Egypt (1 Viewer)

[JerseyEagles]

Youtube frequently locks viewing count on heavily trafficked/newsworthy vids. That may be what is happening here.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Our government is foolish not to always push for true democracy. True democracy will always be a moderating force. Of course, the trick is to make sure that one tyrant isn't replaced with another (as in Iran). So far though, our State Department's reactions have been quite lacking IMO. This shouldn't be surprising though since this is not the first time that our President (meaning not just Obama but ones before him as well) have failed to encourage democratic uprisings around the world. I do fear though that our current President believes entirely too much in the idea that all cultures, governments and countries are equally valid and has not done enough to publicly support democracy internationally. We can agree or disagree on whether or not the US should use military force to facilitate change, but we should certainly be a steadfast voice for democracy and freedom.

What is "true democracy?"We have spent billions spreading democracy and it has rarely ever worked. We end up helping countries become so internally corrupt and unstable, that we start a vicious cycle like has happened in places all over Central and South America and Africa. We should encourage individual freedoms and democratic measures, but not our kind of democracy. It just doesn't work in some of these places. Limited Democracy with personal freedoms, I'm behind that idea anywhere.

 

[siffoin]

It's not all about us, it's about these people. Personally, I think it's great if the people are fed up with the governement and want change and are willing to do whatever it takes. At least they have some passion which is more than you can say about a lot of Americans who don't even vote they are so asleep at the wheel and then wonder why things in this country slowly keep getting worse and worse.

Strongly disagree with you here. We need to view every situation in the Middle East in terms of what is in the United States best interest- meaning, what will in the longterm result in the continued flow of petroleum at cheap prices. This must be our primary concern.

So you don't believe in the main tenant of our own Declaration of Independence?That all men are created EQUAL. That all men have the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That whenever a government becomes destructive towards it own people...those men have the right to abolish that government and establish a new one. That when government is reduced to despotism, it is the right and DUTY of the citizens to overthrow it.

Cheap gas supersedes all of that?

I may not necessarily agree with their religion or cultural beliefs but good God...when we throw basic rights away on others aren't we throwing it away on ourselves?

I don't have any answers here for sure...but I do think our world-view needs to be larger than Kansas.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Khomeini had started the revolution in the 60s, the revolution grew due to many things but Khomeini and the Islamic movement was at the center of it all from the very beginning. Saying they were surprised by it when Qom was producing literature and ideas in great volume to send to the various movements to ignite the flame is strange. The death of Khomeini's son was probably the tipping point that took the revolution from isolated events to an organized movement in mass.

From what I've read, he was caught off guard, but brilliantly took advantage of the situation. It's true that he was the most well-known anti-Shah figure and therefore the easiest for people to rally around. But the students and intellectuals who fought against the Shah did not envisage an Islamist regime as a result. In any case, Egypt is not Iran. Perhaps the difference in religion (Sunni) will make a difference. I certainly hope so. I really want you to be right- for all of our sakes.

The students were encouraged to a large extent by the old Islamic guard. The intellectuals wanted anything but the Shah, he was having them rounded up and put in burlap sacks with hungry cats.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Our government is foolish not to always push for true democracy. True democracy will always be a moderating force. Of course, the trick is to make sure that one tyrant isn't replaced with another (as in Iran). So far though, our State Department's reactions have been quite lacking IMO. This shouldn't be surprising though since this is not the first time that our President (meaning not just Obama but ones before him as well) have failed to encourage democratic uprisings around the world. I do fear though that our current President believes entirely too much in the idea that all cultures, governments and countries are equally valid and has not done enough to publicly support democracy internationally. We can agree or disagree on whether or not the US should use military force to facilitate change, but we should certainly be a steadfast voice for democracy and freedom.

Liberal democracy tends to be a moderating force. Plain old democracy (majority rules, period) tends to really suck.For example, if you left it up to a vote, I'm guessing the people of Saudi Arabia would vote for a theocracy. That's a form of government that we should all loathe.

