1. The Egyptian people will elect the Muslim Brotherhood.
2. The Muslim Brotherhood will seek to undermine future democratic elections.
3. The Muslim Brotherhood will succeed in undermining democratic elections without the military responding.
4. The Egyptian people won't take to the streets and bring down the government, just as they are doing with Mubarak.
If any of these turn out to be incorrect, then this fear is unwarranted. The Egyptian people have the right to experiment with democracy just like anyone else, and that includes making mistakes. Furthermore, any Egyptian government (including a Muslim Brotherhood government), unlike revolutionary Iran, will want to maintain a decent relationship with the United States. And it will be hard to do that if they're bludgeoning democratic protesters.
It is not as easy to replace top military officers with sycophants as you seem to believe. If it was so easy, there would be no instability in any regime anywhere in the world. It's interesting that you cite Iran as an example of this, since even there the dictatorship's grasp on power is tenuous at best. And Turkey, while not exactly a Western democracy, is hardly a dictatorship.Originally Posted by Iron Yank
Last edited by Kandahar; 01-30-11 at 11:57 AM.
Are you coming to bed?
I can't. This is important.
Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD
Last edited by MSgt; 01-30-11 at 11:58 AM.
Please explain how responding to the worst attack on American soil in the history of the country, killing thousands, equates to invasive meddling and making Afghanistan a victim?Originally Posted by kaya'08 I do think Afghanistan is a victim of invasive meddling by many nations, not just the US.