Baghdad is dangerously close to falling !

[surajmal]

Has uncle sam fvcked the middle east up or what? I can't decide if it is a good thing or bad. Luckily, someone like Doval is incharge of the security affairs. Hopefully, he will bring like minded people with him that he can train/provide tutelage to over the duration of his term, so that we aren't subjected to slick talking peace loving IFS' over the next couple of decades - that are bound to be, at the very least, precarious for India. What is the worst case scenario if sh!t hits the fan in the middle east (upto and including Pakiland)? Refugee crisis of gargantuan proportions for India? That is why, Namo, please build a "wall"

[Raghav_12]

America would surely be in predicament. If they support Iraq govt, they'll be fighting against ISIS. At the same time in Syria US is indirectly fighting against Assad and strengthening Rebel groups and among them ISIS is most prominent. So in one country they are fighting against ISIS while in other they are fighting along with ISIS. They are really screwed. I would never understand why did they meddle in Iraq affairs and removed Saddam. At least Iraq had some semblance of a country under Saddam. Since then it is plunging rapidly towards a medieval kind of arrangement.

[Brainfade]

America would surely be in predicament. If they support Iraq govt, they'll be fighting against ISIS. At the same time in Syria US is indirectly fighting against Assad and strengthening Rebel groups and among them ISIS is most prominent. So in one country they are fighting against ISIS while in other they are fighting along with ISIS. They are really screwed. I would never understand why did they meddle in Iraq affairs and removed Saddam. At least Iraq had some semblance of a country under Saddam. Since then it is plunging rapidly towards a medieval kind of arrangement.

The fallacy of "nation-building." America thinks we can remove one force of evil and replace it with democracy. I am not sure if we are naive, or arrogant, or a combination of both, to think that the rest of the world is willing to give up their tribal wars and replace it with Western style democracies. The only thing we've succeeded in doing? Use the enemy's enemy as a "friend" to replace one despot with another one, and cry when things go wrong.

[Raghav_12]

The fallacy of "nation-building." America thinks we can remove one force of evil and replace it with democracy. I am not sure if we are naive' date=' or arrogant, or a combination of both, to think that the rest of the world is willing to give up their tribal wars and replace it with Western style democracies. The only thing we've succeeded in doing? Use the enemy's enemy as a "friend" to replace one despot with another one, and cry when things go wrong.[/quote'] Yes. It is this fallacy of that "Nation Building" can be forced. I am much less cynical of US intentions than most of the people across the globe and I do believe they want a thriving democracy in these countries. But what do you do when these countries themselves are not ready for democracy. Democracy evolves through a organic process and takes time. You just can't replace despot with a democratic system.

[Muloghonto]

Yes. It is this fallacy of that "Nation Building" can be forced. I am much less cynical of US intentions than most of the people across the globe and I do believe they want a thriving democracy in these countries. But what do you do when these countries themselves are not ready for democracy. Democracy evolves through a organic process and takes time. You just can't replace despot with a democratic system.

This. Western democracy took 100s of years to evolve, it wont happen in a few years. Atleast a generation or two is required. Dont b fooled, nation building was just a pretext in iraq. Sent from my GT-S5830D using Tapatalk 2

[randomGuy]

Yes. It is this fallacy of that "Nation Building" can be forced. I am much less cynical of US intentions than most of the people across the globe and I do believe they want a thriving democracy in these countries. But what do you do when these countries themselves are not ready for democracy. Democracy evolves through a organic process and takes time. You just can't replace despot with a democratic system.

Iraq has 30-35% sunni population. If Maliki had given adequate representation to sunnis in govt. as well, maybe things would not have come to this stage.

[Muloghonto]

Iraq has 30-35% sunni population. If Maliki had given adequate representation to sunnis in govt. as well' date=' maybe things would not have come to this stage.[/quote'] Iraq is complex. Its not just shia sunni divide, its also arabs kurds divide. A large part of that 35% are kurds. Fear with kurds is they want independence, which will be a domino effect for the rest Sent from my GT-S5830D using Tapatalk 2

[Desi Cartman]

Blaming Bush is no point' date=' when moron American public gave him second term to satisfy the Americans lust for illegally invading a sovereign nation and murdering thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians. The American average joe has as much blood on their hands as Bush does, collective conscious gone AWOL.[/quote'] People elect their leader due to hope, also as they may believe in the same ideology. It doesn't mean that people are overall stupid, they could be misinformed, uneducated, May not have good choices or scared. Why did congress rule over India for so long. Who voted for mayawati or lalu or MMS ? Are people just stupid or morons ? Bush did all he could to win the first election and second time people wanted to give him a chance to finish what he was working on. Most US presidents do win 2 terms on this pretext. Also, Americans believed when their president after 911 said he had proof of WMDs in Iraq. He used the situation to fulfill the agenda that he might have believed was best for the US. It happens in all democracies. We should be the last ones to call Americans morons considering what we have been voting into power since independence.

