Libya to Become Islamist State

[Just_Believe18]

Well, like I said, either the Dictator gets them or the Islamist Theocracy. Every time.

http://news.yahoo.com/libyas-transitional-leader-declares-liberation-155513082.html

The transitional government leader Mustafa Abdul-Jalil set out a vision for the post-Gadhafi future with an Islamist tint, saying that Islamic Sharia law would be the "basic source" of legislation in the country and that existing laws that contradict the teachings of Islam would be nullified. In a gesture that showed his own piety, he urged Libyans not to express their joy by firing in the air, but rather to chant "Allahu Akbar," or God is Great. He then stepped aside and knelt to offer a brief prayer of thanks.

Arab Spring? More like the Arab Fall.

 

[palbert]

We can only hope this does not befall its people. Unfortunately you are probably correct.

 

[rareboy]

I'm not surprised that Sharia law would be the basis for the constitution of an islamic country.

To even imagine that somehow Libya would immediately turn to western christo-centric european models for governance would be as fantastical as the thought of France adopting Sharia law as the basis for its constitution.

It is a shame that the secular model of Turkey doesn't get more play, but not surprising.

 

[Serenx55]

I'm not surprised that Sharia law would be the basis for the constitution of an islamic country.

To even imagine that somehow Libya would immediately turn to western christo-centric european models for governance would be as fantastical as the thought of France adopting Sharia law as the basis for its constitution.

It is a shame that the secular model of Turkey doesn't get more play, but not surprising.

Turkey's system is moving away from secularism.

 

[rareboy]

Just as the US right is attempting to tilt the country away from separation of church and state.

It is a world wide phenomenon it seems.

The US seemed to have no major issue when Iraq founded its constitution on Sharia law.

I don't see what the big deal is here.

 

[Jack Springer]

I'm not surprised.

However, it depends on the depth of Sharia law.

Strict Sharia law would be worse than Kadafi. It would be hard for me to see that the oppressed people of Libya would settle for another dictator.

But you never know. Some people like to be taken advantage of by others.

Getting into Obama's mind - I doubt that he sees nothing wrong with Sharia law -- it's part of his heritage.

 

[MystikWizard]

A theocracy?

Very interesting. Obama would most certainly take a lot of static from those on the Right about our involvement in assisting to over-throw a dictator only to install a Theocracy ... not to mention one based on (strict?) Sharia Law in it's place.

Then again, we should frankly default to the position of ... "It's none of our business" ... because it isn't.

I despise Theocracies, but it isn't our country to worry about.

 

[Lostlover]

Isn't democracy respecting the will of the people? If so, if they want a theocracy, who are we to stand in their way?

 

[Just_Believe18]

Keep it on topic, gentlemen. We have plenty of other threads to criticize Republican conservatism and Obama.

I am just a little surprised by how quick and sudden the decision was made. It makes you wonder just who has been in charge of the rebel leadership for some time now. Apparently, there hasn't been a progressive, liberal bloc of Libyans as there were Egyptians guiding this revolution.

 

[MystikWizard]

Isn't democracy respecting the will of the people? If so, if they want a theocracy, who are we to stand in their way?

Well, to be fair, I don't really know if it is the will of the people as much as it is the Transitional leadership (which I would love to know who Mustafa Abdul-Jalil is and how he got in that position ... military, or other means .... that is calling on this.

However, to be fair, I thought I read that elections were coming, so we'll see what happens. It will be interesting to see if the rebel military leadership that was on the ground against Gadhafi will attempt to move the country in the direction of a Theocracy, despite whomever is elected.


EDIT:

Actually, here he is ...

During the civil war, Abdul Jalil was identified as the Chairman of the National Transitional Council based in Benghazi, although this position was contested by others in the uprising due to his past direct participation to Gaddafi's government as Minister of Justice for four years until 2011.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustafa_Abdul_Jalil

 

[JayHawk]

To be honest whomever stands up to lead Libya will have to have an iron fist. They are but a collection of warring tribes. Ghaddafi, Gaddafi, Kaddafi, Quaddafi or however you spell that former man's name did so and that is the only thing that prevented them from being a collection of unrully warring tirbes like in Afghanistan.

Anyone who expects different out of these wars is severely deceiving themselves or saying it enough to make everyone believe that was the goal in the first place. It was not.

Finally however and whatever caused those people to revolt did and we stood by them. Many MANY liberal extolled this as the right way to go so when it turns into an oppressive theocratic regime I am sure those same liberals will defend it just as vociferously as they defended the right of BHO to support the demise of Quaddafi.

Those SAME people decry the action in Iraq because it wasn't their man or their policy doing the removing. The same will be said of an eventual tumultuous Afghanistanian leadership.

I just wish people could put their politics aside and support what is right to do for people or object based on their own standards of life. Making it a party line policy is what has the world confused and angry at the US in the first place. (IMHO)

 

[frankfrank]

That's why, in another thread which talked about him being killed by the rebels because he didn't "get the Hell out of Libya" when he could, I said that the assessment was correct. (Of course that thread meant that he didn't leave for another country when the option existed, which is definitely true.)

