"Arab Spring" Should we get involved?

Discussion in 'Syria, Mali, Libya, Middle East & North Africa' started by ex_colonial, Apr 24, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Watching a programme on BBC world yesterday the "Doha debate" on locals (mainly Arabs) views on the need for intervention or otherwise in the growing number of countries with varying levels of unrest against the ruling governments! Given that Tunisia & Egypt have already seen regime change and Libya, Syria, Iran, Algeria, Bahrein and the Yemen are experiencing varying degrees of unrest, violence and even civil war in Libyas case, is it really our job to get involved apart from ensuring the safety of British nationals!
    Seeing the horrific and still simmering problems of post regime changes in Iraq and Afghanistan where violence & killings are still a daily occurrence, is it not time we just left them to it?
    Seeing many of the responses from Arabs in the debate it would appear that many, if not the overwhelming majority are suspicious if not actually downright against our involvement!
    Surely it is time Cameron winds his neck in, we cannot afford to get involved financially nor frankly do we have the military resources! It would appear that our involvement in Iraq & Afghanistan has only given the Islamic extremists more excuses for wishing to kill the modern day crusaders and STILL has not brought about peace & stability, which despite his excesses, many in Iraq had under S. Hussein!
  2. We will get involved if only to make the news of the day about what our troops are doing. Otherwise people might want to know what the government is doing about, the welfare system/NHS/immigration/crime/petrol prices. In fact all the things that really matter to those who live in the UK.
  3. ex colonial you are quite correct
  4. Indeed; I'm not sure how much more 'improvement' the world can take.
  5. Indeed, the countries that have already had regime change, Iraq, Afghanistan and now Tunisia & Egypt, seem to be even more chaotic & lawless than under their previous administrations! All the hogwash about getting democracy & jobs seems to be pie in the sky, any new administration will probably be as corrupt as the last & possibly more anti the West than the old mob! It also appears that in at least 2 countries Iraq & Bahrain, the Iranians appear to be stirring the pot to try & take the heat off their own problems!!
  6. It's very early days with this Arab Spring business, revolutions rarely end looking much like how they started. I'd not bite until its real ripe and hanging low which is years or perhaps decades away. If representative government actually comes to Arab lands there'll be plenty of wars to go round.

    Cairo is the heart of it and all DC can do is bribe the rebooted Junta to behave which works really well for us with Pindi. I predict Barry will bang on about freedom's march while doing his best (which amounts to not much) to ensure the twitterati are thwarted. The US will remain focussed on Israeli security and keeping Camp David in place as it slowly crumbles.

    If Saudi and Iran go at it over Bahrain we'll back the Saudis to the hilt. We need their massive oil reserves. If it means fighting the Iraqis again we'll do that too.

    On Syria, we don't really give a stuff if Assad falls. It could be a problem for Qom which is nice. But neither the Saudis nor the Israelis seem keen on change there so DC will leave well alone. If as is not unlikely the new regime is more hostile than the Baath I think that's an Israeli problem.

    If the Algerian civil war revives it's a major problem mainly for the French. Morocco is also their beat.

    We've already invested far too much energy in the Pal question. They are screwed and so are the Israelis in the longterm.

    Tunisia, Yemen and for that matter Libya are all peripheral. We should shit or get off the pot in the latter.
  7. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    Let them get on with it, it's a right of passage we westerners took a few hundred years ago. Luvvies not with standing, we've benefited from it.
  8. Whilst I agree that they should "Go through it" problem is weapons+technology has moved on somewhat to not be totally at ease with what happens in the middle east.
  9. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    Yeah but Birmingham and Liverpool are acceptable losses surely :p
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Will the Arabs intervene in Bristol? Seriously though. Let's flog them loads of weapons and use the money to develop alternate fuels. Job jobbed.
  11. Can't help thinking that this wonderful wave of public-driven, democracy-seeking revolutions to topple despotic regimes (which have stood mostly by force of arms, for a few decades) is probably going to turn out to be little more than a wonderful opportunity for someone to install himself as the next "liberating" overlord of the land, and proceed to put his boots up and use a large number of his old mates from revolutionary days to keep the plebs in line, and him master of all he surveys.

    It seems to me that revolutions tend to be creatures of repressive societies presided over by an easily-identifiable leader, which unfortunately will tend to select for the most single-minded, ruthless, paranoid, violent nutcases going when the ancien regime topples and the sudden absence of any sort of authority means it's every man (or group of AK-toting nuts) for himself. If you could survive the state's apparatus of repression searching for you, with the intent of taking you to meet Ahmed the Friendly Thumbscrew Fan before getting your neck stretched, you're probably the sort of bastard who'll survive in a post-revolutionary chaos quite nicely.

    's going to be fun, though, watching Cameron explain why his attempt at getting written into the books as an Historical Good Egg suddenly went a bit Pete Tong...
  12. So true, Cameron more & more appears to be a "man of straw", who seems to be following closely in the footsteps of the odious lump of slime Blair, he desperately needs to grow a set of balls & stop pussyfooting around with all the touchy feely policies of his predecessors such as the ludicrous ring fencing of expensive & unaffordable overseas aid to corrupt countries in the third world and take a firm stance on telling the EU to FO & sort their own financial mess out, not stumping up billions more out of our pockets! Any whinging apologist who supports this total waste of money should be forced to contribute out of their own pockets, not continue to leech on our taxes!
    The latest problems with Syria will see yet more deaths, but its NOT our fault, Syria like most of the other countries in the ME have been de facto dictatorships for decades, I seriously doubt if ANY ME or African state really understands democracy as we in the West understand it!
    Where were all the handwringers when Mugabe virtually commited genocide by killing & expelling thousands of people in Zimbabwe? We are not just talking about the "ever so evil" white farmers & businessmen (who actually made Rhodesia a prosperous nation) but tens of thousands of opposing tribesmen see more details here :- Nightmare of Mugabe's Matabele atrocities | Sokwanele
    Leaving Zimbabwe to become the basketcase it is today! Once again Nigeria is having massive problems during the recent elections, where it would appear hundreds have been killed or burnt out in inter religion/tribal disputes! It goes on almost ad infinitum, the Ivory Coast, Kenya, Somalia etc, etc! We cannot possibly sort all these cases out and IMHO should concentrate on looking after any British subjects who happen to be in any problematic country and re establish trade etc once the dust dies down, but definately do not send any British troops to get involved! They are INTERNAL disputes, let the useless talking shop that is the UN condemn them, but let some of the other countries (there are after all 192 in it) pay for and deal with any so called interventions!
  13. it makes me cringe when people say it's another Iraq/Afghanistan.

    there was no civil war.
    there weren't even any demonstrations against Saddam.
    Bush woke up one morning and decided he wanted to finish what his father started.

    there was no civil war.
    there weren't any demonstrations against the Taleban.
    the Taleban were hosting Bin Laden who planned the biggest terror strike in american history.

    the only real similarity is that both wars were also in sunny sandy places.
  14. When they say its another Iraq/Afghan its because of the poor planning, no real end game or solution to the problem. Just armchair parliamentary generals giving very little mission command and very little support to the operation but larging it on the world political stage just long enough to retire and write a book about it later.
  15. What he said.