[gattaca]

People elect their leader due to hope, also as they may believe in the same ideology. It doesn't mean that people are overall stupid, they could be misinformed, uneducated, May not have good choices or scared. Why did congress rule over India for so long. Who voted for mayawati or lalu or MMS ? Are people just stupid or morons ? Bush did all he could to win the first election and second time people wanted to give him a chance to finish what he was working on. Most US presidents do win 2 terms on this pretext. Also, Americans believed when their president after 911 said he had proof of WMDs in Iraq. He used the situation to fulfill the agenda that he might have believed was best for the US. It happens in all democracies. We should be the last ones to call Americans morons considering what we have been voting into power since independence.

America got independence in 1776 or so. Thats lot comparing to India, we are a young nation and lower literacy rates. you cant compare india and america because we are more diverse so every chance their might a moron elected in india than america also the people you listed are CMs at most comparing them with a president doesnt hold much for the argument.

[randomGuy]

Iraq is complex. Its not just shia sunni divide, its also arabs kurds divide. A large part of that 35% are kurds. Fear with kurds is they want independence, which will be a domino effect for the rest Sent from my GT-S5830D using Tapatalk 2

Right. I think secularism is just about symbolism. If the iraqi govt. was seen to be giving representation to the Sunnis, the extremists would not get much support.

[ravishingravi]

Right. I think secularism is just about symbolism. If the iraqi govt. was seen to be giving representation to the Sunnis, the extremists would not get much support.

Do you know who ISIS is and where it originated from.

[someone]

Ry3NzkAOo3s It's a must watch video. A great answer to those who say that majority are peaceful followers of that religion. And not surprising, no protests in India against these attacks especially when you consider how Muslims express outrage about attacks in Myanmar.

[Shunya]

Ry3NzkAOo3s It's a must watch video. A great answer to those who say that majority are peaceful followers of that religion. And not surprising, no protests in India against these attacks especially when you consider how Muslims express outrage about attacks in Myanmar.

:hatsoff:

[ravishingravi]

Ry3NzkAOo3s It's a must watch video. A great answer to those who say that majority are peaceful followers of that religion. And not surprising, no protests in India against these attacks especially when you consider how Muslims express outrage about attacks in Myanmar.

Ummah ?

[Desi Cartman]

America got independence in 1776 or so. Thats lot comparing to India' date=' we are a young nation and lower literacy rates. you cant compare india and america because we are more diverse so every chance their might a moron elected in india than america also the people you listed are CMs at most comparing them with a president doesnt hold much for the argument.[/quote'] So you wish to argue about who is dumber? All I said was that elections are won on hope, choices and numbers. Even Hitler won elections.

[Muloghonto]

So you wish to argue about who is dumber? All I said was that elections are won on hope' date=' choices and numbers. Even Hitler won elections.[/quote'] It amuses me when people say the above - stuff like 'even hitler won the elections!'. Well, if you investigate the climate of Hitler's win, its not a surprise, its a foregone conclusion and in similar scenarios, Hitler wins by a landslide every single time. Its not his Aryan nation ideas that won him the elections. Or nationalistic bravado of how Germany got raped in WWI (which IMO, was way too harsh on Germany). What won him the election by a massive landslide, is that the Nazi party's official name is National Socialist German Workers Party. Yes, they were socialists. Not dyed-in-red commies but very close to it. Now, what happened in the decade preceeding Hitler's win in Germany ? Immediately after WWI, the crushed Germany economy was forced to pay such a huge debt (Germany did not suspend debt payment for WWI till 1932) that Germany experienced hyperinflation. There are pictures of people loading wheelbarrows up with German money to go buy bread from the store. When capitalist system collapses (which hyperinflation is one of the biggest examples of- money has no meaning when a loaf of bread costs 2 billion dollars today, 2.1 billion dollars tomorrow, etc etc), what are the alternatives ? Socialism. The Nazi socialist ideology was simple- blame the economic problem on the evil Ango-American-Russian axis for crippling the economy, enabled by Bolshevik and Jewish traitors in German fold. Hitler was also the very first politician ever to use a radio and aircraft (distributing pamplets) to campaign. Then, in 1930, the Great depression hit- every single capitalist country was ruined, American GDP declined by 10% or so, the British were crippled, so were the Japanese and the French. Germany was devastated some more because the trickle of western financial investment stopped completely. Only one nation remained unscathed by the Great depression: Soviet Union, because well, commies dont care about money-related problems. It is in this cliimate that Hitler came to power: his party was a socialist party that provided socialist solutions to people's economic problems (these wernt problems like ours, where homes are too expensive or govt. taxes us too much. These are problems like what to do when a lawyer doesnt make enough money to buy a slab of meat!), played the blame-game ( blame the Jews & Bolsheviks) and campaigned with stunning efficiency (first campaigners using the radio and pamphlet distribution arially!!) And once the Nazis came to power, their strengths ( which was zero tolerance for corruption, zero tolerance for unproductivity and a socialist form of economy focussed on manufacturing and mining) lead to a stunning German economic growth, the likes of which have not been seen before. So i ask you this- why be surprised at Hitler comming to power and maintaining power ? He did what very few leaders could do in history: campaign with great efficiency & groundbreaking innovation, offer solutions and once in power, deliver a 4-fold increase of the German economy in 4 years. Can you imagine ? a country quadrupling its total GDP in 4 years ? If tomorrow a party in India came to power promising prosperity and blaming the Tamils and Srini for all of India's problems, then managed to quadruple Indian economy in 4 years, all the while saying 'lets kill every single Tamil', trust me, most of India would go along with it. Hitler achieved the key touchstone to political power: deliver stunning economic performance and the people will let you do whatever you want

