Iraq = French Revolution

jrb4him · 03-30-2007, 06:59 PM

So maybe the people in government positions should do more history, after all, If hitler woulda learned about Napoleons adventures in Russia, he might have done a thing or too differently. Anyways...

Anyone who's familiar with the French Revolution come to the realization like me that this war in Iraq is alot like the French Revolution. When you wipe out the original government and the people have no concept of how a new one should work, things get ugly. Iraq looks like France did right after the revolution with roving bandits and terrorisits and mob rule. Anyone also remember that it took France like 100 yrs to get going again after the revolution?? We might be in for a long ride with Iraq here..

Jason

tropicana · 03-30-2007, 07:54 PM

Except that, you know, the French Revolution came from the inside.

+SEAL+ · 03-30-2007, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jrb4him

Anyone who's familiar with the French Revolution come to the realization like me that this war in Iraq is alot like the French Revolution. When you wipe out the original government and the people have no concept of how a new one should work, things get ugly. Iraq looks like France did right after the revolution with roving bandits and terrorisits and mob rule. Anyone also remember that it took France like 100 yrs to get going again after the revolution?? We might be in for a long ride with Iraq here..

The resemblance is only superficial. You're oversimplifying things drastically, so your conclusion's not necessarily accurate either.

As mentioned before, the revolution in France did not come from an outside source. Rather, it was from within. Furthermore, it came as the result of a radical new way of thinking, influenced by the Enlightenment. There actually was a way of government planned, but it didn't work out.

Next, just because there's roving violence in some parts of Iraq doesn't mean that it's like France at the time of the Revolution. Iraq is a war zone currently. It's violent, you say? Duh! It's a war zone! Of course it's going to be violent.

Also, there actually is a stable government being set up. Look at Baghdad. After the troop surge and new fighting strategy there, the insurgents are leaving Baghdad for surrounding areas. Stability is coming.

Finally, the main reason behind the tensions is actually religious: Sunni-Shi'ite and all that stuff. Most definitely not revolutionary.

JerryLove · 03-30-2007, 09:13 PM

Quote:

Finally, the main reason behind the tensions is actually religious: Sunni-Shi'ite and all that stuff. Most definitely not revolutionary.

While religion is the name put on the issue, I don't think there's any support that it's the issue. It's cultural. These people were getting along pretty well 10 years ago. This is pretty similar to the English/Irish fighting... only with a far less stable government and far more people on the outside adding gasoline.

Wolvrin704 · 03-31-2007, 09:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by +SEAL+

The resemblance is only superficial. You're oversimplifying things drastically, so your conclusion's not necessarily accurate either.

As mentioned before, the revolution in France did not come from an outside source. Rather, it was from within. Furthermore, it came as the result of a radical new way of thinking, influenced by the Enlightenment. There actually was a way of government planned, but it didn't work out.

Next, just because there's roving violence in some parts of Iraq doesn't mean that it's like France at the time of the Revolution. Iraq is a war zone currently. It's violent, you say? Duh! It's a war zone! Of course it's going to be violent.

Also, there actually is a stable government being set up. Look at Baghdad. After the troop surge and new fighting strategy there, the insurgents are leaving Baghdad for surrounding areas. Stability is coming.

Finally, the main reason behind the tensions is actually religious: Sunni-Shi'ite and all that stuff. Most definitely not revolutionary.

Not to mention the outside influence of Iran with sending in terrorists, financial support and of course banging the war drums.

Drew Neal · 03-31-2007, 10:11 AM

When I first read the thread title I thought it was stupid, but after giving it some thought there are a few simularities.

1: Opressed Majority taking revenge on a formerly repressive minority. The Sunnis under Sadam prevented the Shiites from celebrating any of their unique Muslim holidays and prveneted them from holding any sort of position of power. As in the French revelotion, when the opressive power fell the majority that had born the burdon of the minority turned on their former masters and killed many of them. In the french revolution it was motivated by class, but the forced distinctions where simular.

2: Two parties fighting each other with little to no respect for human life. The French king brutaly treated any opposition and he and all the french aristocracy lived by holding down their people. The revolution respected no one and actualy beheaded several of their own toword the end when they started going "soft," thinking maybe some of the aristocracy shouldn't die just because they belonged to that class.

jrb4him · 03-31-2007, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drew Neal

When I first read the thread title I thought it was stupid, but after giving it some thought there are a few simularities.

I wasn't necessarily saying the TWO were IDENTICAL. Just the fact that there was an oppressive ruler, who people didn't like who was overthrown. And this big idea for a new government that was a big flop, and gang warfare continued for decades into the future until everyone finally got together and started up a government again. I think the US takes for granted how hard it is to set up a government. Remember, most US colonists were British and already had a solid concept of representative government. These Iraqi's (like the French) have no real concept of whats going on here.

Just my two cents
Jason

Insane Drummer · 03-31-2007, 01:41 PM

I really don't see much similarity. Two very complictated situations that are almost nothing alike. Comparing Saddam and Louis XVI is just plain silly. Louis wasn't really much more than your typical monarch.

The conncetion is basically this. The French Revolution was violent, and so is Iraq. That is about as far as I can see it going.

c4gchip · 04-01-2007, 05:27 AM

You must also take into consideration the hot spots of the fighting right now. From what I can see, the problems are coming from Baghdad, and aren't there close to 11 other provinces in Iraq? *Give or take a few - I'm not a scholar* Remember the media always seems to spice things up.

Definately they're both similar in the fact of a drastic gov't change and unstability to a point - I can understand what your saying, but I think that Iraq and the French Revolution are way different though.