Guest zipperzone Posted February 3, 2011 Share Posted February 3, 2011 I'm in shock that no one either here or in the politics forum has mentioned a word about the riveting happenings of the past week in Egypt. I'd love to hear your comments. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted February 3, 2011 Members Share Posted February 3, 2011 Zip- I have commented on the "other" MB about this until I am weary and wary of "whatever". BO is NOT doing a good job of representing the US in this matter and I have to think a theocracy is the likely result of the current "struggle". I would love to be proved wrong but I think it will take many months for any of us to know what is really going on. So far, nothing good. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members lookin Posted February 4, 2011 Members Share Posted February 4, 2011 BO is NOT doing a good job of representing the US in this matter . . . I'd be interested in hearing what you think he ought to do. So far, I can't think of any particular suggestions I'd make. He's been pretty clear that he wants no harm to come to the Egyptian people and that Mubarak's days are numbered. That feels right to me. And I sure don't think I'd want the U. S. to get all heavy-handed like we did with Iraq. What would be your advice to him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest zipperzone Posted February 4, 2011 Share Posted February 4, 2011 I'd be interested in hearing what you think he ought to do. So far, I can't think of any particular suggestions I'd make. He's been pretty clear that he wants no harm to come to the Egyptian people and that Mubarak's days are numbered. That feels right to me. And I sure don't think I'd want the U. S. to get all heavy-handed like we did with Iraq. What would be your advice to him? He's between a rock and a hard place. Thank God Bush is long gone. The only comforting knowledge is that the US has can spare neither the troops or the money to pull off another Iraq. One piece of advise would be to keep Biden out of it and let Clinton loose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lucky Posted February 4, 2011 Members Share Posted February 4, 2011 Zip- I have commented on the "other" MB about this until I am weary and wary of "whatever". BO is NOT doing a good job of representing the US in this matter and I have to think a theocracy is the likely result of the current "struggle". I would love to be proved wrong but I think it will take many months for any of us to know what is really going on. So far, nothing good. Best regards, RA1 Geez, even Rudy Giuliani was on the news commending Obama for the job he is doing. What would it take to please our resident curmudgeon? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted February 4, 2011 Members Share Posted February 4, 2011 What is the difference between "interferring" in another country's politics in "favor" of a dictator and in favor of a possible theocracy or something completely unknown but very likely that will not be favorable to the US, Israel and the world? Or, to put it another way, if you really mean to allow "them" to choose and do whatever they want, let them do so. There are those who suggest that BO provided the "spark" for the current protests. There are some who think this will be another "Carter" by BO as in Iran with "another" country lost to being friendly to the US. Does anyone actually think the Iran result is a good one? I mean that for them as well as for us. Control is control and a dictatorship is a dictatorship whether grounded in one person's ego or a theocracy and its' own brand of ego. I will certainly listen to other opinions. I hope you will do the same. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members MsGuy Posted February 4, 2011 Members Share Posted February 4, 2011 1) Every Egyptian president since King Farouk was bounced by an Army coup in 1952 has been a former career military officer. All but Nasser were generals. 2) The Army has its fingers in a hugh swath of the Egyptian economy. 30% of the formal economy (by some estimates) is affiliated one way or another with the military. 3) The overwhelming bulk of US aid to Egypt since the Isreali peace treaty has been directed to the military. 4) The officer corps is generally secular and nationalist in outlook, not Islamist. Officers on all levels are well paid, respected in society and have no particular prospects of a decent life/career outside the military. Senior generals can live a quite lavish lifestyle. 5) In a country of around 80 million, the military numbers about 450,000 fairly well trained active duty personnel plus about the same number of reservists. 6) The Army has a 60 year history of squashing every attempt by the Muslim Brotherhood to take power in Egypt. And unlike Iran under the Shah, the Army has a firm identity and organization separate from the government. ---- I'm thoroughly confused by what's going on over there but I suspect all this Western hoorah about an Islamist takeover is way overblown. Mubarak may go, now or later, big whoop. The Army remains intact. I doubt the military will sit in their barracks and hand over their country to the Brotherhood. If nothing else, the officer corps has a good deal of Islamist blood on its hands and can recall what happened to the officer corps in Iran when the Mullahs took charge. This is an Egyptian problem. I suspect the best thing the US can do, even from a view of its own narrow self-interest, is to let them work out things for themselves. In the current circumstances, for the US to publicly press for a particular result would probably amount to a kiss of death for whatever we are advocating. Just my 2 cents worth. That and 5 bucks will get you one of those high dollar mugs of coffee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lucky Posted February 5, 2011 Members Share Posted February 5, 2011 What is the difference between "interferring" in another country's politics in "favor" of a dictator and in favor of a possible theocracy or something completely unknown but very likely that will not be favorable to the US, Israel and the world? Or, to put it another way, if you really mean to allow "them" to choose and do whatever they want, let them do so. There are those who suggest that BO provided the "spark" for the current protests. There are some who think this will be another "Carter" by BO as in Iran with "another" country lost to being friendly to the US. Does anyone actually think the Iran result is a good one? I mean that for them as well as for us. Control is control and a dictatorship is a dictatorship whether grounded in one person's ego or a theocracy and its' own brand of ego. I will certainly listen to other opinions. I hope you will do the same. Best regards, RA1 I listened to Giuliani, and you have no idea how hard that was for me. Why CNN would ask a former mayor for his opinion on Egypt escapes me. But he did back Obama, so I credit him for that. He could have done the usual hatchet job just to make hay. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted February 5, 2011 Members Share Posted February 5, 2011 MS Guy- I hope you are mainly correct. The army does seem to be trying to remain somewhat "neutral". Very likely it will take more than a few days or weeks to know what has really happened. Lucky- Isn't Giuliani pretty much a one trick pony? Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest CharliePS Posted February 5, 2011 Share Posted February 5, 2011 The US has a long history of supporting dictators, if they seem to support "stability" plus US interests, and then paying dearly for it when the tyrants are finally overthrown. George W. tried to go the other way and overthrow the former friendly dictator in Iraq, expecting the people to be overjoyed--that didn't work too well either. If BO tries to protect Mubarrak, the rest of the world (not just Muslims) will assume that he is just a tool of the Israelis; if he encourages the protesters to overthrow Mubarrak, other governments (especially the Saudis) will wonder whether they can trust the US as an ally. The best that BO can do is make innocuous speeches but not be seen to intervene on either side. Egypt is a rather unusual case, because the military is not only the most important political force in the country, it is also very heavily involved in the non-military economy (e.g., it actually runs many of those resort hotels), so it is unlikely to relinquish control to fanatical Islamists, which may not be a very important faction in the opposition anyhow. Unfortunately, it is impossible to know what was the right way to handle a dilemma of this sort without a few years hindsight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members RA1 Posted February 5, 2011 Members Share Posted February 5, 2011 Isn't the US the perpetual "whipping boy"? No matter who we support, when they go out we are blamed and often regardless of whether they go out or not. If we support change or support the current administration, we are still "wrong" in the eyes of so many. I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. I completely agree we shall not know the "real" result for some time to come. Best regards, RA1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
