Middle East tensions continue to rise after Egypt's success

myp · Feb 21, 2011

After the [thus far] successful protests in Egypt, tensions have risen in other Middle Eastern nations as citizens seek similar changes in what is being termed the Facebook revolution. Libya grew particularly violent earlier today as the government vowed to crackdown on protests.

As a result, oil has soared to over $91 today as have gold and silver to over $1405 and $34, respectively. I have a feeling this week is going to particularly interesting...

DodgeFB · Feb 21, 2011

myp said:
After the [thus far] successful protests in Egypt, tensions have risen in other Middle Eastern nations as citizens seek similar changes in what is being termed the Facebook revolution. Libya grew particularly violent earlier today as the government vowed to crackdown on protests.

As a result, oil has soared to over $91 today as have gold and silver to over $1405 and $34, respectively. I have a feeling this week is going to particularly interesting...

Agreed! And I know it will cost us plenty. But it seems we have supported and armed the wrong people for years. We will be paying in blood and money for years.

David · Feb 21, 2011

Libya is is a sorry state. Rebels (at this point simply calling them protesters is an understatement and I'm not British) have sized several military bases, military units are declaring themselves for the rebels and loyalist forces have taken to bombing their own capital. Meanwhile, the good Col. seems to have run, tail between his legs, clear to the other side of the world while the UN mission has declared itself for the rebels and 1 of their diplomats in China actually Godwined the sitting gov't in his statement of support for the rebels.

The MB, for it's part, has ordered his death as a holy mission. That would explain why he ran.

RoccoR · Feb 22, 2011

et al,

The Arab nations do like to mimic one another. It doesn't mean the outcomes will not cause a lot of pain; economically.

myp said:
After the [thus far] successful protests in Egypt, tensions have risen in other Middle Eastern nations as citizens seek similar changes in what is being termed the Facebook revolution. Libya grew particularly violent earlier today as the government vowed to crackdown on protests.

As a result, oil has soared to over $91 today as have gold and silver to over $1405 and $34, respectively. I have a feeling this week is going to particularly interesting...

(COMMENT)

I'm in one of those countries (in the news) now. Sometimes, democracy is not what you want. Bahrain is a classic example. Those people really don't have a whole lot to complain about. The Royal Family has done very well by them.

Most Respectfully,
R

myp · Feb 23, 2011

So apparently Saudi Arabia has raised wages, benefits, etc. as it tries to avoid unrest of its own: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/he...e-meet-enola-gay-abdullah-whorism-goes-global

DodgeFB · Feb 24, 2011

myp said:
So apparently Saudi Arabia has raised wages, benefits, etc. as it tries to avoid unrest of its own: http://www.zerohedge.com/article/he...e-meet-enola-gay-abdullah-whorism-goes-global

For my own selfish reasons I hope they make it work.:unsure:

Fascist Canuck · Feb 24, 2011

myp said:
After the [thus far] successful protests in Egypt, tensions have risen in other Middle Eastern nations as citizens seek similar changes in what is being termed the Facebook revolution. Libya grew particularly violent earlier today as the government vowed to crackdown on protests.

As a result, oil has soared to over $91 today as have gold and silver to over $1405 and $34, respectively. I have a feeling this week is going to particularly interesting...

Strange, since virtually ALL of your oil comes from my country.

Fascist Canuck · Feb 24, 2011

DodgeFB said:
Agreed! And I know it will cost us plenty. But it seems we have supported and armed the wrong people for years. We will be paying in blood and money for years.

Ah, I see geopolitics completely escapes your understanding. There was a REASON for arming and supporting such people. The very 'revolution' happening now, and the ever-increasing fuel prices should be enough to explain things to you.

myp · Feb 24, 2011

Fascist Canuck said:
Strange, since virtually ALL of your oil comes from my country.

Not sure how that has anything to do with my comments. Are you trying to say Libyan supply won't have an effect on price?

And cut it out with the superiority complex; it just hurts what little credibility you may have.

obtuseobserver · Feb 25, 2011

Fascist Canuck said:
Strange, since virtually ALL of your oil comes from my country.

