Predictions in the Middle East and other parts of the world

[just me]

I wish others to share predictions regarding the outcome in Middle Eastern and other areas of the world affairs. I would like to see how many would like to share theirs with mine.

I see an Iranian-influenced uprising backed mainly by certain(not all) Shiite Muslims for control of the area. I do not see democracy taking hold in all these areas. I see Iranian protesters killed in the streets and in the desert and mountains. I see certain other countries using their militaries and police to stop the protests. I see certain militaries and police trying to take advantage of some situations to their own benefit. I see America standing idly by, trying to use some of their own influence for the outcome they would prefer.

I feel Israel will be attacked again by nations under Iranian influence. I see America wondering what to do. I see the destruction of Mecca and Medina if Israel is left with no alternative but to use nuclear weapons. It is vague if it will be by the hands of the Israelis, though. I pray none of this happens and I pray I am wrong. I would like to see peace among nations.

Anyone else wish to share your thoughts and vision of the future.

 

[Oranguh]

So.... we cast out our predictions and... if they're wrong... we're no longer infj's :0? ~~ But, I'm not an infj~ Am I still allowed to cast my prediction?

 

[just me]

So.... we cast out our predictions and... if they're wrong... we're no longer infj's :0? ~~ But, I'm not an infj~ Am I still allowed to cast my prediction?

You can play. I doubt all predictions will happen in some of our lifetimes. Being wrong does not mean we are no longer infj; it may simply mean someone or something may have changed things.

 

[acd]

The Egyptian protesters have changed the course of history there and set a standard for the rest of their neighbors. No one thought change could be accomplished without a violent overthrow--but they did it! The fact that people will not tolerate being oppressed any longer, and that they want to govern themselves means that the mullahs and autocrats will not succeed in rising to power in the long run. People are not afraid to speak out, and what good is a dictatorship without a terrified and weak public?

Maybe I'm an optimist...But I see a Middle-East free of autocrats and mullahs eventually..maybe in our lifetime, maybe not.. It will not be an easy road, but I am cheering for those who want democracy to make it happen.

 

[Sloe Djinn]

While I do enjoy the idea of people rising up against tyranny, I see the transitional period as the most risky part of the process. Once an established regime is overthrown, the resulting vacuum and instability can give rise to even more violence and corruption. Competing successors run the risk of having to sell their souls to ideas or people that they don't really believe in, or who/which are potentially just as harmful as the original oppressors in order to secure their positions as new leaders.

I guess I'm hopeful but pessimistic. I see larger nations wanting to step in and help, but exacerbating the situation by tending to subtly impose themselves upon the struggling nations.

 

[acd]

It's not as if they are now without a military and defenseless.

 

[muir]

I think that the adoption of western neoliberalism has created a massive imbalance in wealth in Egypt.

The people have been impoverished whilst the capitalist class have got richer.

Mubarak is the figurehead of the capitalist class and he has built a personal fortune of $70 billion whilst in office, while many of his countrymen/women have been left languishing in poverty, so the people have demanded that he go.

Initially he tried to resist the protest and used his police force to intimidate and brutalise the people which included imprisoning, beating and murdering political opponents. He flew military jets over Cairo and deployed the police and army to try and intimidate the people, but they have not budged.

The capitalist class are now caught in a game of damage limitation.

They have told Mubarak that he must go because the main demand of the protestors was that he go. Now the capitalist class must try to string out the protest in the hope that it will lose momentum.

They may give in to some demands for economic reform because they know that if they can get the protestors to disperse then they can quietly go about undoing the reforms and clawing back any wealth or power they had to give away in short term reforms. They can also go about rounding up ringleaders and disposing of them and they can stregthen their control of the population for example by building up the police force, secret police and surveilance of the population.

Personally i would like to see total system change to a socialist model, but i fear what is more likely is economic or political reforms which will either retain the status quo or come up against whole new problems.

What i would say is that if conditions have got so bad that the people have risen up against the ruling class then you can be sure they are really suffering.

Can they stay smart and remain united, get organised and install a system or regime which will create a fairer balance of wealth?

One thing is for sure....you can bet that the western powers will want to see the maintenance of the status quo, neoliberalism and their capitalist allies in positions of power.

Exciting times, good luck to the people.

Watch our own western governments tighten up on surveillance of their own populations because they are currently squeezing us financially. The rich are getting richer and the rest of us are working harder.

When the imbalance tips too far, it falls off its fulcrum and that is what we are seeing happening across the middle east and north africa.

