One of the Greatest Western Pol iti
cal Fantasies
Has been the illusion that stable Democracies
Could Be Built IN Either Iraq OR Afghanistan
Before The Second Advent Of The Messiah.
The World believes His Coming is Fantasy
But Fantasy is to see lasting Democracy
In the countries of Afghanistan & Iraq!
Countries Are headed for Theocracy,
And its King is the King of all Kings,
Returning soon to Reign Eternally!
August 11, 2010
http://www.tribulationperiod.com/
Revelation 16:16 – And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon.
Revelation 1:7 – Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him.
Even so, Amen.
Luke 21:25-27 – And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon, and in the stars; and upon the earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring; [26] Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.
[27] And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud with power and great glory.
Revelation 19:19,20 – And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. [20] And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast,
and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone.
Zechariah 14:16 – And it shall come to pass, that every one that is left of all the nations which came against Jerusalem shall even go up from year to year to worship the King, the Lord of hosts, and to keep the feast of tabernacles.
Isaiah 2:2-4 – And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the Lord’s house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. [3] And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem. [4] And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
Zechariah 14:9 – And the Lord shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one Lord, and his name one.
Please don’t get the idea I agree with everything in the Excerpt which follows, but I do agree that it is impossible to establish a lasting democracy in either Afghanistan or Iraq. I was certainly in favor of going in and getting rid of Saddam Hussein, who was a megalomaniac, and then leaving the Kurds, Sunni, and Shiites to slug it out until another strong man (hopefully not a megalomaniac) came out on top.
The fact that we went in, and replaced Saddam Hussein, would certainly have been burned in a new strong man’s grey cells for a very long time.
Begin Excerpt from MEMRI
Middle East Media Research Institute
Special Dispatch No. 3142
August 4, 2010
Al-Sharq Al-Awsat Editor: ‘Post-Saddam Iraq was Not in Need of Superficial Democracy… It Needs a Strong Ruler, from the Army… or an Iraqi Ataturk’
On August 4, 2010, the website of the London-based Arabic daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat published an English-language column by its editor, Tareq Al-Homayed, titled “Why Did You Topple Saddam Hussein?” In the article Al-Homayed argues that the U.S. was short-sighted to promote Western-style democracy in Iraq, and that the country instead requires a benevolent but strong non-democratic leader in order to confront the challenges that it faces.
The following are excerpts from the article (slightly edited for clarity):
Al-Maliki is Refusing to Hand Over Power, Just Like Saddam Would Do
“… While the U.S. president confirms his country’s determination to withdraw its troops from Iraq by the end of the month, the Iraqi Prime Minister is continuing to cling to power despite his recent electoral defeat, and Iran is defending him by saying: accept al-Maliki or else we’ll hit you over the head!
“We say that this is strange because an observer can do nothing but ask: in this case, what is the difference between Nouri al-Maliki and Saddam Hussein
? Al-Maliki is saying that Allawi won the elections by only one vote, and that he does not consider this to be an election defeat, while Saddam used to say that the Iraqis had elected him with 100 percent of the vote; therefore what is the difference between them
? The most important question that must be asked here is, in this case, why did the U.S. forces even topple Saddam Hussein, if they are going to allow another Saddam – Nouri al-Maliki – to rise up and appear to us and the people of Iraq, but this time with democratic cover?”
The U.S. was Wrong in Predicting that Democracy in Iraq would Spread Throughout the Middle East
“Washington justified its invasion of Iraq by saying that it was searching for weapons of mass destruction – which it did not find – although the most dangerous weapons were those figures that were governing Iraq under the leadership of Saddam Hussein. The Americans later said that toppling Saddam Hussein would result in a democratic spring emerging not just in Iraq, but the region as a whole; however what is happening today is the opposite of this. The suffering of the Iraqis is on the increase, and the danger that is hanging over Iraq – and the region – is a warning that the gates of hell are opening.
“For all the American talk about the democratization of Iraq, and the necessity of the Iraqi people managing their own national issues, this is nothing more than beautiful talk that is a good excuse for the ugly reality, for what is the difference between Saddam and al-Maliki? What is the situation in Iraq today in comparison with yesterday?”
“It is the Americans Who Corrupted Baghdad … [They] Focused on How to Topple [Saddam], without Putting in Place Any Clear Plans for what would Happen Afterwards”
“What is the extent of the potential risk from Iraq, and within it, following the U.S. withdrawal, in comparison to the risk Iraq represented during the Saddam era? We ask this not out of a desire for the occupiers to remain, but … it is up to those who corrupted and destroyed Baghdad to fix this. It is the Americans who corrupted Baghdad, and it has become clear that all of their plans – prior to the invasion of Iraq – focused on how to topple the Saddam Hussein regime, without putting in place any clear plans for what would happen afterwards.
“Therefore Iraq’s democracy is like somebody who has kidnapped a child from its family, and then abandoned this child in a tough neighborhood… The cultivation [of democracy] must always be accompanied by a parallel effort to construct [the country]. This is what Iraq is lacking, as democracy was imposed upon the country in a completely superficial manner.
“To sum up what the Americans did in the country, they entered Iraq, which was suffering from old age during the Saddam Hussein regime, and subjected it to an extremely difficult surgical operation, and then they asked Iraq on the day after the operation to get up and run a thousand meter relay-race in a region full of wolves!
“Post-Saddam Iraq was not in need of superficial democracy, but rather it was – and continues to be – in need of a strong ruler, from the army, in the ilk of a benevolent autocrat or an Iraqi Ataturk. Such a ruler would prepare the country for the post-Saddam era, ensuring institution building, and guaranteeing that Iraq does not fall into the hands of greedy powers, whilst also protecting the country from sectarianism and in-fighting, and ensuring that Iraq reaches a stage where it a country made up of genuine democratic institutes, rather than a country of sectarian rulers who cannot see farther than the ends of their own noses…”
FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc.
We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner
from which we extracted it.