Arabs are folks whose first language is Arabic, full stop. If you want to differentiate between folks from the Arabian penninsula and the rest of the Arab world, I suppose you could the slightly archaic “Arabian.” But Arab is widely accepted as the term used for Arabic-speakers and there it pretty much rests*.
However even if you were arguing bloodlines, unlike many/most non-Arabian Arab populations a fair number of Libyan Arabs in particular are likely descended from Bedouin Arabs who migrated into the region from the Arabian penninsula ( with a helping hand from the Fatimids, interested in punishing their rebellious former vassals ) - most notably the Banu Hilal and Banu Suleim confederacies.
It is of course not that clear-cut and simple. There are self-identified “Arabs” in Afghanistan that have largely lost Arabic as a language and you could probably find Arabic-as-first-language-speakers who disdain the designation of Arab, like perhaps some Arabized Berbers. But as a general definition it is the most reasonable.
ETA: Oh yeah and posters who take the names of bloody-handed tyrants are some…kind…of badness. Really, really bad :p.
While I have a lot of faith and trust in your posts, and regard you as a good source in general, I’m not sure I buy this.
Egyptians do not, in general, self-identify as Arabs. And so on and so forth.
If you’d started out with the username Curtis LeMay and posted as Qin has and does, I’d react the same way to you. You didn’t, you haven’t, and you don’t.
Your first post in this thread quoted me saying “OK. I’ll do that too,” in response to a mod note. You responded, “Let the debate begin.” If that sentence was regarding the link to the NYT editorial, then there was no reason to include my quote, and, I’ve got to say, that was some seriously sloppy writing.
At this point, I’ll assume that we’re talking past each other, and neither of us can grasp the others point. I give, and I’m perfectly happy to pretend that the past few posts didn’t happen.
And Gadhafi has 8 sons who are probably not happy. And Hugo Chavez seems to be fan of the Green Book. That makes eleven… anyone think we can get an even dozen? No, me neither.
The funny thing is that it is only the pro-American governments that seem to show “undue restraint” in dealing with protesters. Qaddafi has opened fire on his own people at a level that Ben Ali and Hosni Mubarek have not. Don’t you find it hard to defend that sort of action or id it irrelevant because you feel you know what is good for others with so much certainty that you think opening fire on your own people to suppress the will of the people (for their own good of course) is acceptable?
I’m afraid that I cannot accept your assertion that pro-American governments tend to be less bloody in crushing dissent. Moreover, it is unfair to make direct comparisons between the situation in Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya. The first two featured largely peaceful mass protests that ground down the governments under the inexorable will of the people. The third involves an all-out civil war in which armed traitors are attempting to wrest power away at gunpoint. I maintain that this situation justifies harsher counter-measures; those that live by the sword shall die by the sword.
So, no, I do no find it difficult at all to support the Colonel’s decisions to this point. I fully expect any government to meet armed insurrection with military force. For comparative purposes, I remind you of what happened the last time that half of the US tried to secede… It wasn’t all flowers and group hugs, that’s for certain. The Libyan government is doing what any government would do in its position, and I fully support its right to do so. If the rebels truly represent the will of the people, then they will have no difficulties trumping the government’s countermeasures.
Of course, as Commissar’s apologia for attrocity is hard to keep straight (what with it being made up of rationalizations, non-facts and non-sense), I’m not sure he’s figured out yet how a brutal dictator ruling without the consent of the people, engaging in the worst types of capitalistic, materialist cronyism and using overwhelming lethal force against protesters who want the masses’ interests to be seen to, is the one who has the right to lethal force. Including engaging in the capitalistic enterprise of actually contracting out the use of force to mercenaries in order to brutalize the people.
Since when? Every Egyptian I have ever met in the UK has self identified as an Arab, although sometimes the Coptics ones put some nuances on that. The country even calls itself the Arab Republic of Egypt, which does not seem to be an appellation put in question by the recent events.
That Vegimite Lover guy we had was very adamant about how Egyptians aren’t Arabs and they just called themselves the Arab Republic of Egypt because they hated Israel and wanted to show solidarity. Then again, he wasn’t exactly a font of factual information.
Shrug. All I can report is every Egyptian I have ever encountered self-identified as Egyptian and Arab… I suppose it all depends on what people mean by Arab. It’s a no brainer that they’re not actually descended from the Arabs.
They are descended from the Arabs. Cairo was an Arab creation and much like the conquest of the Mongols in Asia, the Arab conquest of Egypt in the 7th century saw significant genetic mixing.
So, Commissar, you’re on Gaddafi’s side, huh? Well, then, you should be able to justify the bombing of an airliner over Lockerbie, right? Let’s hear it.
If you’d started out with the username Curtis LeMay and posted as Qin has and does, I’d react the same way to you. You didn’t, you haven’t, and you don’t.