Conceded. Although, even in that circumstance I think that as long as it remained a true democracy, it would still end up being more moderate over time with the influence of the theocracy fading over time. But individual liberty is certainly an important component. Which I did mention as being something that we should be a voice for, but didn't actually mention it explicitely as part of my democracy argument.

 

[DCThunder]

Our government is foolish not to always push for true democracy. True democracy will always be a moderating force.

And again, I strongly disagree with you (and with George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter, the two contemporary presidents most prominent for this idea.). Pushing democracy on countries with high illiteracy or with extremist religious views lead inevitably to dictatorships worse than the ones that were there before. Democracy is not in itself moral. Sometimes a benevolent dictatorship can be better, for our interests, than a democracy.

Tim, you ever hear of or read President Reagan's Westminster speech? http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2...tminster-speech

This speech has more to do with promoting democracy than anything Jimmy Carter ever did. While it is focused on the Soviets his points about freedom are universal. Because that's what this is really all about, freedom. No Egyptian is going to willingly give up the dictatorship of Mubarak for the dictatorship of some ayatollah. The Iraninans were beaten down by a thugocracy, the Egyptians won't let themselves be, IMHO.

Reagan's concluding paragraph:

Well, the task I've set forth will long outlive our own generation. But together, we too have come through the worst. Let us now begin a major effort to secure the best -- a crusade for freedom that will engage the faith and fortitude of the next generation. For the sake of peace and justice, let us move toward a world in which all people are at last free to determine their own destiny.

 

[GroveDiesel]

Our government is foolish not to always push for true democracy. True democracy will always be a moderating force. Of course, the trick is to make sure that one tyrant isn't replaced with another (as in Iran). So far though, our State Department's reactions have been quite lacking IMO. This shouldn't be surprising though since this is not the first time that our President (meaning not just Obama but ones before him as well) have failed to encourage democratic uprisings around the world. I do fear though that our current President believes entirely too much in the idea that all cultures, governments and countries are equally valid and has not done enough to publicly support democracy internationally. We can agree or disagree on whether or not the US should use military force to facilitate change, but we should certainly be a steadfast voice for democracy and freedom.

What is "true democracy?"We have spent billions spreading democracy and it has rarely ever worked. We end up helping countries become so internally corrupt and unstable, that we start a vicious cycle like has happened in places all over Central and South America and Africa. We should encourage individual freedoms and democratic measures, but not our kind of democracy. It just doesn't work in some of these places. Limited Democracy with personal freedoms, I'm behind that idea anywhere.

I absolutely agree with the simple fact that getting from Point A to Point B is extremely difficult and often must go through Point C, D, E, F, and G first to get there. But ultimately, I think the goal should be to encourage liberal democracy as the end game as much as possible. How to get there is certainly a difficult proposition and I can honestly say that I really don't know what Points C, D, E, F and G should necessarily be. But I think that propping up dictators that suppress their people and suck their country dry just because they are the "known" versus the "unknown" is not only bad policy, it's bad humanity and poor stewardship of the unique place we hold in the world.Of course, it's easy to forget that our nation's democratic success's are built on hundreds of years of reforms in Europe and specifically England. Most of the rest of the world's background is one of repression and a rejection of individual rights. Trying to change those mindsets and cultures is not a simple task. Democracy can't just be created out of thin air. For true liberal democracy to take root, the climate must exist for it to flourish. As a nation, we shouldn't view our role so much as to create democracy as much as it is to create a climate for it to flourish. An arduous task to be sure.

 

[Jethro Q. Walrustitty]

It's not all about us, it's about these people. Personally, I think it's great if the people are fed up with the governement and want change and are willing to do whatever it takes. At least they have some passion which is more than you can say about a lot of Americans who don't even vote they are so asleep at the wheel and then wonder why things in this country slowly keep getting worse and worse.

Strongly disagree with you here. We need to view every situation in the Middle East in terms of what is in the United States best interest- meaning, what will in the longterm result in the continued flow of petroleum at cheap prices. This must be our primary concern.

