Middle East - Chances of peace? - [Closes 21/05/07]

[---MAD---]

We all know what is happening in the middle east. Iraq situations, Iran trying to get attention from the West regarding its Nuclear ambitions, Palestine and Israels never ending war. What is the chance (if any) of the middle east becoming truly stable?

Happy debating!

[Blinger1]

zip *makes longer*

[Tash.]

I don't think there's any chance at all. The majority of these conflicts stem from leaders that are power fanatics. All they want is control and there are always going to be people that want to fight for it and countries that are going to oppose them having it. With Iran and the nuclear weapons, and not just Iran as there are other countries that want to develop them (N.Korea), the UN and especially the USA & the Uk are never going to allow them to have them, so there are always going to be ill feelings between countries as far as that goes. As for the whole Iraq situation, thats gotten beyond all control, & it's worse than ever. Although something did have to be done because of the violence of Saddam's regime.

[DiscoPat]

I think that eventually it will end, but needs alot of time, alot.

[VPSwow]

After a long long time, they will finally stop this. It might need someone to do something major drastic for this to happen though.

[Ed.]

I seriously doubt it - I wish that there was a chance of peace but if we even try to be nice to them they will still hate us and the USA . Tony Blair made the wrong decision to go to war with IRAQ and we are paying the price

[Seatherny]

Its possible.
Unfortunately there are people in the world who just don't like peace or people don't agree on things. In my opinion, they need leaders who are fair and strong. Leaders who listen to people and not murder anyone who disagrees with them. There will always be disputes over stuff like nuclear weapons. I think the UN needs to get rid of stupid leaders like Bush who is destroying the world.

[---MAD---]

IMO, democracy in the middle east won't ever work. The reason for that is because people in the middle east are not used to being able to say bad things about the goverment without being put in jail or being kicked out. Its a bit like allowing piracy in the UK. Everyone will go buy it until the actual companies go bust.

Having a strong ruler, doing the right things works much better than having 100 people involved like they are trying to do with Iraq. As you can see it doesn't quite work.

[Mentor]

IMO, democracy in the middle east won't ever work. The reason for that is because people in the middle east are not used to being able to say bad things about the goverment without being put in jail or being kicked out.
Go back a few 100 years and you could say the same thing about the west, all it takes is enough time.


Its a bit like allowing piracy in the UK. Everyone will go buy it until the actual companies go bust.
war is nothing like piracy? copyright infringment and killing each other are pretty differnt in nature.


Having a strong ruler, doing the right things works much better than having 100 people involved like they are trying to do with Iraq. As you can see it doesn't quite work.
Becuse it hasnt had time to sink in, it took 100s of years for britain to evolve a democrosy after all. same is true there, just shoveing one in and hopeing for the best will take a while to take hold.

[RedStratocas]

The really sad thing about the Iraq war is that really, it could have worked. Peace in the Middle East is possible, you guys are underestimating them. We just really aren't helping with how we're going through with this. If you get past the idea that we shouldn't be there simply because it's not our business, we could sponsor peace talks. We can do things that aren't forceful. Unfortunately, we put a gun to their head and said "be democratic!", which will never make a stable democracy.

It can work, but like someone said earlier, it takes time.

[Seatherny]

IMO, democracy in the middle east won't ever work. The reason for that is because people in the middle east are not used to being able to say bad things about the goverment without being put in jail or being kicked out. Its a bit like allowing piracy in the UK. Everyone will go buy it until the actual companies go bust.

Having a strong ruler, doing the right things works much better than having 100 people involved like they are trying to do with Iraq. As you can see it doesn't quite work.

I totally disagree with you.

Britain ruled half the world. Anyone who spoke against them was put in prison. The country had to get together and fight off the British. Britain was ruled once, they got rid of their rulers. It takes time but it happens. There is going to be a time when some people high up in the goverment or a new political party forms and some how gets rid of the current ones.

Iraq would have been much better if Bush hadnt attacked it. Now, when people walk out of their house, they aren't sure if they will ever return. Yes, Saddam was a crap ruler, but the country was atleast under control.