[Stuge]

Muloghonto is back .. :ohmy::ohmy:

[Desi Cartman]

It amuses me when people say the above - stuff like 'even hitler won the elections!'. Well, if you investigate the climate of Hitler's win, its not a surprise, its a foregone conclusion and in similar scenarios, Hitler wins by a landslide every single time. Its not his Aryan nation ideas that won him the elections. Or nationalistic bravado of how Germany got raped in WWI (which IMO, was way too harsh on Germany). What won him the election by a massive landslide, is that the Nazi party's official name is National Socialist German Workers Party. Yes, they were socialists. Not dyed-in-red commies but very close to it. Now, what happened in the decade preceeding Hitler's win in Germany ? Immediately after WWI, the crushed Germany economy was forced to pay such a huge debt (Germany did not suspend debt payment for WWI till 1932) that Germany experienced hyperinflation. There are pictures of people loading wheelbarrows up with German money to go buy bread from the store. When capitalist system collapses (which hyperinflation is one of the biggest examples of- money has no meaning when a loaf of bread costs 2 billion dollars today, 2.1 billion dollars tomorrow, etc etc), what are the alternatives ? Socialism. The Nazi socialist ideology was simple- blame the economic problem on the evil Ango-American-Russian axis for crippling the economy, enabled by Bolshevik and Jewish traitors in German fold. Hitler was also the very first politician ever to use a radio and aircraft (distributing pamplets) to campaign. Then, in 1930, the Great depression hit- every single capitalist country was ruined, American GDP declined by 10% or so, the British were crippled, so were the Japanese and the French. Germany was devastated some more because the trickle of western financial investment stopped completely. Only one nation remained unscathed by the Great depression: Soviet Union, because well, commies dont care about money-related problems. It is in this cliimate that Hitler came to power: his party was a socialist party that provided socialist solutions to people's economic problems (these wernt problems like ours, where homes are too expensive or govt. taxes us too much. These are problems like what to do when a lawyer doesnt make enough money to buy a slab of meat!), played the blame-game ( blame the Jews & Bolsheviks) and campaigned with stunning efficiency (first campaigners using the radio and pamphlet distribution arially!!) And once the Nazis came to power, their strengths ( which was zero tolerance for corruption, zero tolerance for unproductivity and a socialist form of economy focussed on manufacturing and mining) lead to a stunning German economic growth, the likes of which have not been seen before. So i ask you this- why be surprised at Hitler comming to power and maintaining power ? He did what very few leaders could do in history: campaign with great efficiency & groundbreaking innovation, offer solutions and once in power, deliver a 4-fold increase of the German economy in 4 years. Can you imagine ? a country quadrupling its total GDP in 4 years ? If tomorrow a party in India came to power promising prosperity and blaming the Tamils and Srini for all of India's problems, then managed to quadruple Indian economy in 4 years, all the while saying 'lets kill every single Tamil', trust me, most of India would go along with it. Hitler achieved the key touchstone to political power: deliver stunning economic performance and the people will let you do whatever you want

Thanks for the history lesson but that's what exactly I was saying in my post that there are variety of reasons for a candidate winning elections.

[Sachin=GOD]

ISIS: The unsurprising surprise that is sweeping Iraq http://thebulletin.org/isis-unsurprising-surprise-sweeping-iraq7251 Must read article.

[Sachin=GOD]

Iraq militants declare 'Islamic Caliphate', announce ISIS chief Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi as the 'Caliph': Agence France-Presse