So you don't believe in the main tenant of our own Declaration of Independence?That all men are created EQUAL. That all men have the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That whenever a government becomes destructive towards it own people...those men have the right to abolish that government and establish a new one. That when government is reduced to despotism, it is the right and DUTY of the citizens to overthrow it.

Cheap gas supersedes all of that?

I may not necessarily agree with their religion or cultural beliefs but good God...when we throw basic rights away on others aren't we throwing it away on ourselves?

I don't have any answers here for sure...but I do think our world-view needs to be larger than Kansas.

I'm going to go ahead and assume The Prince is laying on tim's bedside table at the moment.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Our government is foolish not to always push for true democracy. True democracy will always be a moderating force. Of course, the trick is to make sure that one tyrant isn't replaced with another (as in Iran). So far though, our State Department's reactions have been quite lacking IMO. This shouldn't be surprising though since this is not the first time that our President (meaning not just Obama but ones before him as well) have failed to encourage democratic uprisings around the world. I do fear though that our current President believes entirely too much in the idea that all cultures, governments and countries are equally valid and has not done enough to publicly support democracy internationally. We can agree or disagree on whether or not the US should use military force to facilitate change, but we should certainly be a steadfast voice for democracy and freedom.

What is "true democracy?"We have spent billions spreading democracy and it has rarely ever worked. We end up helping countries become so internally corrupt and unstable, that we start a vicious cycle like has happened in places all over Central and South America and Africa. We should encourage individual freedoms and democratic measures, but not our kind of democracy. It just doesn't work in some of these places. Limited Democracy with personal freedoms, I'm behind that idea anywhere.

I absolutely agree with the simple fact that getting from Point A to Point B is extremely difficult and often must go through Point C, D, E, F, and G first to get there. But ultimately, I think the goal should be to encourage liberal democracy as the end game as much as possible. How to get there is certainly a difficult proposition and I can honestly say that I really don't know what Points C, D, E, F and G should necessarily be. But I think that propping up dictators that suppress their people and suck their country dry just because they are the "known" versus the "unknown" is not only bad policy, it's bad humanity and poor stewardship of the unique place we hold in the world.Of course, it's easy to forget that our nation's democratic success's are built on hundreds of years of reforms in Europe and specifically England. Most of the rest of the world's background is one of repression and a rejection of individual rights. Trying to change those mindsets and cultures is not a simple task. Democracy can't just be created out of thin air. For true liberal democracy to take root, the climate must exist for it to flourish. As a nation, we shouldn't view our role so much as to create democracy as much as it is to create a climate for it to flourish. An arduous task to be sure.

I can dig it.

 

[timschochet]

Our government is foolish not to always push for true democracy. True democracy will always be a moderating force.

And again, I strongly disagree with you (and with George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter, the two contemporary presidents most prominent for this idea.). Pushing democracy on countries with high illiteracy or with extremist religious views lead inevitably to dictatorships worse than the ones that were there before. Democracy is not in itself moral. Sometimes a benevolent dictatorship can be better, for our interests, than a democracy.

Tim, you ever hear of or read President Reagan's Westminster speech? http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2...tminster-speech

This speech has more to do with promoting democracy than anything Jimmy Carter ever did. While it is focused on the Soviets his points about freedom are universal. Because that's what this is really all about, freedom. No Egyptian is going to willingly give up the dictatorship of Mubarak for the dictatorship of some ayatollah. The Iraninans were beaten down by a thugocracy, the Egyptians won't let themselves be, IMHO.

Reagan's concluding paragraph:

Well, the task I've set forth will long outlive our own generation. But together, we too have come through the worst. Let us now begin a major effort to secure the best -- a crusade for freedom that will engage the faith and fortitude of the next generation. For the sake of peace and justice, let us move toward a world in which all people are at last free to determine their own destiny.

