This “prove it! prove it! prove it!” stuff is pointless. It’s just another way of saying, “nyahh, nyahh, I disagree with you.” I didn’t ask for “PROOOOOOF” for a couple of IW’s assertions, even though they were pretty out-there.
Of course, the next step in this internet kiddie tactic is to assert that the person who refuses to provide “PROOOOF” is doing so because his argument is, as you put it, “full of shit.” There are other possible reasons why, in fact, and please come back in thirty years when you’ve figured out what those might be.
I take it then that you’re admitting you were wrong when you implied that most Arab countries were “Islamic Republics”?
Thanks for doing so.
Now, you made another argument that is demonstrably false and would strike anyone familiar with the region cringe.
That is bullshit. The Israelis have never offered citizenship to the Palestinians in the West Bank or the Gaza Strip. They offerred citizenship to the Palestinians in East Jerusalem and to the Druze on the Golan Heights after annexing the territory.
Boy oh boy, are you ever posting on the wrong website.
And no, asking you to prove your case isn’t just saying someone disagrees with you, if you can’t meet their challenge, it’s pointing out that* you aint got nuthin’.*
Failing to respond to a straightforward question with a factual answer because the person asking the question is a “radical” is the surest way to have everyone on the board question your credibility.
You have made sweeping statements in this thread that would tend to indicate that your grasp on these subjects is tenuous at best. Not being willing to entertain even basic questions on what you’ve said further undercuts any credibility others might give to your flimsy opinions.
If you don’t want to debate a certain poster, then don’t respond at all. Selectively responding makes your positions look even weaker.
What “extremely radical views” do you think I hold?
You made some extremely strong statements, suggesting that most Arab countries were Islamic Republics when the actual number is more like two(Saudi Arabia and Sudan) out of roughly 22(there is a certain debate over many “Arab” countries there are)though I suppose one might stretch the definition a little to include a Gulf Emirate or two as well.
I merely asked you to list the Arab countries you feel are “Islamic Republics” other than the already mentioned Sudan and Saudi Arabia.
The fact that you refuse a fairly simple request is far more likely to make people think that you don’t have an answer but that you do but are merely refusing to say.
On this board, when we’re asked to provide a cite or explain an assertion we made, we’re expected to do so.
With that in mind you said I made some extreme assertions you disagreed with but you chose not to ask me to back them up.
Ok, then list the Arab countries other that Saudi Arabia and the Sudan and afterwards I’ll be happy to answer any questions you have about assertions I made.
No one is compelled to respond to another poster’s questions. greenslime is correct that if you have asked a question three times with no answer, the person questioned is likely not going to do so at subsequent requests.
Persistent badgering for an answer is harrassment and it will stop.
On the other hand, it is also true that a poster who makes an assertion that he or she refuses to support may be simply ducking the fact that the idea has no support and other posters are free to point out that fact.
= = =
Both of you will stop this sort of childish exchange.
Stick to actually discussing the topic on its own merits and omit discussions regarding the debating tactics of others.
= = =
And now you are going to mischaracterize Diamond as well. (And if this was an attempt to open a wedge for another of your assertions that those dark people are dumb, then open a new thread to do so, rather than further hijacking this one.)
[ /Moderating ]
The irony here is that while we’re sticking up for that idea that Israel’s culture is responsible for their relative success, as Diamond noted the culture of the United States, which does not value education, is responsible for our relative decline.
I did not realize that asking someone to provide evidence for their assertions was considered harassment.
I wasn’t trying to harass him, merely asking him to provide proof for his assertions which strikes me as SOP on the dope.
Had he declared off the bat that he’d refuse to answer questions from me for whatever reason, such as the fact that I’m Muslim(I don’t know if that’s a reason but he accused me of holding radical views and has made several bigoted, ignorant statement about both Islam and Muslims so it’s certainly possible) I wouldn’t have asked him to explain his assertions.
Anyway, as others have noted it’s rather obvious he made some ignorant statements about a subject knows little and didn’t react well to being challenged on his claims, particularly when the challenge was made by a Muslim.
Help me understand why you insist on this point-of-view when at least two people, who display far better knowledge of Turkey and its politics than you, have clearly demonstrated that your concerns are baseless?
Maybe I can help a little: The AKP first dominated Turkish politics in the general election of 2002. Since then there were general elections in 2007 and 2011. There were local elections in 2004 and 2009. Referendums on electoral processes and their constitution were held in 2007 and 2010. So the AKP has dominated Turkish politics for 10 years. In that time 6 major votes have occurred. If you look in Google News for these votes you will not find a single news article discussing election rigging in Turkey that is anything like Iran. If anything, the dominance of the AKP and the military receding into the background marks the end of a democratic system that in anyway reflects Iran’s system of government.
Turkey’s only 2 problems in government are 1) Kurdish representation and the ongoing war with the PKK; 2) corruption. Corruption is a far more serious problem. It’s a serious problem affecting democratic governments throughout the world, independent of ethnicity and religion.