If a American or a British dies in Iraq now, it would make the headline - but you have loads of Iraqis dieing everyday.

The UN needs to get rid of all the crap rules somehow - and make sure the votes arent rigged.

Btw, you comparison of the corrent topic with piracy isn't very good. They are on completely different levels.

[Mentor]

The really sad thing about the Iraq war is that really, it could have worked. Peace in the Middle East is possible, you guys are underestimating them. We just really aren't helping with how we're going through with this. If you get past the idea that we shouldn't be there simply because it's not our business, we could sponsor peace talks. We can do things that aren't forceful. Unfortunately, we put a gun to their head and said "be democratic!", which will never make a stable democracy.

It can work, but like someone said earlier, it takes time.

Actually i think thats a good point, democracy is a form of government where the people have the power choose who runs the country.
If you take away that choice and force people threw military power to choose a government, then how the hell can that be considered democracy. Furthermore how could that ever lead to true democracy's unless you actually allow the democratic process to take place and people to actually have a real choice.

[HabboIsKrouts]

IF Pakistan And India start an arguement as they did in the past it could end with nuclear war, doe'nt bare thinking about =)

as for Iraq, we were right to go into that conflict, but our soldiers [british] have done there job and should leave, and let Iraq stand on its on 2 feet.

[Seatherny]

IF Pakistan And India start an arguement as they did in the past it could end with nuclear war, doe'nt bare thinking about =)

as for Iraq, we were right to go into that conflict, but our soldiers [british] have done there job and should leave, and let Iraq stand on its on 2 feet.

I am sure Bush and Blair would like to get out ASAP, but they can't because of the damage they have caused.

[HabboIsKrouts]

Yup. >makes loonger>

[lAdmire]

I'm not going to underestimate anyone or anything but people from the middle eastern believe in one thing && it's their religion. They believe their religion is the right religion. In my opinion, it's not. They kill because of their religion. If 'Allah', their God, tells them to kill, they will do it. I believe that there will not be peace in the Middle East UNLESS everyone turns to their religion which won't be happening. There could've been peace but then President Bush decided to go to war && fight them when he could've let them do 9/11 && left it at that so that nothing else would happen but he decided not to && now he has cause World War III.

[Mentor]

I'm not going to underestimate anyone or anything but people from the middle eastern believe in one thing && it's their religion. They believe their religion is the right religion. In my opinion, it's not. They kill because of their religion. If 'Allah', their God, tells them to kill, they will do it. I believe that there will not be peace in the Middle East UNLESS everyone turns to their religion which won't be happening. There could've been peace but then President Bush decided to go to war && fight them when he could've let them do 9/11 && left it at that so that nothing else would happen but he decided not to && now he has cause World War III.

America kinda has peace and that seems to believe Christianity is the only right religion(at the governmental level). Bush has also stated before many of his actions were done becuse god told him to do so.
How is that different?

[lAdmire]

After thinking about it, there can be a chance at peace. But we must all work together. Also, Christian's believe that killing is wrong, muslims && those religions might but they believe they must kill for their religion. Which is wrong.

[RedStratocas]

After thinking about it, there can be a chance at peace. But we must all work together. Also, Christian's believe that killing is wrong, muslims && those religions might but they believe they must kill for their religion. Which is wrong.

No they dont. Their religion says nothing about needing to kill people. Anywhere. But people interpret things badly and they get way out of hand. Its like a bad game of telephone. You should read some facts before you say stuff like that.

[Virgin Mary]

This is confusing, but the majority of fights in the Middle East are mainly due to what happened between the Jews and Arabs over half a century ago. I don't understand though why the USA feels the need to interfere in other country's affairs, as it did with Russia, as well as dragging the UK in with it. It just seems like another excuse to go to war.

[Browney]

I actually do think there's a chance. Well, I'd like to think so. They just need to wake up and realise that fighting doesn't solve their problems. Talking is the only way things will get better.