I absolutely agree with you (and Reagan) about freedom. I draw a very clear distinction between freedom and democracy. So did Reagan; so did Churchill. So did George H. W. Bush. So did John F. Kennedy.Unfortunately, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Jimmy Carter, and George W. Bush did NOT draw this distinction, and many of the problems we face in the world today are a result of that failure. Democracy is not akin to freedom. True democracy does not result in true freedom.

 

[DCThunder]

Our government is foolish not to always push for true democracy. True democracy will always be a moderating force.

And again, I strongly disagree with you (and with George W. Bush and Jimmy Carter, the two contemporary presidents most prominent for this idea.). Pushing democracy on countries with high illiteracy or with extremist religious views lead inevitably to dictatorships worse than the ones that were there before. Democracy is not in itself moral. Sometimes a benevolent dictatorship can be better, for our interests, than a democracy.

Tim, you ever hear of or read President Reagan's Westminster speech? http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2...tminster-speech

This speech has more to do with promoting democracy than anything Jimmy Carter ever did. While it is focused on the Soviets his points about freedom are universal. Because that's what this is really all about, freedom. No Egyptian is going to willingly give up the dictatorship of Mubarak for the dictatorship of some ayatollah. The Iraninans were beaten down by a thugocracy, the Egyptians won't let themselves be, IMHO.

Reagan's concluding paragraph:

Well, the task I've set forth will long outlive our own generation. But together, we too have come through the worst. Let us now begin a major effort to secure the best -- a crusade for freedom that will engage the faith and fortitude of the next generation. For the sake of peace and justice, let us move toward a world in which all people are at last free to determine their own destiny.

I absolutely agree with you (and Reagan) about freedom. I draw a very clear distinction between freedom and democracy. So did Reagan; so did Churchill. So did George H. W. Bush. So did John F. Kennedy.Unfortunately, Woodrow Wilson, FDR, Jimmy Carter, and George W. Bush did NOT draw this distinction, and many of the problems we face in the world today are a result of that failure. Democracy is not akin to freedom. True democracy does not result in true freedom.

But there is no such thing as "freedom" in a dictatorship or theocracy or absolute monarchy.

 

[timschochet]

It's not all about us, it's about these people. Personally, I think it's great if the people are fed up with the governement and want change and are willing to do whatever it takes. At least they have some passion which is more than you can say about a lot of Americans who don't even vote they are so asleep at the wheel and then wonder why things in this country slowly keep getting worse and worse.

Strongly disagree with you here. We need to view every situation in the Middle East in terms of what is in the United States best interest- meaning, what will in the longterm result in the continued flow of petroleum at cheap prices. This must be our primary concern.

So you don't believe in the main tenant of our own Declaration of Independence?That all men are created EQUAL. That all men have the right to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. That whenever a government becomes destructive towards it own people...those men have the right to abolish that government and establish a new one. That when government is reduced to despotism, it is the right and DUTY of the citizens to overthrow it.

Cheap gas supersedes all of that?

I may not necessarily agree with their religion or cultural beliefs but good God...when we throw basic rights away on others aren't we throwing it away on ourselves?

I don't have any answers here for sure...but I do think our world-view needs to be larger than Kansas.

Do you want the feel good answer or do you want the truth?The truth is that, until we find an alternative to oil (and we need to get on this) the stability of our economic system is largely dependent on keeping the price low. For us to maintain our own liberties and way of life, we cannot afford to look at what happens in the Middle East in terms other than geopolitical. Of course I want every person on Earth to have the freedom that I enjoy. But Islamist regimes do more to threaten that freedom than dictators benevolent to the United States.

 

[timschochet]

But there is no such thing as "freedom" in a dictatorship or theocracy or absolute monarchy.

What I'm saying is that when you give "democracy" to an uneducated, illiterate country, the typical result is a quick dictatorship. Even in cases where the public is educated and literate, the result can be a dictatorship, especially when the populace yearns for authoritarianism (1920s Germany and modern day Russia are two good examples.) Nearly a century of historical example after example warns me that if Mubarek falls, it is much more likely that the ultimate result will be a new, much worse dictatorship hostile to the United States rather than a new free democracy friendly to our interests with more liberty for the people. That is why I am hesitant to encourage this rebellion. Again, hope I'm wrong.