Though it is now dead, and whoever takes over will probably care no more about the rights of the citizens/people/subjects than the former despot did, Qadaffi did NOT "get the Hell out of Libya." The Hell is STILL in Libya, albeit it will have a new leader, and it will probably be Hell there for years to come.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Well, like I said, either the Dictator gets them or the Islamist Theocracy. Every time.

http://news.yahoo.com/libyas-transitional-leader-declares-liberation-155513082.html

Arab Spring? More like the Arab Fall.

Another anti-Islamist thread..... Yay! How unique.

The US, its Presidents, and related governmental minions all invoke a xtian "god" and "biblical laws / values", so why would you expect anything but the same behavior elsewhere, but instead of xtian it's Islamic? The new constitution of Libya will have to be voted upon, and if that is the will of the people, then so be it. Libya is not Iran, nor Saudi Arabia, nor Indonesia. How strictly they plan to "adhere" to the path will ultimately be up to the people of Libya, as it should be.

Today's news is nothing new, or disconcerting IMHO, as per the NYT.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/w...official-vows-a-new-and-more-pious-state.html

 

[JayHawk]

Well you are correct they can rule themselves how they see fit.

I stick by my previous assertion that it will devolve into a iron-fisted state regardless of the path they decide. Either they will be harsh or they will be very short lived.

 

[Kulindahr]

Another anti-Islamist thread..... Yay! How unique.

The US, its Presidents, and related governmental minions all invoke a xtian "god" and "biblical laws / values", so why would you expect anything but the same behavior elsewhere, but instead of xtian it's Islamic? The new constitution of Libya will have to be voted upon, and if that is the will of the people, then so be it. Libya is not Iran, nor Saudi Arabia, nor Indonesia. How strictly they plan to "adhere" to the path will ultimately be up to the people of Libya, as it should be.

Today's news is nothing new, or disconcerting IMHO, as per the NYT.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/w...official-vows-a-new-and-more-pious-state.html

Human rights should never be a matter of a vote. The danger of our modern worship of democracy is that it can impose tyranny. Islamism is tyranny, just as Dominionism is tyranny. Both should be opposed by those who believe in liberty.

 

[opinterph]

Moderator Notice

This thread is designated On-Topic.

Eight posts from this thread have been split into a new thread: US Political situation regarding Libyan liberation

Please use the alternative thread to continue discussions that are not relative to this thread’s intended topic.

 

[Just_Believe18]

Another anti-Islamist thread..... Yay! How unique.

The US, its Presidents, and related governmental minions all invoke a xtian "god" and "biblical laws / values", so why would you expect anything but the same behavior elsewhere, but instead of xtian it's Islamic? The new constitution of Libya will have to be voted upon, and if that is the will of the people, then so be it. Libya is not Iran, nor Saudi Arabia, nor Indonesia. How strictly they plan to "adhere" to the path will ultimately be up to the people of Libya, as it should be.

Today's news is nothing new, or disconcerting IMHO, as per the NYT.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/w...official-vows-a-new-and-more-pious-state.html

You're welcome, Molten.

There's a difference between a government founded under Islamic principles, and one that is founded under Sharia Law. It's also difficult to accept that the Libyan people will vote for a just government, when theocratic tyranny has manipulated elections before. Remember, when the Shah was thrown out of Iran and the new government had its first elections, the people overwhelmingly voted in a theocratic government that stamped out the educated, intellectual class of Iranians.

I'm not closing the book on Libya yet; however, after what we've been seeing in Egypt so far, the future looks grim when the new Libyan government already wants to establish a Sharia Law government. However, like you said, time will tell.

 

[Ninja108]

Bottom line...they wanted him gone and as we've seen in the past, supporting tyrants has often come back to bite us in the butt.

 

[jackoroe]

Gentlemen, the topic is Libya's becoming an Islamist state. Please address that topic or don't post. Thank you.

 

[Mariatenebre]

Isn't democracy respecting the will of the people? If so, if they want a theocracy, who are we to stand in their way?

A proper country does not vote away the rights of the minority based on what the majority says. You should never respect a theocracy in these systems especially the Abrahamic ones individual rights become nil. A democracy is supposed to protect individual rights not support tyranny of the majority. At one point in American history the majority thought slavery was ok, at one point in history we thought that women should be denied the right to vote. What the majority wants is not neccesarily right.

Another anti-Islamist thread..... Yay! How unique.

The US, its Presidents, and related governmental minions all invoke a xtian "god" and "biblical laws / values", so why would you expect anything but the same behavior elsewhere, but instead of xtian it's Islamic? The new constitution of Libya will have to be voted upon, and if that is the will of the people, then so be it. Libya is not Iran, nor Saudi Arabia, nor Indonesia. How strictly they plan to "adhere" to the path will ultimately be up to the people of Libya, as it should be.

Today's news is nothing new, or disconcerting IMHO, as per the NYT.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/24/w...official-vows-a-new-and-more-pious-state.html

I personally hate both theocratic Christians and theocratic Muslims. Also their theocracy should not be up to the people. They should not have one period. As I said before the majority has to right to vote away the rights of the minority. It should be up to no people to violate the rights of another. Further more you as a gay man should be against Islamic theocracy more then any considering what they do to gay people. Supporting Islam if you are gay, a woman or non Muslim is suicide. Also there have been many threads bashing Christianity so having one bashing Islam should be supported as well. Unless you are a typical Islam defending leftist.