Arab spring uprises Tunisia/Egypt/Libya/Syria
- Thread starter Vince_Fiero
- 975 comments
- 62,346 views
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
Really, "Color Revolution" or "revolutionary wave" subsumes all or almost all the uprisings since 1986. The role of NGOs in fomenting all these uprisings is of notable importance.
from wikipedia:
Colour revolution (sometimes called the coloured revolution) or color revolution is a term that was widely used by worldwide media[1] to describe various related movements that developed in several countries in the former Soviet Union and the Balkans during the early 2000s. The term has also been applied to a number of revolutions elsewhere, including in the Middle East. Some observers (such as Justin Raimondo and Michael Lind) have called the events a revolutionary wave, the origins of which can be traced back to the 1986 People Power Revolution (also known as the "Yellow Revolution") in the Philippines.
Participants in the colour revolutions have mostly used nonviolent resistance, also called civil resistance. Such methods as demonstrations, strikes and interventions have been intended protest against governments seen as corrupt and/or authoritarian, and to advocate democracy; and they have also created strong pressure for change. These movements generally adopted a specific colour or flower as their symbol. The colour revolutions are notable for the important role of non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and particularly student activists in organising creative non-violent resistance.
Such movements have had a measure of success, as for example in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia's Bulldozer Revolution (2000), in Georgia's Rose Revolution (2003), and in Ukraine's Orange Revolution (2004). In most but not all cases, massive street protests followed disputed elections, or requests for fair elections, and led to the resignation or overthrow of leaders considered by their opponents to be authoritarian. Some events have been called "color revolutions" but are different from the above cases in certain basic characteristics. Examples include Lebanon's Cedar Revolution(2005); and Kuwait's Blue Revolution (2005).
- 6,293
- Canada
Thanks for that. Colour Revolutions eh, first I've heard of all of them being lumped together. Interesting. My tinfoil hat is in its box, screaming "PUT ME ON!!!" I'll leave it for a while
Some genuine questions. Would Iran's revolution in 1978 not be part of the Colour Revolutions? Too early? What about their Green Revolution in 2009?
I must be mistaken, but I thought the Orange Revolution in the Ukraine was only just a couple of years ago? Or like, last year? Or was that a seperate public uprising (it was about election results iirc) that co-opted the "Orange" name? Or am I being dumb and confusing two seperate things that happened in the Ukraine some 10+ years apart. The recent one's, I've definitely heard a few conspiracies about whether or not the protests were genuine. Seems like no one can have a good'ol uprising these days without someone else coming along and saying "they're faking it."
What about Clinton's Purple Revolution that she tried to launch after she lost?
Lastly, unserious - "Yellow Revultion"? Dat's racists!
- 6,293
- Canada
From what I can gather by searching various things like #iranprotests #iranuprising, some people are trying to express the fact that all media outlets in the country are owned and controlled by the Revolutionary Guard, and furthermore that during these protests, the government is trying to shut down the internet to prevent news from getting out.
So, if the Internet is unplugged, how are all the videos getting out?
Something I noticed in lots of the tweets, especially videos, was #MEK. I searched that on google, and found lots more videos than I had previously seen. As well as the 10ish videos id seen repeated several times over the last day or so, there was videos that were tagged as being from today, Jan 4.
Then I googled MEK, and got this off of Wikipedia.
The People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran or the Mojahedin-e Khalq(Persian: سازمان مجاهدين خلق ايران, translit. Sāzmān-e mojāhedin-e khalq-e irān, abbreviated MEK, PMOI or MKO) is an Iranian political–militantorganization[5] in exile that advocates the violent overthrow of the current regime in Iran, while claiming itself as the replacing government in exile.
So here, we'd call them terrorists....or ANTIFA.
Really not sure how I feel about all that. I can see why the current government would make the claim that the protests are influenced by outside forces (some accounts I've read seem to indicate that the original protests where peaceful protests against economic conditions, before certain entities started committing violent and distructive acts. Police reacted, which caused the people to react, and things went downhill from there...sounds like a regular day at UC Berkeley).
On the other hand, if the government is shutting down the internet to censor people, I disagree with that pretty strongly. I'm not American, but hypothetically, let's say Trump shut down the internet, and I had to rely on ANTIFA to spread information, could I say they're the bad guys?
Furthermore, at least a small aspect of the uprising seems to involve the feminist #WhiteWednesday. I still can't tell how this fits in, how big of a role it's playing in actually motivating the protests, or if it's a rather small movement that's riding the wave of something larger (economic unrest). Whatever the involvement though, even if they are supported by MEK "terrorists" (I really don't know enough to know if the label actually applies), or payed off with Saudi money - I can't not support a woman's, or any person's, right to choose what they want to wear, free from fear of punishment by governement and/or clergy.