 

[culdeus]

MSM is now covering this. Must be big time.

 

[Jackstraw]

But there is no such thing as "freedom" in a dictatorship or theocracy or absolute monarchy.

What I'm saying is that when you give "democracy" to an uneducated, illiterate country, the typical result is a quick dictatorship. Even in cases where the public is educated and literate, the result can be a dictatorship, especially when the populace yearns for authoritarianism (1920s Germany and modern day Russia are two good examples.) Nearly a century of historical example after example warns me that if Mubarek falls, it is much more likely that the ultimate result will be a new, much worse dictatorship hostile to the United States rather than a new free democracy friendly to our interests with more liberty for the people. That is why I am hesitant to encourage this rebellion. Again, hope I'm wrong.

I remembered when people complained about America propping up strongmen abroad in the 70's and 80's. It may be morally objectionable but can certainly serve our strategic interests. As long as we got "our boy" in there so to speak.

 

[DCThunder]

But there is no such thing as "freedom" in a dictatorship or theocracy or absolute monarchy.

What I'm saying is that when you give "democracy" to an uneducated, illiterate country, the typical result is a quick dictatorship. Even in cases where the public is educated and literate, the result can be a dictatorship, especially when the populace yearns for authoritarianism (1920s Germany and modern day Russia are two good examples.) Nearly a century of historical example after example warns me that if Mubarek falls, it is much more likely that the ultimate result will be a new, much worse dictatorship hostile to the United States rather than a new free democracy friendly to our interests with more liberty for the people. That is why I am hesitant to encourage this rebellion. Again, hope I'm wrong.

So what countries can't be given democracy or freedom because they are too uneducated and illiterate? You sound like King George III in 1776 or PW Botha or FW de Klerk in 1989.

 

[Jackstraw]

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_...the-day-12.html

Chart showing internet trafic out of Egypt. The revolution will not be facebooked.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_...the-day-12.html

Chart showing internet trafic out of Egypt. The revolution will not be facebooked.

Wow, the hammer drops.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

Aljazeera Live Egypt Feed.

 

[FBG26]

Aljazeera Live Egypt Feed.

Mubarak is speaking now.He apparently ordered the government to step down and declared that there will be a new better one tomorrow.

 

[timschochet]

But there is no such thing as "freedom" in a dictatorship or theocracy or absolute monarchy.

What I'm saying is that when you give "democracy" to an uneducated, illiterate country, the typical result is a quick dictatorship. Even in cases where the public is educated and literate, the result can be a dictatorship, especially when the populace yearns for authoritarianism (1920s Germany and modern day Russia are two good examples.) Nearly a century of historical example after example warns me that if Mubarek falls, it is much more likely that the ultimate result will be a new, much worse dictatorship hostile to the United States rather than a new free democracy friendly to our interests with more liberty for the people. That is why I am hesitant to encourage this rebellion. Again, hope I'm wrong.

So what countries can't be given democracy or freedom because they are too uneducated and illiterate? You sound like King George III in 1776 or PW Botha or FW de Klerk in 1989.

What I wrote is something that, were I a political leader in this country, I would never dare say. If Obama said it, he'd be pilloried and rightly so. But I'm nobody and it's on the internet so I feel safe in saying it. I do not know if Egypt is ready for democracy. I doubt it. I don't think Iraq was ready for the democracy we imposed on them.

 

[timschochet]

For the moment, Mubarik appears to have the support of the military. So long as he does, he will stay in power. I think.

 

[Jackstraw]

Things that make you go hmmmm..........

Cairo calmer: there is no gov't, no authority, no police. Soldiers and Republican Guards at Foreign Ministry, State TV. No protest because nobody to protest against

Saw ruling party headquarters in flames, police huddling in barracks as protesters tried to pursue them. Hearing parliament burning.