Our country, your country, Mexico... it comes from nearby

Egypt, FTR, produces less oil anually than North Dakota does in a couple months

Egypt and Success are two words we must be cautious using together in close proximity.

Tunisia was the match that lit this... Egypt is the Arab state with the largest population and is the producer of the pop-culture. These are both very important.

SA raising wages..... I could post all day long on SA. If you start another thread I will ;-)

DodgeFB · Feb 25, 2011

Fascist Canuck said:
Ah, I see geopolitics completely escapes your understanding. There was a REASON for arming and supporting such people. The very 'revolution' happening now, and the ever-increasing fuel prices should be enough to explain things to you.

No explanation necessary. As someone that was shot at with my own gun, I understand very well when our people are killed with weapons we supplied.
Perhaps that part "escapes" your understanding.:unsure:

Fascist Canuck · Feb 25, 2011

myp said:
Not sure how that has anything to do with my comments. Are you trying to say Libyan supply won't have an effect on price?

And cut it out with the superiority complex; it just hurts what little credibility you may have.

The Libyan supply should not affect YOUR prices. You receive none of their oil. The prices rise and fall due to speculation, not supply. You have your wonderful oil barons to blame for that. They are loving every minute of the Mideast crisis. Canada alone has enough oil to supply your country.

Fascist Canuck · Feb 25, 2011

obtuseobserver said:
Our country, your country, Mexico... it comes from nearby

Egypt, FTR, produces less oil anually than North Dakota does in a couple months

Egypt and Success are two words we must be cautious using together in close proximity.

Tunisia was the match that lit this... Egypt is the Arab state with the largest population and is the producer of the pop-culture. These are both very important.

SA raising wages..... I could post all day long on SA. If you start another thread I will ;-)

Alberta produces more oil annually than your entire country and Mexico combined. You were saying...?

Fascist Canuck · Feb 25, 2011

DodgeFB said:
No explanation necessary. As someone that was shot at with my own gun, I understand very well when our people are killed with weapons we supplied.
Perhaps that part "escapes" your understanding.:unsure:

What do 'your people' have to do with what is going on there now??? They are not fighting you, they are fighting themselves, further Arab stupidity, which is why they got their collective asses kicked in 4 wars against Israel. Arabs are not going to be a problem in this world, nor will they ever be. They are simply too stupid.

myp · Feb 25, 2011

Fascist Canuck said:
The Libyan supply should not affect YOUR prices. You receive none of their oil. The prices rise and fall due to speculation, not supply. You have your wonderful oil barons to blame for that. They are loving every minute of the Mideast crisis. Canada alone has enough oil to supply your country.

First off, some of our oil does still come from the Mideast. Second, even if none of it came from the Mideast that does not matter because someone somewhere uses that oil and still would need oil should exports be shut down. What does that mean? Demand stays the same, supply down, prices up as those people look to other places- perhaps Canada- for oil.

RoccoR · Feb 26, 2011

et al,

The protests in and around the Middle East are more a reflection of the peoples discontent and government management. It is not really about the "oil," except that they happen to be in the richest oil producing region.

The people of these countries have hopes and dreams; just like us all. "Democracy" is not the "cure all" answer to attaining these aspirations. Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain (just as examples) are very benevolent Kingdoms. The Royal Familes actually have an profound interest in the welfare of the people. And, for the most part, have done well by them. No leadership is perfect; and there is always room for improvement, --- but I think that many Middle Easterners should keep in mind that some have come a very long way in the last half century. They shouldn't try to fix something that isn't broke (for them).

While the culture and lifestyles may be vastly different from our own, the many Royal Families have distinguished themselves as truly outstanding leaders; given the circumstances and situations they have had to contend with in the last five (5) decades. While we Americans have rather tended to be a bit evangelistic in our promotion of "decomcracy" during this period, it is not the only solution; it is not a matter of right and wrong. A leadership (Democracy or Kingdom) is judged by the care it shows for its people, the progress it makes for its nation, and the prosperity, fairness and freedom it dispenses. These are the outcomes by which the people should make their judgements.

