(Original post by Clessus)
Good post, the followers of Ron Paul and especially George Galloway sicken me.
While the Left correctly points out the hypocracy of the West in helping certain oppressed peoples and not helping others, some of its members fall into the trap of only supporting oppressed peoples who the West doesn't support, while not supporting oppressed peoples which the West also supports, which is in effect the same sort of hypocracy and oppertunism. An example of this is the reaction to the recent massacre in Syria, which has been fairly lukeworm among certain commenters, and there have even been attempts to deny the massacre or blame it on the rebels. However, if Israel or the USA committed such an action I daresay the reaction would be somewhat different. It really is a shame to see that when an anti-western regime is threatened, certain members of the Left become trusted allies of the conservative forces, and defenders of the status-quo.
And of course we have the boogey man of Islamic extremism being brought up both by right-wing racists and left-wing "anti-imperialists". Leaving aside the fact that Gadaffi and others was hardly secular themselves, and even if they were, it would only show that secular regimes can be just as nasty as theocratic ones, the arab dictatorships have always played on fears of "islamic extremism" to preserve their illegitimate rule. It is similar to how right-wing dictatorships in Central and South America played on fears of Communism to surpress popular movements and justifty their autocratic rule.
Certain people regret the fall of the Gaddafi regime and the possible fall of Assad's, in the belief that these acted as leviathans keeping lids on Islamic extremism. They fail to appreciate that these dictatorships, through preventing the emergence of healthy political pluralism and through opportunistic collaboration with Islamism, acted as the incubators of the very Islamist movements they claimed to keep in check. It is pluralism that is ultimately the cure for the evil represented by Islamism.
If the so-called "anti-interventionalist" crowd had its way (and the likes of Galloway have no problem with Soviet intervention in Afghanistan or Hungary or Czekeslovakia, it's only Western intervention he's against
), as well as the things you mention, in the last 20 years the following would be the case;
1. Kuwait would be part of a Greater Iraq.
2. Bosnia would be ethnically cleansed and annexed.
3. The Taliban would be in charge of Afghanistan.
4. Kosova would be ethnically cleansed and annexed.
We have already seen the effects of "anti-imperialism" in Sudan amongst other places.
The Arab Spring may end badly in some or all of the countries in question, but long live the brave Syrians, Yemenis, Tunisians, Egyptians, Libyans, Bahrainis and others who have redeemed the honour of the Arab world through their heroic struggle against tyranny.