I would love to see the saudi royal family fall as they are hoarding all their nations wealth while many are left in poverty. They are of course a close ally of the US, who itself has dynasties who are hoarding all the wealth while many are left in poverty

Revolution in the west? Civil unrest has also been sweeping across Europe. The people are not happy and ideas can spread fast on the internet. That has made the internet a target of the power elites who are already seeking to regulate and limit it.

 

[Trifoilum]

For Middle East particularly, after Egypt....It's going to be a rocky ride out there.

For about....5 years? A decade? A generation?

Probably several Dubai and Shanghai will rise. Probably further degree of westernization will happen..
Maybe Europe or some part of Asia will follow Egypt, creating further ripples.

 

[Sloe Djinn]

It's not as if they are now without a military and defenseless.

I didn't necessarily mean via military occupation, assuming that this statement was directed towards my previous one.

 

[bickelz]

I know this is crazy talk and i'm going to get shit for this post but has anyone seriously considered a caliphate like Glenn Beck has been suggesting. I have been watching him the past few weeks and he has kind of predicted some of what has been going on. I don't believe him completely because he leaves things out of his argument but it doesn't seem impossible given how vast the outbreaks are right now. In order for this to happen, from what I've heard is the Muslim brotherhood would have to grab power. I think Rachel Maddow said last night that they have an approval rating of less than 1% (it might have been John Stewart two days ago though). And also, I don't know why everyone is afraid of some sort of caliphate here in America. As long as it's peaceful, there are no problems. And if it is violent, do you actually think that it could take the US when we spend as much on our military on the rest of the world combined? Not that I am pro war (in fact the opposite) but there is nothing to be afraid of.

 

[Sloe Djinn]

I know this is crazy talk and i'm going to get shit for this post but has anyone seriously considered a caliphate like Glenn Beck has been suggesting. I have been watching him the past few weeks and he has kind of predicted some of what has been going on. I don't believe him completely because he leaves things out of his argument but it doesn't seem impossible given how vast the outbreaks are right now. In order for this to happen, from what I've heard is the Muslim brotherhood would have to grab power. I think Rachel Maddow said last night that they have an approval rating of less than 1% (it might have been John Stewart two days ago though). And also, I don't know why everyone is afraid of some sort of caliphate here in America. As long as it's peaceful, there are no problems. And if it is violent, do you actually think that it could take the US when we spend as much on our military on the rest of the world combined? Not that I am pro war (in fact the opposite) but there is nothing to be afraid of.

[MENTION=3545]bickelz[/MENTION] Dunno why you would get shit for the post aside from the knee-jerk aversion to Glenn Beck on the part of liberals. I tend more towards the liberal side, but regardless, can you elaborate on the definition of, and possible benefits of a caliphate?

 

[bickelz]

@bickelz Dunno why you would get shit for the post aside from the knee-jerk aversion to Glenn Beck on the part of liberals. I tend more towards the liberal side, but regardless, can you elaborate on the definition of, and possible benefits of a caliphate?

Well, actually I am pretty much a socialist so I understand the whole Glenn is a crazy thing but I started a thread about him a week ago and people hated me for it. I just watch him to get the other angle to make sure i haven't missed anything.

The way caliphate has been used is as some sort of large religious state or coalition of states. It has been used to describe this as a coalition of Islamic states much like that of the Ottoman Empire. Actually, the Ottoman Empire was the last caliphate the world has seen (according to Beck). I'm pretty sure that the word caliphate only pertains to an Islamic state like this.

I don't know exactly what the benefits of this would be. The question I have is why would it be a bad thing for western democracy? People on both the right and left seem to be shuddering at the words caliphate and Sharia Law. But if they are both peaceful, I see no reason for panic. We could see a flourishing middle east under a caliphate and another mess under more democracy.

Like I said above, I'm not sure of any benefits to this kind of system but I could take a stab at it. The only thing that I could see from an economic standpoint would be less trade restrictions between countries like the EU.

OH WAIT...

I remember now why everyone is so scared! It is because the don't want an Islamic caliphate to kick the crap out of Israel. Well, I'm not a huge fan of Israel so I could care less.

By the way, in all probability, there will be no caliphate. It's just not that likely but I would enjoy watching it form in my lifetime. Seeing the middle east/ north africa flourish again could bring some stability to the region and possibly bring us closer to world peace. Ok, i should stop talking right now because my Ni is running wild on this and pretty soon I will sound like the dirty hippie socialist version of Glenn Beck.

 

[just me]

I am enjoying this thread. Please keep them coming.

