Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (37278)	8/12/2002 1:01:50 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Democracy, WITHOUT a legal framework such as a constitution, would likely be destablizing. But a constitution is the political "rulebook" setting the rules by which participating parties operate. It has to be equally derived from all parties, and include some semblance of separation between church and state, mosque and ministry. Within those restrictions and guidelines, the Saudis can likely moderate the extremists by permitting some of that dissension to expend itself in the political process, rather than through the arbitrary indulgences of a King. The choice is either take this course, or wait for the entire Arabian peninsula to erupt into outright revolt. And the Saudis are unwilling to permit that. Let's face it, the Saudis are political opportunists. They will become political doppel-gangers, taking on the characteristics of whichever group they perceive best guarantees their political survival. What we have to do is apply the same amount of pressure upon them as the Wahabbi extremists are. And if that means their closing down some of their extremist schools, then so be it. The reality, which you, and many others, seem to ignore, is that there is a long-term trend toward reactionary Extremist Islam. It is fed by demographic trends, economic and social failure, political corruption. Accomodating it will only put off the day of reckoning to a period where the cost will likely be even higher. Thus, the risk is in doing nothing and permitting the status quo to continue to feed the processes that led to extremists becoming so bold that they hijacked and crashed jetliners into the very heart of America. If we're not willing to defend against such attacks, then we really don't have much worth defending. Certainly we're not much of an example those those societies who are weighing whether democratic reforms are beneficial or detrimental. After all, if the US can be attacked with relative impunity, what will happen to any other nation that dares to become democratic?? Hawk