What a 🤬 mess.
So, if the Internet is unplugged, how are all the videos getting out?
Something I noticed in lots of the tweets, especially videos, was #MEK. I searched that on google, and found lots more videos than I had previously seen. As well as the 10ish videos id seen repeated several times over the last day or so, there was videos that were tagged as being from today, Jan 4.
Then I googled MEK, and got this off of Wikipedia.
The People's Mojahedin Organization of Iran or the Mojahedin-e Khalq(Persian: سازمان مجاهدين خلق ايران, translit. Sāzmān-e mojāhedin-e khalq-e irān, abbreviated MEK, PMOI or MKO) is an Iranian political–militantorganization[5] in exile that advocates the violent overthrow of the current regime in Iran, while claiming itself as the replacing government in exile.
So here, we'd call them terrorists....or ANTIFA.
Really not sure how I feel about all that. I can see why the current government would make the claim that the protests are influenced by outside forces (some accounts I've read seem to indicate that the original protests where peaceful protests against economic conditions, before certain entities started committing violent and distructive acts. Police reacted, which caused the people to react, and things went downhill from there...sounds like a regular day at UC Berkeley).
On the other hand, if the government is shutting down the internet to censor people, I disagree with that pretty strongly. I'm not American, but hypothetically, let's say Trump shut down the internet, and I had to rely on ANTIFA to spread information, could I say they're the bad guys?
Furthermore, at least a small aspect of the uprising seems to involve the feminist #WhiteWednesday. I still can't tell how this fits in, how big of a role it's playing in actually motivating the protests, or if it's a rather small movement that's riding the wave of something larger (economic unrest). Whatever the involvement though, even if they are supported by MEK "terrorists" (I really don't know enough to know if the label actually applies), or payed off with Saudi money - I can't not support a woman's, or any person's, right to choose what they want to wear, free from fear of punishment by governement and/or clergy.
What a 🤬 mess.
- 9,401
- Western Sydney
- mustafur
Keep in mind up until just before the protests, Iran was open with social media(incredibly unique for a country with a dictatorship).
My guess is they are continuing with that just with VPNs.
From most of what i have seen in the media the protests are mostly about high costs of living and removal of social media, as most of the protesters are young adults.
My guess is they are continuing with that just with VPNs.
From most of what i have seen in the media the protests are mostly about high costs of living and removal of social media, as most of the protesters are young adults.
- 4,551
- Moscow
- Rage_Racer_VOLK
- RageRacer48
No, that's a different thing. What happened in 2014 wasn't the Orange Revolution (it was 10 years before). They call it a "Pride Revolution" (Revolyutsiya hidnosti).
The Orange Revolution in 2004, that led Viktor Yuschenko to power, was peaceful and bloodless, AFAIK. But the next one was much different. It started in 2013 as a peaceful protest ("Euromaidan"), when president Yanukovich rejected the association agreement with EU. The agreement was unprofitable for Ukraine, but none of the protestors even read it. Slowly, the protests were about to end, but then...
...a small group of protestors was violently beaten by the police. How and why did that happen, was unclear. But the fuel was added to the fire that was about to go out. Later, there were more and more ultra-right nationalists (neo-Nazis if you like) among the protestors, who provoked clashes with the police, attacking with Molotov cocktail. And in the end, somebody opened sniper fire both at the protestors and the police, resulting in miltiple victims. The rebels, apart from Molotov bottles, brought their guns (mostly - shotguns and hunting rifles). In response, the police was authorized to use lethal force. As a result, ~100 people were killed and Yanukovich ran away to Russia, fearing for his life.
Who were those snipers is still unknown. The new regime in Ukraine still haven't completed the investigation, but their propaganda hints that they were "Russian agents acting under Putin's orders". Some info is coming up that the snipers came from Georgia.
That "Pride Revolution" was openly sponsored by the US. The State Department told that they spent $5 billion "to develop democracy in Ukraine".
- 6,293
- Canada
Small aside...but how are Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt considered Arab Countries? They're in Africa, separated from Arabia by the Red Sea.
Why is there a hard boarder between Arabia and Persia (let's say it's the Iran/Iraq boarder), but between Arabia and Africa, there's an undefined transition from Arab to African? Are Algeria or Morocco Arab? What about Sudan?
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
- 6,293
- Canada
Hmm, I always went with the notion that Arab countries were countries on the Arabian Penensula. Apparently it's more like a Super Best Friends Club that anyone can join.