 

[Kavalan]

The fact that sharia law and a caliphate state(in the form that is currently in practice in the middle east) would run counter to the throngs that protested in Egypt and Tunisia would lead me to believe that they would not be part of such a coalition(maybe as a show of support but would not be a core member). The fact that Iran has had massive protests(after the reelection of Mahmoud and after the of Egypt's successful protests) showing that religious rule is slowly eroding as far as favor is concerned.

 

[just me]

Kavalan, I must agree with your assessment of Sharia Law. I see it as a form of controlling people with fear.

On the other hand, people would gladly follow a wise and fair leader; even if it were a King. I feel democracy may not be best for everyone, as many people are misinformed about what is going on around them. I would like to see what works best in each situation, and would like to see the people's best interests in the hearts of all rulers or leaders......the people of each and every country.

 

[bamf]

Idealistically? A new intellectual awakening of social justice and individual freedom

Realistically? An increased and renewed response and interest from the western world in the form of economic coercion.

 

[bickelz]

Kavalan, I must agree with your assessment of Sharia Law. I see it as a form of controlling people with fear.

On the other hand, people would gladly follow a wise and fair leader; even if it were a King. I feel democracy may not be best for everyone, as many people are misinformed about what is going on around them. I would like to see what works best in each situation, and would like to see the people's best interests in the hearts of all rulers or leaders......the people of each and every country.

Sharia Law is ultimately what everyone is afraid of happening to the middle east if the so called caliphate happens. From what I have heard, Sharia Law does control people through fear by cutting off hands and death penalties and such. But democracies can have that too. I also think that if 80% of a population wants Sharia Law, there will be few offenders and therefore few brutal punishments. Why would you vote to cut peoples hands off when they steal and then go out and steal?

But yes, it is ultimately up to the people of what type of government is made. I think the US should stay out of it, for once in our lives.

 

[just me]

So, what would you do as a leader of the USA watching two Iranian warships that "just happened" to pass through the Suez Canal while all this is happening in Egypt....loaded with long range missiles destined for Hezbollah and Syria to be aimed at your ally Israel?

Do you foresee another bout in the Mediterranean? Do you see America's abandoning their ally...staying out of it?
What do you see happening? Call it. Remember the Karine-A? Remember why it was stopped? Do you think Israel can afford to sit back and watch? Would you? What do you foresee?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karine_A_Affair

 

[muir]

The capitalist class will never give up power without a fight. They are the propertied class, they own the means of production and all the wealth and they do not want to share it with the rest of humanity whether it is their countrymen or people from another country.

There is no point saying what a 'leader' of the USA should do, because they are simply a figurehead of the capitalist class. The capitalist class hold power in the US and in other capitalist countries. To paraphrase Marx: the government is the committee of the capitalist class.

Do you think that if the Republicans gained power in the US, they would turn their backs on the banks? Of course not because the banks own them and everything else. It doesn't matter whether you vote Democrat or Republican they are both working for the banks.

This means that the government in the US represents the interests of the corporations and banks both domestically and abroad.

The US government does not represent the interests of the US people. The job of the US government, as the committee of the capitalist class, is to give the American people just enough that they don't rebel.

Their job is to control the people by missinforming them, distracting them and incorrectly educating them in order to keep them buying into the capitalist system; essentially to keep them as wage slaves

When the capitalist class fail to keep the uneasy balance of power between the capitalist class and the working class then the working class get agitated and make themselves heard. That is what we are seeing in Europe, N.Africa and in the Middle East.

Because the capitalist class runs the government they naturally control the police force and the army as well and the media, and they have no reservations about using any of these to control the working class.

So i don't see any point in conjecturing about what a US leader could or should do because they are not representing the interests of the people whether in the US or anywhere else, they are representing the interests of themselves and their astronomically rich friends and allies.

It is not upto the governments to make change, because they won't....it isn't in their interests to change anything

It is upto the people to change things by voting with their feet and by demanding change from their government or by doing away with government all together

US tax dollars go towards Israel which makes Israel arrogantly hostile to Palestineans and other neighbouring peoples. Whilst the US is backing Israel so efficiently there is no need to seek any compromise that might lead to peace

Meanwhile the capitalist class will tell the US people, via their media, that the US is trying to act as a peacekeeper in the middle east, which is done to keep the US people from getting angry at their government, because it hides the truth from them that their tax dollars are going to foment trouble in other parts of the world, which in turn makes people angry at the US

As the American industrialist Henry Ford said:

'It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.'

 

[poshlost]

lybia currently being freed. so happy...despite qaddafi's 3day massacre. at least 300 protesters have been killed so far.