Saw boys with massive seal of the republic looted from State TV. If this isn't the end, it certainly looks and smells like it.

One man said he graduated from college 4 years ago, hasn't worked a day since. Has been in streets since Tuesday protesting.

Teenager showed me teargas canister "Made in USA."Saw the same thing in Tunisia. Time to reconsider U.S. exports?

 

[griff321]

Our government is foolish not to always push for true democracy. True democracy will always be a moderating force. Of course, the trick is to make sure that one tyrant isn't replaced with another (as in Iran). So far though, our State Department's reactions have been quite lacking IMO. This shouldn't be surprising though since this is not the first time that our President (meaning not just Obama but ones before him as well) have failed to encourage democratic uprisings around the world. I do fear though that our current President believes entirely too much in the idea that all cultures, governments and countries are equally valid and has not done enough to publicly support democracy internationally. We can agree or disagree on whether or not the US should use military force to facilitate change, but we should certainly be a steadfast voice for democracy and freedom.

What is "true democracy?"We have spent billions spreading democracy and it has rarely ever worked. We end up helping countries become so internally corrupt and unstable, that we start a vicious cycle like has happened in places all over Central and South America and Africa. We should encourage individual freedoms and democratic measures, but not our kind of democracy. It just doesn't work in some of these places. Limited Democracy with personal freedoms, I'm behind that idea anywhere.

I absolutely agree with the simple fact that getting from Point A to Point B is extremely difficult and often must go through Point C, D, E, F, and G first to get there. But ultimately, I think the goal should be to encourage liberal democracy as the end game as much as possible. How to get there is certainly a difficult proposition and I can honestly say that I really don't know what Points C, D, E, F and G should necessarily be. But I think that propping up dictators that suppress their people and suck their country dry just because they are the "known" versus the "unknown" is not only bad policy, it's bad humanity and poor stewardship of the unique place we hold in the world.Of course, it's easy to forget that our nation's democratic success's are built on hundreds of years of reforms in Europe and specifically England. Most of the rest of the world's background is one of repression and a rejection of individual rights. Trying to change those mindsets and cultures is not a simple task. Democracy can't just be created out of thin air. For true liberal democracy to take root, the climate must exist for it to flourish. As a nation, we shouldn't view our role so much as to create democracy as much as it is to create a climate for it to flourish. An arduous task to be sure.

Our democratic success is quite the unique perfect storm. We're talking about revolution my friend. You can't mold or control it because they are all unique and evolve differently. Their is no road map. Neighbor killing neighbor, families divided, political/ethnic genocide, fear, and terror. In all cases they hold one constant and that is instability. Who knows when or what influence will be strong enough to rise above the din. We were fortunate to have the early political climate we did and the strong individuals willing to uphold and preserve an ideal when they had ample opportunity to do otherwise. You can see the influence of Voltaire and other European Enlightenment Thinkers on our revolution, but yet look at France's revolution. Would you say the ends justified the means? France destabilized by the revolutions/counter-revolutions that allowed an Emperor to rise through the guise of security. A continent at war with millions dead by it's conclusion and still only the seeds of democracy had been planted. Look at German Revolution and a weak Weimar Republic fostered an environment for Adolf Hitler to rise. It's all part of the process.To say that the United States should actively foster this kind of environment seems narrow to me, because it's just not a process you can or should force. I feel that the United States should neither oppose or support revolution. We should simply monitor events and then take a diplomatic stance based on the events once the chaos subsides. We need to learn to be observers of history in these instances.

 

[cr8f]

Fox's map of the Middle East

 

[tommyboy]

breaking news: Rahm Emmanuel heads to Egypt to assume new role as Mayor.

 

[griff321]

Fox's map of the Middle East

 

[cr8f]

@sivavaid: To Mubarak, denial IS just a river in #Egypt.

 

[wikkidpissah]

If Egypt falls, no one reading this board will see peace again in our lifetime and more of our sons & daughters will die in the stinking desert in this decade (most of them drafted, too) than in the last.