Sudan, Arab? Somalia, Arab? Ok, if Wikipedia says so.
Regarding Iran, I saw today that the US called a meeting of the UN Security Council. Russia, France, and China were not too pleased, with Russia saying the US should mind its own business. Others, including the Iranian UN rep, have said that the Security council conveigning for these protests would be akin to it conveigning for #OccupyWallstreet or #Ferguson.
I think on one hand, he has a point. On the other hand, neither of those saw 1000s arrested, internet blockages, and rumours of the death toll reaching 50 (I have seen some twitter posts claiming that some deaths have been caused by protestors getting carried away, and bystanders ending up as collateral).
The mainstream media seems to be slowly picking up the story, I read what seemed to be a reasonably fair summary of the situation on CNN. That said, their article did seem to try to downplay the protests, stating that the government had "navigated" its way through the situation (seems like rather friendly language for what is a pretty oppressive regime). They also go on to say that the protests are basically over....but that's not what I'm seeing on twitter. There's reports of more demonstrations today, with one report saying that a TV broadcast of a soccer game was cut because the whole stadium started chanting against the regime.
It seems to me that the women's Rights aspect of the movement is getting lost in the noise, as more coverage I see is turning into a mud flinging contest of Obama vs Trump. And because Trump has come out in support of the protests, people who are anti-Trump above all else have basically come out on the side of the Iranian government, which is pretty messed up in my opinion. People making statements like "America, Israel, and Saudi Arabi (talk about the unholy alliance
) do terrible things, so they should shut the hell up about other people's terrible things." I mean, I get the foundations of that arguement, but that seems really elementary.I did come across one tweet, completely unverified, which said that part of the reason Trudeau had yet to say anything, especially regarding the women's rights aspect of this, was because Bombardier has a deal to sell a few airplanes to the Mullahs. Like I said, completely unverified, but that would not surprise me for one second
To me, this is the kicker of all this. In 2018, Progressives work to promote International Hijab Day (coming up Feb 1), whilst Conservatives, led by Donald J Trump, are given the opportunity to act as the champions of women's rights.
Oh Hatter, more tea, why thank you.
Sorry Alice...the use of women's rights as a political bargaining chip...you were saying?
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
This smells close to the ugly truth as can be feared. A decision has been taken that all important Shiite regimes must go, no matter what they did or didn't do with respect to any law, treaty or moral code. Peace will be brought to the Muslim world simply through the democratic tyranny of the majority Sunni - and the heavy thumb of allies of convenience (that would be us).People making statements like "America, Israel, and Saudi Arabi (talk about the unholy alliance
Last edited:
- 28,471
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
I can give you Trudeau's statement in advance if you like:I did come across one tweet, completely unverified, which said that part of the reason Trudeau had yet to say anything, especially regarding the women's rights aspect of this, was because Bombardier has a deal to sell a few airplanes to the Mullahs. Like I said, completely unverified, but that would not surprise me for one second
To me, this is the kicker of all this. In 2018, Progressives work to promote International Hijab Day (coming up Feb 1), whilst Conservatives, led by Donald J Trump, are given the opportunity to act as the champions of women's rights.
Oh Hatter, more tea, why thank you.
Sorry Alice...the use of women's rights as a political bargaining chip...you were saying?
We uuhh are very aware uhhhh of the protests and we support the uuuhhh right of everyone to uuhh protest but they must remain uuhh peaceful and all parties must uuuhh work together on solutions that uuhhh work for everyone.
- 7,436
- Canada
- photonrider
That's about as factual as reporting can get.
Imagine a monarch saying that to a bunch of colonies that decided that might was to be met with might.
The Age of Enlightenment spreads faster than people can be made ignorant of the truth - many truths, truths so incredible that even once what was believed as gospel truth cannot be accepted for what it always was, is, and will be - a lie. Kings, Mullahs, Dictators, Royalty . . . do . . . not . . .exist. It's subjective, it's an illusion.
Today's 'princes and princesses' are not real. These are self-given titles, born of tyranny, caste-consciousness, the subjugation of fellow h. sapiens sapiens, and the rape of resources for personal gain under the guise of survival of the fittest that also blanketed a myth - that our survival as a species was ruled by 'might is right'.
In short - these are the progeny of former slaughterers who were never held accountable for atrocities - who, just as in times past, will have acolytes willing to sacrifice their lives to defend the pomp and glitter, if only for some reflected . . . 'class'.
This feeling of 'royalty' seeps through to most governance, whether religious, political, or even sociological.
