying 'if its not broke,dont fix it'.
What ever system of government was there in these countries,it was fumctional and was keeping their people together.

Why people of these countries went into self destruction and what will they gain from it,if ever?

 

[Lone]

because there are idiots and defectors everywhere

 

[livingdead]

@Safriz Did you really travelled to all these countries?
People threw these dictators out because their aspiraction is same as your or mine. Democracy, equality, freedom.
The fact that islamists grabbed power in many of them is unfortunate, but you cant blame people for dreaming a better future.
Same thing happed in iran long time ago.


You saw women in tight jeans with cleavage because the rulers were not conservative. That is not a good enough reason to have dictatorship in this day and age.
Anyway, who am I to complain, let them decide their own fate.
The libyan I met after gaddafi was ecstatic.

 

[Rajaraja Chola]

Their country, their rules. There is a opposition. The problem is, not oly Hosni Mubarak is born with an intention to rule a country.
Every people in a nation wants to give a shot at the throne.
No idea about Libya. He was already terrorising people. But yes, Egypt, Tunisia and Syria were far better.
In syria still, many people support Assad.
The relative peace in their nations, has emboldened them to ask, Why do they need a dictatorship, if the country is calm and good and prosperous?
But in times of need people wants a saviour to save them from the miseries, and hence they accept dictatorship.
Thats sadly, human psychology.

 

[Zabaniyah]

I was in syria in 2001. It was a functional country.I didnt see pelple dropping dead out of hunger.I didnt see people shooting each other on streets,and it was the so called Asad regime back then.
I was never in Libya,but same story.A prosperous functional country under Qazafi regime.
I was in Egypt around same time. The country was very prosperous.Food was cheap. I could see peace and rule of law,their currency was strong and it was Husni Mubarak on the throne.
I was in tunisia many times. Same story.A prosperous functional country,and a liberal one.
In all the three countries i memtioned i saw women with burqa and i saw women in tight jeans with cleavages hanging out.
That means nobody was imposing their religion or idiology on the other.

So why in the world the people of these countries chose to listen to foreign propoganda and throw their countries into utter and total anarchy?
What they had was peace and prosperity,what they have now is civil war,chaos and people killing each other.
There is a saying 'if its not broke,dont fix it'.
What ever system of government was there in these countries,it was fumctional and was keeping their people together.

Why people of these countries went into self destruction and what will they gain from it,if ever?

If memory serves, the current mess started when a group of protesters were fired upon. And I wouldn't say that Syria is economically 'prosperous' under Assad's regime. The country has much more potential.

As far as Egypt is concerned, 30 years of emergency rule? Seriously? The one thing they didn't get right is how things should fare after Mubarak's overthrow. Parts of the country are in anarchy with its economy tanked.

Gaddaffi was an idiot. Libya is relatively calm though.

It's better to live free than live in a palace headed by an oppressive nutjob. Everyone want to live in freedom, and they have rights. But freedom ain't free either!

A free market economy with rights for its citizens is always superior than that of one under a dictator. Even a benevolent one. No dictator rules forever, and it is often a grim end for them.

Are Arabs stupid? No.

Them folks need to mature more and form a will of their respective nations. These developments take time. In fact, a vast overwhelming majority of Muslim nations are lacking in this regard (I really don't know why).

 

[King Solomon]

I was in syria in 2001. It was a functional country.I didnt see pelple dropping dead out of hunger.I didnt see people shooting each other on streets,and it was the so called Asad regime back then.
I was never in Libya,but same story.A prosperous functional country under Qazafi regime.
I was in Egypt around same time. The country was very prosperous.Food was cheap. I could see peace and rule of law,their currency was strong and it was Husni Mubarak on the throne.
I was in tunisia many times. Same story.A prosperous functional country,and a liberal one.
In all the three countries i memtioned i saw women with burqa and i saw women in tight jeans with cleavages hanging out.
That means nobody was imposing their religion or idiology on the other.

So why in the world the people of these countries chose to listen to foreign propoganda and throw their countries into utter and total anarchy?
What they had was peace and prosperity,what they have now is civil war,chaos and people killing each other.
There is a saying 'if its not broke,dont fix it'.
What ever system of government was there in these countries,it was fumctional and was keeping their people together.

Why people of these countries went into self destruction and what will they gain from it,if ever?

I've done some basic analysis on each of the country which has undergone Arab spring - their 'before' and 'after' situation. I assumed economy to be the yardstick and invariably, all of the countries failed in economic terms after revolution. Except maybe, Libya which is showing signs of recovery.

It depends on the national psyche. I read a book on Russian History, written by the former head of BBC's Russian branch. It analyses Russian history since Kievan Rus and makes the point that throughout Russia's history, the country has only prospered when a dictator ruled the country with "iron fist". All attempts to democratise the country in history has been met with failure and a return to autocracy.

Arabs may have a similar psyche - they tend to prosper under dictatorship and "iron rule". Any attempt to 'democratise' is met with failure.

 

[Zabaniyah]

I've done some basic analysis on each of the country which has undergone Arab spring - their 'before' and 'after' situation. I assumed economy to be the yardstick and invariably, all of the countries failed in economic terms after revolution.

It depends on the national psyche. I read a book on Russian History, written by the former head of BBC's Russian branch. It analyses Russian history since Kievan Rus and makes the point that throughout Russia's history, the country has only prospered when a dictator ruled the country with "iron fist". All attempts to democratise the country in history has been met with failure and a return to autocracy.

Arabs may have a similar psyche - they tend to prosper under dictatorship and "iron rule". Any attempt to 'democratise' is met with failure.

