From AP:
Islamist candidates swept to victory in Bahrain's parliamentary election, splitting the vote between hardline Shiite and Sunni Muslims while female and liberal candidates fared poorly in the U.S.-allied kingdom, preliminary results showed Sunday.With several races headed for runoffs, Saturday's vote appeared to reinforce the sectarian divide between the Persian Gulf island's governing Sunni minority and the underprivileged Shiites who make up two-thirds of its 700,000 people.
The results also underlined a deepening social and religious conservatism in Bahrain, which has been among the most liberal of Arab states in the region and is host to the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet.
Of 18 women running, only one won outright - Latifa al-Gaoud, who was unopposed in her district. Another, Munira Fakhro, advanced to a runoff next Saturday but faces a tough race against Salah Ali of the pro-government Muslim Brotherhood, a hardline Sunni group.
Let's see. I seem to recall agitation in Qatar not long ago to get the U. S. military out. Presumably, we'll see the same in Bahrain soon. Which country were the Democrat leadership planning to re-deploy our forces to again?
Which ever one will render them ineffective.
Dave:
That's your take on this? Not to question the Bush administration's religious faith in the magic of democracy in the Arab middle east? If there's a delusion at work it seems the far greater fantasy is that free elections in any middle eastern country -- possibly, and temporarily excepting Kuwait -- would result in an anti-western government. Our only friends seem to be kings and presidents-for-life.
We're supposed to see the Dems as unrealistic for suggesting we could base troops in countries where Mr. Bush has been basing troops, while the realistic choice is a country in the middle of a civil war?
m takhalus -- I do agree that is useless and futile to expect decent government much less even the beginning of rapprochement with Modernity from the Arab and Muslim world.
However, given that the only way to handle the threats from Muslim countries is to support brutal dictators who will slaughter their countrymen wholesale to oppose Islam; and occassionally make a demonstration of US power to deter states from cozying up to Jihad with various WMDs of which nukes are only a part.
It doesn't take much for example to cultivate anthrax. Saddam had them while nukes were more difficult (thanks to the Israelis bombing Osirak).
If the repudiation of the Bush Doctrine is complete, the only task left before us is to induce raw, naked fear of the US among Muslims world-wide.
I agree that Bush tried to introduce Democracy and that failed. Given your logic and mine, isn't it time to nuke Tehran's nuke facilities to demonstrate what happens when you are the obvious and self-selected enemy of the US?
The only other course of action I see is abject and craven surrender.
As you know, MT, I opposed the invasion of Iraq and I've been skeptical about the democratization project from the start. However, I don't feel under any particular obligation to condemn Bush with every breath.
Dave:
I know. I was just bored so I decided to pick a fight with you. You make it difficult by being relentlessly reasonable. Reminds me of many years ago on some obscure religion board I determined to do what no one else had done: piss off some Bahai. Turns out you just can't bait a Bahai.
Jim:
We can't bomb Iran's nuclear facilities. I mean, yes, we physically can, but in the real world we can't unless we have sufficient ground forces to occupy at least the coastal areas of Iran and safeguard shipping. We don't have the men to do that. Why don't we? Ask Don (we don't need no stinkin' army) Rumsfeld.
Even if we had the capacity to stop Iranians from popping tankers like ducks in a carnival firing range, we have 140k men in Iraq on the wrong end of a long supply line the Shiites can cut tomorrow.
So you know what we're going to do? We're going to accept a nuclear Iran after saying we never would, just like we've accepted a nuclear North Korea after saying we never would. Haven't you heard? Jim Baker has us asking the Iranians to rescue us in Iraq.
If you own property in Tel Aviv this might be a good time to sell.
The Russians are sending AA missiles to a resurgent Iran and irradiating dissidents, Iraq is a sinkhole, Pakistan is shielding the Taliban, Syria is running the assassination-of-the-month club in Lebanon, Somalia's the next Afghanistan, the genocide in Darfur is now also the genocide in Chad, Daniel Ortega -- the Hello Kitty version of Castro -- is back, L'il Kim has pop-gun nukes, the entire world is united in believing that we suck, and the dollar is worth slightly more than Monopoly money.
Things are going along just great.
Another addition to the target list. By the look of it, Bangkok is after that.
There's also been a rise in the Islamic government in Turkey, which used to be a very secular place. Pakistan is experiencing constant upheaval. Unless we want to make more enemies for ourselves, we need to start considering how Muslims feel about US foreign policy.