Wonder what we would say or think if it came down to an ISLAMIC REVOLUTION

[Valerie5555]

in SAUDI ARABIA.


I wonder if we would think, if we were too young to pay attention to the one that happened in IRAN about 25 years ago, "thanks a lot Bushie, for giving us our own Iran deja vu."

[AndyTiedye]

1. Bush* Would Send in Troops

Even if he had to send ones who just came back from Iraq last week.

[Valerie5555]

2. Wonder if Al Quaeda's response in that case will be too

:scared:y to contemplate.

[Fear]

3. What about the CHRISTIAN revolution in the US?????

All of a sudden we see Christianity popping up within the Government.

[Valerie5555]

4. And everything going "Handmaid's Taleish"

:scared: y

[AndyTiedye]

11. That is the trouble with this Crusade/Jihad Thing

It would be catastrophic for either set of Fundies to win!
A choice between Xtian Fundies and Islamic Fundies is not much of a choice!

We also have to stop the End-Times people from enacting their mythos with nuclear weapons.

[Djinn]

5. "our" Iran Deja Vu??

how would it be "our" anything? I wouldn't be happy to see fundie nuts taking control of any country but it would be "deja vu" for the Saudi's NOT any of us surely.

BTW Apart from the Royal family running things, a Islamic revolution in Saudi wouldn't change much for everyday people.

[Fear]

6. link

http://novaonline.nvcc.edu/eli/evans/his135/Events/Iran79.htm

[Djinn]

7. why the link

I know what happened pre/during and after the Iranian revolution - it's just a bit weird to see this framed in the light of "wouldn't this be bad for AMERICANS"

[DemBones DemBones]

8. Eh, Valerie's Canadian.

Eh, at least I think she is.

[Valerie5555]

10. You bet I am

eom

[Fear]

13. ? so.....I'm from the Netherlands......

[DemBones DemBones]

17. Just a joke, because Djinn posted

- it's just a bit weird to see this framed in the light of "wouldn't this be bad for AMERICANS"

[Fear]

18. got it ;)

[Valerie5555]

9. The Iran one hurt Americans in 3 words or OIL PRICE SHOCKS and in 2 words

or IRANIAN CAPTIVITY or HOSTAGE CRISIS.

[Djinn]

24. OK then

I still think what happens in another country has significantly more to do with the people OF that nation, although in Saudi apart from the Royal family the laws wouldn't change much - and the knock on effects like a oil price hike are secondary.

[Fear]

12. Because the US always has it's hand in there SOMEWHERE...

The 16th century saw renewed independence with the Safavids and then other lines of kings or shahs. During the 19th century Persia came under pressure from both Russia and the United Kingdom and a process of modernisation began that continued into the 20th century. In 1953, Iran's prime minister Mohammed Mossadeq, who had been elected to parliament in 1923 and again in 1944, and who had been prime minister since 1951, was removed from power in a complex plot orchestrated by British and US intelligence agencies("Operation Ajax"). Following Mossadeq's fall Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (Iran's monarch) grew increasingly dictatorial. With strong support from the USA and the UK, the Shah further modernised Iranian industry but crushed civil liberties. His autocratic rule, including systematic torture and other human rights violations, led to revolution and overthrow of his regime in 1979. After over a year of struggle between a variety of different political groups, an Islamic republic was established under the Ayatollah Khomeini.


UPDATED WITH A SOURCE LINK:
http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Iran

[Aidoneus]

14. You would have to be more specific

In general, the result would be a really revolutionary shift in world politics--almost literally overnight. I would not say that such would be a bad thing--indeed, such is greatly in need--, though there are some short-term negative facets to this.

[Fear]

15. some quick thoughts on religious revolutions

The Islam is a strong religion, I guess you can kind of compare it with the strong Catholic church in Europe back a LONG time ago.
The development is dangerous cause an Islamic revolution would mean more mixture of Governments and Religion. My personal humble opinion is that Religion is Faith, and has nothing to do with Politics, and Faith will not collide with Politics cause it's an individual endavour.

The Islamic religion is very strong since there is a high level of social control by family / friends etc. etc. (as we had with the catholic church) (and still see from time to time) whether or not someone is following the religion the way it's preached by whoever.

The danger lies in two things, the mixture of Christianity in the US government and Islamic mixture in the Saudi region. These two religions both have the same goal. Interestingly the fundematalist religions have fascinating similarities with what they demand of their followers - the difference might only be in what/who they believe.

So when a religious war would happen, remember those that have Nuclear weapons as well......especially in the saudi region (Israel).

While the Islam is on it's way modernizing (as seen within Europe) it just takes a long time to develop in the Saudi countries, this is not something that can be forced but takes time.

An Islamic revolution would mean inaccessible areas and a more divided world. And yes that is what we can thank the Bush government for. Forcing democracy and not allowing it to grow the *normal* way will make people angry and put up more resistance towards the western world, an Islamic revolution will be the answer for many people. As much the Christian *revolution?* is the answer for many people here in the US towards the *Terrorists?!?!?!*.

Religions are closing and arming.

[RafterMan]

16. I would support it

It's bitter medicine, but Islamic government has proven to be the strongest secularizing force Iran has ever known. There's still a chance some of the Arab autocrats will be able to China their way out of continued radicalization, but it becomes less likely every year and holding back the fault line becomes increasingly difficult. A taste of Islamic utopia might be its own best cure.

[Fear]

19. hmmmm, well, get ready for the Christian revolution too then ;)

[RafterMan]

20. Heh.

I think the opposition is still strong enough to save us from that (crosses fingers).

Basically, my point was addressing the Arab dictators who use the Islamist bogeyman as an excuse not to call elections. I actually agree with them that Islamist bogeymen would win nearly every seat. But then they'd have to govern -- and that's what is most likely to make them less popular.

[Fear]

21. yup, prolly true there

[theboss]

22. We would invade.

But to be quite honest, I still feel that if we were to have a war in the Middle East, it should have been in Saudi Arabia.

[mmonk]

23. No way we could let that happen

without support either for the Saudis or a replacement gov't that wasn't militant because at present, it would throw the world into further crisis.