 

[Flying Spaghetti Monster]

If Egypt falls, no one reading this board will see peace again in our lifetime and more of our sons & daughters will die in the stinking desert in this decade (most of them drafted, too) than in the last.

Expand this a little bit.

 

[wikkidpissah]

If Egypt falls, no one reading this board will see peace again in our lifetime and more of our sons & daughters will die in the stinking desert in this decade (most of them drafted, too) than in the last.

Expand this a little bit.

If Egypt falls, no one reading this board will see peace again in our lifetime and more of our sons & daughters will die in the stinking desert in this decade (most of them drafted, too) than in the last.

 

[griff321]

If Egypt falls, no one reading this board will see peace again in our lifetime and more of our sons & daughters will die in the stinking desert in this decade (most of them drafted, too) than in the last.

Expand this a little bit.

If Egypt falls, no one reading this board will see peace again in our lifetime and more of our sons & daughters will die in the stinking desert in this decade (most of them drafted, too) than in the last.

oh....well now that you posted it in a larger size I completely see what straw man domino effect scenario you have in mind.

 

[the moops]

Fox's map of the Middle East

Oops

 

[Trey]

I was under the impression that this was a much more organic revolution/uprising than most on this board are giving it credit for.

My take is that this is being driven by a young workforce which is facing severe unemployment along with human rights' violations and rigged elections.

The Muslim Brotherhood is merely attempting to co-opt the uprising for its own purposes. (And will be unsuccessful in this attempt)

 

[Jayrok]

Fox's map of the Middle East

Iraq is no more! [bush]mission accomplished[/bush]

 

[DCThunder]

What I wrote is something that, were I a political leader in this country, I would never dare say. If Obama said it, he'd be pilloried and rightly so. But I'm nobody and it's on the internet so I feel safe in saying it.

I do not know if Egypt is ready for democracy. I doubt it. I don't think Iraq was ready for the democracy we imposed on them.

This statement kind of takes your breath away...You believe in freedom, but only for those you think worthy/ready for it. There isn't an emoticon strong enough for how disgusting your statement is.

 

[grateful zed]

If Egypt falls, no one reading this board will see peace again in our lifetime and more of our sons & daughters will die in the stinking desert in this decade (most of them drafted, too) than in the last.

Expand this a little bit.

If Egypt falls, no one reading this board will see peace again in our lifetime and more of our sons & daughters will die in the stinking desert in this decade (most of them drafted, too) than in the last.

the repubtards are doing their best to keep us at war for my entire lifetime.link

 

[timschochet]

What I wrote is something that, were I a political leader in this country, I would never dare say. If Obama said it, he'd be pilloried and rightly so. But I'm nobody and it's on the internet so I feel safe in saying it.

I do not know if Egypt is ready for democracy. I doubt it. I don't think Iraq was ready for the democracy we imposed on them.

This statement kind of takes your breath away...You believe in freedom, but only for those you think worthy/ready for it. There isn't an emoticon strong enough for how disgusting your statement is.

I believe in freedom for everyone, period. But why do you keep confusing freedom and democracy? We don't have true democracy here. If we did, our freedom would be lost very quickly.

 

[timschochet]

The good news: The movement seems to be secular in nature, and the Muslim Brotherhood is only playing a small role, and apparently will not be a player. So far. Gives me hope that Dr. Detroit was right.

The good news: so far the people seem to want a legal transfer of power, and Mubarak's resignation, rather than a violent overthrow.

The bad news: Mubarak's speech and actions indicate that we may see a much more violent confrontation before this over.

The bad news: According to CNN, it's believed all over Egypt, and on the streets, that tear gas canisters used against the crowd were given to the government by the United States. That coupled with Obama's statement (in which, to the disappointment of Egyptians, he did not demand Mubarak's resignation) may lead to growing anti-American sentiment.

 

[Cassius]

Thanks Tim. Now, Sports!

