Arab League First Approves of Bombing Libya, Then Rethinks Their Position
Of course the Arab League would flip-flop on Libya. Why? Because if a precedent is set for intervention on the basis of dictators massacring civilians, then they would be next, referring to the situation in Bahrain where the Saudi monarch has been cracking down on the democracy movement, also. The socialist website ‘The League for the 5thInternational’ reportsthere’s a likelihood that in order to get Arab League support for bombing Libya, the U.S. had to in return not go after Saudi Arabia—as a sort of pact. But the future being unpredictable, after the U.N. vote, the Arab league would have to switch to their ‘actual’ thinking on western intervention in Arab lands. If they slept with the devil, they may have to f*ck some day… so they just made a quick deal, you scratch my back and I scratch yours, but nothing beyond that. Not making some ‘Grand Partnership’ or agreement of any kind beyond the Libyan matter at hand. The question of Saudi Arabia’s own humanitarian crisis was simply not even touched or addressed whatsoever, and the Arab league liked that. “Yeah, take that criminal Khaddafi out, but after the vote we’re going to have to retract it and say we were not thinking straight or something”… might be something that they said to Hillary… Well, whether they like it or not, they did go to bed with the west to take one of their own out. So they’re a bunch of backstabbing bastards, the way I see it.
Email this page
Over-generalizations
Submitted on March 31st, 2011 by Al GiordanoHaving recently returned from the region, I am more convinced than ever that it is a huge (if common) mistake to refer to all Arab peoples as a homogeneous bloc. The differences in culture, dialect, language, religious tendencies and practices, and governance are as diverse throughout Arab countries as they are in Europe or the Americas. So I think phrases that refer to the overall view of Arab countries regarding "one of their own" (a quote used above) misses the bigger truth. Truth is, there are many disputes and tensions between some Arab countries. Gulf states are totally distinct from North African or Middle East states. Iran is in a category all its own. Turkey is, culturally, probably closer to Europe than it is to Gulf States, and yet it is a majority Muslim country.
The Western world has to stop lumping that entire region together as if it is one entity. It's not. And it is stereotypes like these that feed the objectification and so much bigotry toward peoples.
Nation states - all of them, from the Arab world to the "western democracies" to every other region on earth - have more in common with each other than with their own peoples. The problems you cite (i.e. governments not meaning what they say, for example) have to do with the very nature of "The State," and are hardly unique to those in Arab countries. Hypocrisy abounds on all sides.