A Democracy based on Russian values (or any nation's values) takes time to mature so that it becomes sustainable. That matured version is always a thousand times better than being under a one-man rule.

 

[livingdead]

I've done some basic analysis on each of the country which has undergone Arab spring - their 'before' and 'after' situation. I assumed economy to be the yardstick and invariably, all of the countries failed in economic terms after revolution. Except maybe, Libya which is showing signs of recovery.

It depends on the national psyche. I read a book on Russian History, written by the former head of BBC's Russian branch. It analyses Russian history since Kievan Rus and makes the point that throughout Russia's history, the country has only prospered when a dictator ruled the country with "iron fist". All attempts to democratise the country in history has been met with failure and a return to autocracy.

Arabs may have a similar psyche - they tend to prosper under dictatorship and "iron rule". Any attempt to 'democratise' is met with failure.

arabs never had democracy to compare before and after. Economic recovery after such chaos takes time.

 

[Saleem]

I was in syria in 2001. It was a functional country.I didnt see pelple dropping dead out of hunger.I didnt see people shooting each other on streets,and it was the so called Asad regime back then.
I was never in Libya,but same story.A prosperous functional country under Qazafi regime.
I was in Egypt around same time. The country was very prosperous.Food was cheap. I could see peace and rule of law,their currency was strong and it was Husni Mubarak on the throne.
I was in tunisia many times. Same story.A prosperous functional country,and a liberal one.
In all the three countries i memtioned i saw women with burqa and i saw women in tight jeans with cleavages hanging out.
That means nobody was imposing their religion or idiology on the other.

So why in the world the people of these countries chose to listen to foreign propoganda and throw their countries into utter and total anarchy?
What they had was peace and prosperity,what they have now is civil war,chaos and people killing each other.
There is a saying 'if its not broke,dont fix it'.
What ever system of government was there in these countries,it was fumctional and was keeping their people together.

Why people of these countries went into self destruction and what will they gain from it,if ever?

it is this strange problem with humans that they want to free and live with dignity....

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

Whatever man, we have repeated the story for like a thousandth time.

 

[Falcon29]

I've been to Egypt many times during the Mubarak era and it wasn't as prosperous as you make it sound. There were many, many people in poverty. You just never went to the areas where they are. I've seen Egyptian boys trying to sell water bottles on the streets to make money and some grown men putting tea for people in hopes for getting tips. And as BE said, you wouldn't understand it. Of course it will be a long term process but you will see how it benefited us politically and it will economically in the future. Nothing will happen overnight.

 

[Safriz]

I've been to Egypt many times during the Mubarak era and it wasn't as prosperous as you make it sound. There were many, many people in poverty. You just never went to the areas where they are. I've seen Egyptian boys trying to sell water bottles on the streets to make money and some grown men putting tea for people in hopes for getting tips. And as BE said, you wouldn't understand it. Of course it will be a long term process but you will see how it benefited us politically and it will economically in the future. Nothing will happen overnight.

Its another thing that Democracy isn't the silver bullet and isn't the only way forward..
China is a shining example...theirs isn't the Western form of democracy and they have made real progress.

 

[Falcon29]

Its another thing that Democracy isn't the silver bullet and isn't the only way forward..
China is a shining example...theirs isn't the Western form of democracy and they have made real progress.

Arabic democracy is nothing like Western Democracy. They can make progress but it needs time.

 

[BATMAN]

I was in syria in 2001. It was a functional country.I didnt see pelple dropping dead out of hunger.I didnt see people shooting each other on streets,and it was the so called Asad regime back then.
I was never in Libya,but same story.A prosperous functional country under Qazafi regime.
I was in Egypt around same time. The country was very prosperous.Food was cheap. I could see peace and rule of law,their currency was strong and it was Husni Mubarak on the throne.
I was in tunisia many times. Same story.A prosperous functional country,and a liberal one.
In all the three countries i memtioned i saw women with burqa and i saw women in tight jeans with cleavages hanging out.
That means nobody was imposing their religion or idiology on the other.

So why in the world the people of these countries chose to listen to foreign propoganda and throw their countries into utter and total anarchy?
What they had was peace and prosperity,what they have now is civil war,chaos and people killing each other.
There is a saying 'if its not broke,dont fix it'.
What ever system of government was there in these countries,it was fumctional and was keeping their people together.

Why people of these countries went into self destruction and what will they gain from it,if ever?

Why did Imran Khan preferred to have Asif ali Zardari as Pakistan President, rather than Pervaiz Musharraf !

There is a reason why i call Imran Khan and his long march against the progressive and corruption less regime of Pervaiz Musharraf a great fitna.

All troubles in Arab world and Pakistan, started afterwards and all the good things happened in Arab world about the same time, when P.Musharraf was ruling.

violent minority hijacking a peaceful majority is name of the game.

 

[Falcon29]

I've done some basic analysis on each of the country which has undergone Arab spring - their 'before' and 'after' situation. I assumed economy to be the yardstick and invariably, all of the countries failed in economic terms after revolution. Except maybe, Libya which is showing signs of recovery.

It depends on the national psyche. I read a book on Russian History, written by the former head of BBC's Russian branch. It analyses Russian history since Kievan Rus and makes the point that throughout Russia's history, the country has only prospered when a dictator ruled the country with "iron fist". All attempts to democratise the country in history has been met with failure and a return to autocracy.

Arabs may have a similar psyche - they tend to prosper under dictatorship and "iron rule". Any attempt to 'democratise' is met with failure.

You don't need to do a study to realize they will always be ruled by the fist.....

We know that. Because that's what they've been used to the past centuries. That's not the kind of democracy they're speaking of.