Military strikes against Assad's Syria | Updates & Discussions.

[iranigirl2]

..........................

 

[Hussein]

Perhaps not by noticeable margin. But dictators and their regimes do not last unless there are sizable support among the people and the dictator is able to gain and maintain their support by certain means. I read a long time ago, as in pre-historic (Internet) days, an analyst who declared that a dictator needs at best 30% of the population to gain power and maintains it. Reasonable people are the bulk of any citizenry and their willingness to be reasonable often makes them easily cowed by threats and intimidation by that lesser 30%.

10% is enough
during occupation in France, someone said me that : 10% resist 10% collaborate and part of system 80% don't do anything but survive or want have no problem
that's much more the reality than 30%

 

[gambit]

Has there been a scientific study in this regard?

It appears to be true but exact percentages would be helpful as sometime in multiparty democracy, winner has support of less than 30%.

Like I said, this was pre-historic (Internet).

Anyway...I will use Viet Nam as an example, specifically post WW II when the people finally had a chance for true independence. Sentiments regarding independence were strong but the details on how to achieve it greatly varied. Some advocated gradualism under the sponsorship of a foreign power experienced in self governance, even if that sponsor was the old colonial master -- France. Some advocated instant severance from all foreign powers and let the country/people take their chances. Obviously this would mean instant anarchy but there were some minority support for it. The rest of the people, from illiterate farmers to intellectuals, were quite reasonable and discussed the middle grounds between France and anarchy.

The Viet Minh was communist and they had strong support -- roughly 30% -- of the people and the bulk of that 30% were from the working people, from farmers to urbanites to a few intellectuals, in that order of decreasing numbers. For post WW II Viet Nam, this was a nascent democracy, or at least a bud of it. So if there was a vote, the Viet Minh would have been another party in Parliament or Congress or whatever label for that legislative body. This was unacceptable for the Viet Minh. In the end, the Viet Minh colluded with France via the Ho-Sainteny Agreement that invited France back into Viet Nam. Then this alliance proceeded to slaughter the opposition to secure the Viet Minh's dominant position in northern Viet Nam.

Dictators by nature dislike the democratic process. Violence is the preferred method in both achieving power and maintenance of it. In a functional democracy under proportional representation as how most governments are, a thirty percent support among the citizenry would at best guarantee seats in government, or perhaps even the Prime Ministership, but there should be sufficient checks and balances in place to prevent the administration from morphing into a dictatorship.

That 30% figure should be a rough guide to observers to redirect their attention. Take note of the emotions involved and especially the rhetoric. See how inflammatory it is or is not. Study how supporters opined about their oppositions. For foreign affairs specialists, naturally this would be important for their leaders so they can prepare their countries for possible regime changes with policies that could deviate from the current ones, and these deviations may not be good for national interests. In countries that do not have a history of peaceful regime changes via the democratic processes, which would include new countries, that 30% figure should be a red flag for the potential of violent regime changes and an eventual dictatorship.

 

[gambit]

10% is enough
during occupation in France, someone said me that : 10% resist 10% collaborate and part of system 80% don't do anything but survive or want have no problem
that's much more the reality than 30%

Not sure if this is applicable since France was militarily defeated then occupied. A foreign power was already in place so there would be no need for any large scale support by the natives. The war time condition serves the interests of the foreign power and their native associates by making life physically and environmentally too arduous for the rest to think about anything else but mere physical sustenance.

 

[Ceylal]

Qatari rousing their shock troops
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=670519086297435&set=o.139856902692228&type=2&theater

Saudi arabia, a heaven on earth...Look at the dance of the sea gulls...

And a Saudi Prince that forecast the fall of the Saud..

 

[gambit]

Middle eastern people should not die in conflicts related to Israel's security and futre.

Does this includes those who died and are willing to die for the destruction of Israel?

I said this before, your trying to portray every Iranian here as a religious fanatic..... It's not working. Most of us here are secular. So it's not a muslim vs jew, Shia vs Sunni, etc... like you say.

Sure it is. And I do not need to do anything. Your post/comment that I highlighted is good enough. You do not need to be religious in order to be a fanatic.

So for you to say that 'No innocent person should DIE for security of Israel.' means you are already a fanatic and your fanaticism is perfectly in line with the religious fanatics.

Congratulations.

 

[Declein]

Doesn't anyone find it peculiar that the USA are basically telling Assad when they will hit, and to a degree, what they will hit.They don't want regime change and are not going after the CW - that leaves what?
Throw some missiles here and there in the desert, blow 3 tanks and go home with Obama's big mouth avenged..

 

[500]

Like I said, right now Iran is the most stable country in the middle east and it will remain that way.

Iranian rial is most stably falling currency in Middle East.

 

[500]

If your gonna redraw the Middle east map, to divide up all the Arab countries so that the security of Israel can be guaranteed, then the people should know the truth.

ASSad did not fire a bullet towards Israel since 1973.
HisBlah did not fire a bullet towards Israel since 2006.

Both are actually protecting the Israeli border against Salafi groups who want to fire rockets at Israel

Not everything rotates around Israel dear kitten.

 

[iranigirl2]

.....................................

 

[Juice]

Just because every morning you visits Foxnews.com, watch lady gaga Video and Miley Cyrus slutty videos don't mean you have access to real valuable information on the internet.

You live in the US....any trouble getting information?

 

[Juice]

Anyone against US foreign polict in the Middle east is "religious fanatic"

Anyone that is against Bush's numerous lies is a "terrorist"

Whats next? anyone that don't believe government lies is a criminal, take her to the gas chamber.

You sound like a Nazi.

Your the one hollering about "Zionist in my closet" and he's the Nazi? You do know what Nazi policy was...right?

 

[iranigirl2]

..................................

 

[islamrules]

I agree with @500, not everything turns around israel anymore, israel has gone from a manipulative state that controls the ME puppet dictators into a viewer, the dictators r buying israel sometime, but when they fall and they will, israel will be destroyed by the global jihad

 

[gambit]

He sounds like a fascist dictator. He wants to silence anyone that don't agree with him.


He sounds completely brainwashed.

So to challenge you in an anonymous Internet forum where the contents of arguments matters the most is to 'silence' you?

Now who is the brainwashed one here? I guess when I brought you the UNMOVIC website it pretty much silenced you because you ran away from it.