So on the one hand, you have a system of government that is nothing like Iran and much more like Western governments, yet you fear them being some kind of theocracy. If it’s because of your predictions about the success of a secular party (e.g. CHP); the only thing keeping the major secular party out of controlling the government is their ineptitude.
This leaves the choice to you: 1) Develop a world view like the one that Romney is criticized for portraying - unidimensional, simplistic, and inaccurate, or 2) develop a world view based on understanding a complex variety of factual information that you can use to make reliable predictions.
It’s up to you of course, but I’m now the 3rd person who’s posted to this thread who says your fears are baseless and you know nothing of use about politics in Turkey.
Don’t be disingenuous. No one has claimed that asking a question is harrassment. In fact, no one has claimed that simply repeating a question once or twice is harrassment. It becomes harrassment when the question is asked repeatedly, along with references to how often it has been asked.
I have simply observed the actions of Islamic theocracies when they seize power, by revolution, coup, or democratic means. I have not seen any such theocracy, anywhere in the world, hold a fair election where a secular opposition has a fighting chance to win, nor have I seen any such Islamic government voluntarily step down in favor of a pluralistic/secular one.
I certainly do hope I’m wrong about Turkey, and that it proves to be unique in not oppressing and crushing secular opposition to the theocracy. But until we see that happening, I doubt my concerns are “baseless.”
For starters, Turkey under the AKP is not a theocracy and doesn’t remotely resemble one.
Second, what did you mean by an “Islamic theocracy” seizing power by “democratic means” or “coup”?
I’ve never heard of an Islamic theocracy seizing power by either democratic means or coup.
I’ll even give a quick rundown of the Islamic theocracies in the world to show that.
Saudi Arabia- I don’t see how you could say the Saudi family seized power through any of the three means you said. They steadily gained power in the 19th and early 20th Century and with the backing of the western powers who loved their oil combined their kingdoms into The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia(so named for due to the royal family.
Iran- Ok, they seized power due to a revolution. I do feel compelled to note that while I’m probably the last person on the Dope who will ever be fans of the Mullahs, their government grants far more freedom to their populace than did most of the “secular” governments in the region, such as Egypt, Syria and Saddam’s Iraq.
One of the mistakes westerners make is to foolishly assume that people would naturally see secular governments as somehow being freer, more modern, and more tolerant than “secular” governments when those from the Middle East who take a look at Assad’s Syria, Hussein’s Iraq, or Mubarak’s Egypt and then take a look at Iran, which has elections for the Presidency, which has been won by people who the Ayatollahs disapproved of, think Iran’s a better choice. In fact, the whole reason for the Green Revolution was because Iranians were used to electing their President, saw that as an essential right, and saw the right stripped away when the government clearly lied about the results.
Finally,
Sudan- Now yes, General Bashir took power in a coup(a bloodless one but still a coup) and he made the country into a theocracy, but he didn’t make it a theocracy until years later so I’m not sure how you could call that an example of a theocracy taking power via coup.
And yes, off the top of my head, those really are all the Islamic theocracies I can think of. I know some people would argue that Pakistan should be considered a theocracy because it’s official title is “The Islamic Republic of Pakistan” and it has Islam as the official position, but I’m a bit hesitant to put it in the same category as Iran and Saudi Arabia. The same with Afghanistan now that the Taliban has fallen, though I’m not a fan of Kharzai or his government.
I suppose one could also throw in a gulf emirate or two, but yes, I know this may be shocking to many, but out of the the 150+ Muslim countries in the world, you can probably count on one hand the number that are “theocracies”. And no, that doesn’t mean that there isn’t some mixture of government and religion within many, the same as is true in all but a handful of western countries, but hardly enough to get them labeled theocracies.
I know people are terrified of the rise of “Islamic theocracies” in the Middle East, but in reality they’re few and far between.
BTW, you earlier claimed that the Israeli government had repeatedly offered citizenship to the Palestinians on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip as members of a combined state.
The Israelis have never once offered this, though they have offered citizenship to the Palestinians in East Jerusalem. Since you won’t provide any cite for your claim I assume we can infer that you have conceded that your claim was wrong.
If not, it should be no problem for you to provide an instance of the Israelis doing this and you have ample motivation to do so because doing so would certainly make me look a bit foolish.
Most reasonable people would agree that you not providing evidence for your claim is ample evidence that your claim was wrong.
It hasn’t happened in 3 elections in over 10 years but I’m sure if you email the AKP they’ll get right onto implementing your brain fevered imaginings.
Or we can just call bullshit on your concerns and lump them into an apparent tendency to spout baseless assertions and then shriek Trope! Meme! when asked to back them up.
Thank you for expressing your disagreement with me in such a polite and felicitous manner, especially given the fact that your opinion is so much more valid than mine. You serve as a shining example for other internet message board posters.