 

[wazoo11]

The good news: The movement seems to be secular in nature, and the Muslim Brotherhood is only playing a small role, and apparently will not be a player. So far. Gives me hope that Dr. Detroit was right.

The good news: so far the people seem to want a legal transfer of power, and Mubarak's resignation, rather than a violent overthrow.

The bad news: Mubarak's speech and actions indicate that we may see a much more violent confrontation before this over.

The bad news: According to CNN, it's believed all over Egypt, and on the streets, that tear gas canisters used against the crowd were given to the government by the United States. That coupled with Obama's statement (in which, to the disappointment of Egyptians, he did not demand Mubarak's resignation) may lead to growing anti-American sentiment.

Al Jazeera broke that hours ago,guy.

 

[timschochet]

The good news: The movement seems to be secular in nature, and the Muslim Brotherhood is only playing a small role, and apparently will not be a player. So far. Gives me hope that Dr. Detroit was right.

The good news: so far the people seem to want a legal transfer of power, and Mubarak's resignation, rather than a violent overthrow.

The bad news: Mubarak's speech and actions indicate that we may see a much more violent confrontation before this over.

The bad news: According to CNN, it's believed all over Egypt, and on the streets, that tear gas canisters used against the crowd were given to the government by the United States. That coupled with Obama's statement (in which, to the disappointment of Egyptians, he did not demand Mubarak's resignation) may lead to growing anti-American sentiment.

Al Jazeera broke that hours ago,guy.

Well, I just heard it.

 

[Epic Problem]

Thanks Tim. Now, Sports!

 

[facook]

If Egypt falls, no one reading this board will see peace again in our lifetime and more of our sons & daughters will die in the stinking desert in this decade (most of them drafted, too) than in the last.

Expand this a little bit.

If Egypt falls, no one reading this board will see peace again in our lifetime and more of our sons & daughters will die in the stinking desert in this decade (most of them drafted, too) than in the last.

the repubtards are doing their best to keep us at war for my entire lifetime.link

Bush, Clinton, Bush, Obama...Al Qaeda, Taliban, Bin Laden.

 

[Clarence the barber]

John Kerry being interviewed rt now (at least I think it's live)

http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/

 

[QuizGuy66]

Leaving partisan stuff aside, I'm kinda surprised this thread is only 3 pages. This story is huge and will have big implications for us down the line however it plays out.

-QG

 

[the moops]

Leaving partisan stuff aside, I'm kinda surprised this thread is only 3 pages. This story is huge and will have big implications for us down the line however it plays out.-QG

Says the guy with 1 post in the thread. Just kidding.

 

[DiStefano]

The good news: The movement seems to be secular in nature, and the Muslim Brotherhood is only playing a small role, and apparently will not be a player. So far. Gives me hope that Dr. Detroit was right.The good news: so far the people seem to want a legal transfer of power, and Mubarak's resignation, rather than a violent overthrow. The bad news: Mubarak's speech and actions indicate that we may see a much more violent confrontation before this over.The bad news: According to CNN, it's believed all over Egypt, and on the streets, that tear gas canisters used against the crowd were given to the government by the United States. That coupled with Obama's statement (in which, to the disappointment of Egyptians, he did not demand Mubarak's resignation) may lead to growing anti-American sentiment.

Obama will solve it by sending them a red Reset button. Then we'll be buddy buddy.

 

[Doctor Detroit]

Leaving partisan stuff aside, I'm kinda surprised this thread is only 3 pages.

Well there shouldn't be anything partisan in here, this has nothing to do with us. Nothing. It might impact us to some degree as far as regional politics, our relationships in the region and the like but that stuff is down the road. What is happening in Egypt is particular to that country and the Muslim world and the influences are internal. I'm glad this thread is only three pages, we've had a few Boneyarddog posts (autoterrible) and a few other partisan shots, but mostly it has been centered on the issue at hand.

 

[Boom Switch]

Egypt has shut down the internet.

Everyone in Egypt had a great season?