Clearly, the leaderships Egypt and Libya (maybe even Yemen) have demonstrated a certain lack of concern for their people, their culture/heritage, and welfare --- affecting the progess and prosperity of thier people. It is their (the peoples) right and (in some cases) duty to effect change --- chose their own destiny. But the people of the Middle East must take care not to make changes just for the sake of making change. Sound and benevolent leadership is extremely hard to come-by. It is not something you can learn in a classroom. HRH King Abdullah (SA), HRH King Abdullah II (Jordan), and HRH King Hamad (Bahrain) are clear examples where (for the most part) things have gone right.

Just My Humble Opinion,
R

myp · Mar 1, 2011

While I agree that democracy isn't for everyone and that these revolutions do have bigger meaning than the oil and market outcomes, they are still of importance.

Even when it comes to diplomacy with other nations oil interests are certainly playing their own role.

obtuseobserver · Mar 1, 2011

RoccoR said:
et al,

The protests in and around the Middle East are more a reflection of the peoples discontent and government management. It is not really about the "oil," except that they happen to be in the richest oil producing region.

The people of these countries have hopes and dreams; just like us all. "Democracy" is not the "cure all" answer to attaining these aspirations. Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain (just as examples) are very benevolent Kingdoms. The Royal Familes actually have an profound interest in the welfare of the people. And, for the most part, have done well by them. No leadership is perfect; and there is always room for improvement, --- but I think that many Middle Easterners should keep in mind that some have come a very long way in the last half century. They shouldn't try to fix something that isn't broke (for them).

Agreed on those enlightened despots. However, there's no guarantee of that continuing. England took ceturies to develop its constitutional monarchy. No reason to others could do it quicker.

Fascist Canuck · Mar 3, 2011

I love seeing Americans defending the Arab monarchies. Americans are simply too stupid to realise that monarchism and fascism are one and the same in many respects. Yet, Americans rail against fascism, but kiss monarchist ass. Talk about double-standards. Fascism is a superior ideology, pure and simple. Now, if the Arab states gain democracy, the 'leaders' will be fighting each other over the merits of garbage pickup rather than simply saying 'shut the **** up, this is how it is going to be done' without fucking debating the subject for two or more years.

RoccoR · Mar 4, 2011

Fascist Canuck, et al,

It is not a case of defending or promoting one system of government over another (democracy 'vs' monarchy). It is about the people and their wants and needs.

Fascist Canuck said:
I love seeing Americans defending the Arab monarchies. Americans are simply too stupid to realise that monarchism and fascism are one and the same in many respects. Yet, Americans rail against fascism, but kiss monarchist ass. Talk about double-standards. Fascism is a superior ideology, pure and simple. Now, if the Arab states gain democracy, the 'leaders' will be fighting each other over the merits of garbage pickup rather than simply saying 'shut the **** up, this is how it is going to be done' without fucking debating the subject for two or more years.

(COMMENT)

There is no "right" or "wrong" when it comes to these questions. The correctness is evaluated on the outcomes. If a nation is free, and the people are prosperous, enjoying economic, industrial and scientific growth, then no matter what form of government they have, it is beneficial.

There is nothing to support the claim that "fascism is the superior ideology." There are NO examples of where it worded --- being a recent ideology.

There are examples in time where a form of government, previously successful in the past, fails to meet the challenges of the future.

Yes, Fascist Canuck is correct, that the ideology behind "fascism" is such that it appeals to many:

Strong Leadership, promoting the Nation
[*]
Very Strong National Defense Posture
[*]
A cooperative labor relations environment in support of:
- Quality Production
  [*]Natioanl Pride in product lines
  [*]Strong Research & Development
[*]Maximization of Production - GNP for the Nation Corporate Interests should serve the nation and build a strong economy
[*]Production Emphasis should serve the National Interest

Democracy and Capitalism, in its combination, are not always compatable with these ideas. We promote the concentration of wealth in the maximization of the shareholder. While the US side of Democracy and Capitalism for national governments does not always promote policies in national pride, economic development, idustrialization, employment or other features associated with this concept; it does seem to work.

BUT, the claim that it is superior is unfounded.

Most Respectfully,
R

Middle East tensions continue to rise after Egypt's success

Similar threads