But an illusion can be maintained for only so long before fellow h. sapiens sapiens (being no less aware of basic reality) see through this smoke and military might and realize that they are not being governed but, rather, subjugated.
It starts with freedoms taken away. And then the very lives that would want that freedom will also be taken away. This is where the people then raise their voices against the governance and demand to be governed - treated - as equals with an equal voice.
That is also why successful revolutions matched might with might.
But the technology behind what is mighty changes - what is mighty today is more than a handful of guns or a truckload of explosives; what is mighty is this 'voice' of the people of Iran, people with a history almost as old as civilization itself, people who have the right to be selective of who governs them, who finally can be heard around the world.
We must talk about this.
What the 'ruling class' of Iran needs to know is that while they may use smoke and mirrors to fool themselves and no one else in that patch of land inhabited once by ancients, the present people are not fooled, and neither is a greater part of the global consciousness of the truth; self-proclaimed authority is nothing but false authority when it comes to the governance of the people, for the people . . . by the people.
- 31,113
- Hilversum
- Dennisch
After the latest 'gas attack' , where Britain and the US were quickly to blame Assad, because of reasonable doubt, Russia does a 'no u' and says that they have evidence that the Brits are behind the attack.
*popcorn*
Will Trump bomb London if the evidence holds up?
*popcorn*
Will Trump bomb London if the evidence holds up?
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
No. The US and allies have used false flag attacks in the past to justify previous interventions and wars of acquisition. Should that continue? Yes, for the time being. Sun Tzu, Machiavelli and all sound military doctrine stand in agreement. The ends justify the means. Might makes right. That said, in the long run, Russia may be a better ally for the US than Britain.
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
Ordinarily I might say attack first and ask questions later.
But if we want to be sincere for just moment, I will admit that I called the White House comment line this morning and expressed my opposition to the US war in Syria. For US citizens, the number to call is 202-456-1414. I had to wait on hold about 5 minutes, as the lines are pretty busy, even early in the morning.
Last edited:
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
At this moment, Trump is announcing a combined strike by US, Britain, and France against Syria. Perfect news on a Friday the 13th.
"Huge blasts are to said be heard Damascus", says Fox news.
edit:
Explosions also in Homs and numerous locations all over Syria. Tartus was hit.
British Tornado jets from Cyprus and US B-1 bombers from Qatar said to be in the action. There is a French frigate involved in the eastern Med. US Navy vessels are said to be in action in both the Med and the Red Sea. This attack is said to be mostly against chem weapons facilities, although numerous seaports, airports and airfields have been struck. Syria claims to have shot down 13 Tomahawks.
Teresa May has admitted authorizing the British strikes, and made assurances this is a precision targeted strike which will not involve escalation. Mattis, the US Secretary of Defense, says these attacks "will avert a worsening catastrophe".
"Huge blasts are to said be heard Damascus", says Fox news.
edit:
Explosions also in Homs and numerous locations all over Syria. Tartus was hit.
British Tornado jets from Cyprus and US B-1 bombers from Qatar said to be in the action. There is a French frigate involved in the eastern Med. US Navy vessels are said to be in action in both the Med and the Red Sea. This attack is said to be mostly against chem weapons facilities, although numerous seaports, airports and airfields have been struck. Syria claims to have shot down 13 Tomahawks.
Teresa May has admitted authorizing the British strikes, and made assurances this is a precision targeted strike which will not involve escalation. Mattis, the US Secretary of Defense, says these attacks "will avert a worsening catastrophe".
Last edited:
VolkswagenX
(Banned)
- 1,532
- Netherlands
VolkswagenX
(Banned)
- 1,532
- Netherlands
- 4,551
- Moscow
- Rage_Racer_VOLK
- RageRacer48
- 31,113
- Hilversum
- Dennisch
They think they did it, therefore they are allowed to bomb them.
They and them can be replaced by either side.
- 1,751
- Old South Wales
- numbnuts70
Warmongers bombing before a proper investigation which was due to start today, could be completed.
That tells me their intel was flawed and they knew it would be stated by the OPCW as so, so they bombed before the report surfaced.
Russian press conference confirms Syrian air defences were sucessfull in taking down all but 5 or 6 of the 103 missiles fired.
Lets see how this escalates.
That tells me their intel was flawed and they knew it would be stated by the OPCW as so, so they bombed before the report surfaced.
Russian press conference confirms Syrian air defences were sucessfull in taking down all but 5 or 6 of the 103 missiles fired.
Lets see how this escalates.
- 3,070
- Norway
FTFY
