Which middle-eastern nations function well and why?

Please discuss. I'm curious. :popcorn:

Israel I think functions well. ALso, there has been some reform in Morocco and Kuwait in terms of Democracy and womens rights...the whole area is generally very unstable though.

** oh yeah, and Iraq now that the people are free and dancing in the streets with flowers and American flags!! :-)

At least economically, and only a small portion of their money comes from oil.

Dubai's a huge port. It handles most of the shipping that crosses the Indian Ocean, through the Suez canal, etc.

I heard oil only accounts for 5% GDP.

"Slave" is only a little too harsh of a word, imo.

Pull the other one.

Israel isn't filled with fundamentalist radical Muslims who want to convert the world by the sword.

Palestine and Egypt also are subsidized by US taxpayer dollars.

Any actual viable economies?

economics 101 stuff. The secret is to actually diversify. For the longest time the US economy was subsidized by Coal and Steel, nowadays ITS subsidized by Oil as well, the Petrodollar is the world's currency, after all. That seem to be changing though.

a strong economy where wealth is spread around. I don't see great things in Texas or Alaska (oil economies) as compared with, say, Seattle (yes, they still cut down a few trees, but mostly they make money from high-tech).

What do you think?

Our oil, coal, and steel was a free for all, and created the Robber Baron period, especially when combined to make the Railroad conglomerates. In Saudi Arabia, basically it was same, if you will, all major profits went to the Royal Family, and a few other select families, like the Bin Ladens, who profited from the boom in construction that the oil wells sprung forth, and made a killing(pun sadly intended).

EU people probably wouldn't like that.

against Russian Jews and others, and occupation of Palestinian territories and this is called "functioning well?" Without US tax dollars and military aid in the form of weapons and wars what would Israel really be like? They heed few international laws, have WMDs and nukes, and violate almost every UN resolution concerning Israel. I know the "anti-semitic" flames will start but sooner or later even people at DU will have to face the truth about the ME.

I forgot about Turkey. I'd say they are one of the better ones as well.

with that as well. But lets face it...the Middle East isn't exactly a well spring of human rights...

*ding*

Is that a desirable or likely successful model? Should the abaya (for example) be outlawed in Iraq as it was in Turkey?

Function well as in; Meets all requirements for industrialized nation? Lowest poverty? Least amount of wars?

After that, a basic respect for human rights and the rule of law....

Has one of the lower infant mortality rates, very little chance of getting HIV/AIDS, 78% of the people are literate, average life expectancy is in the mid 70s. Drawbacks, not a representive democracy. No political parties or leaders to diversify govt. Not the best on human rights. Didn't sign on to the UN charter to abolish slavery until the 1960s.

SA is probably 'above average' in the ME.

making. What will they do when the oil runs out?

Pre-1953, then the US got involved in their government and it all went to hell.

But I really don't know that much about it.

How about Jordan? I've heard Amman is a decent place.

but that was our meddling there, as far as Jordan, its much maligned, but decent as far as places around the mid-east go. Egypt, if you consider it Middle Eastern rather than North African, isn't that bad either. Alexandria has a brand new, state of the art library that I'm just DYING to go to, I'm a book worm, and that is, if you will excuse the term, the MECCA of all places for bookworms. :)

Turkey is another place, obviously, that has a decent democratic government, though still has its troubles, like all nations around the Mid-East.

denominator?

Actually, it may be the streak of Intellectualism in all 3 places, I don't really know, also, all 3, while not strictly Democratic themselves do have democratic structures within the structure of their governments. Even Turkey, for the longest time, had to have a government that was subservient to the Military, or they risk military coups, which did happen occasionally.

Back in the late 1990s, Iran actually elected a Moderate government, then the Mullahs dissolved it, being a theocracy, they had the power to do that, but then the protests started, and it actually looked like KIDS were going to win the day. At least a compromise between the reformists agitators of the young people, and the Mullahs could at least have been hammered out. Then soon after 9/11, Bush had to open his big fat mouth, and named Iran as a member of the axis of evil. These kids were, by and large, western thinking, forward thinking, sick of religious rule, and wanted a taste of true freedom, but all Bush accomplished was strengthening the conservative government, and now we are talking war, its fucking disgusting!

I remember reading that American culture was actually POPULAR with young Iranians in the 1990s.

It wasn't 9/11 that changed everything. It was the 2000 election. :mad:

He and his cronies are not about peace they are the WAR administration.

:mad:

planned to paint the other two?

declared their intent to conduct all international transactions in Euros, abandoning the USD. The threat of challenging the USD hegemony is their greatest fear as it is the only thing propping up our counterfeit currency.

Without this metaphorical gun pointed at the heads of the other nations of the world, they would be able to tell us what to go do with ourselves.