Riots erupt in Egypt as protesters demand end to Mubarak regime

The Arab world is very poor, and its no wonder that we see so much power hungry fools at the helm of it all.

kaya'08 said:

America supports pro-American terrorism so thats okay (like the Taliban during the soviet invasion of Afghanistan). :roll:

MY concern of the Islamic brotherhood is ideological and not because they supposedly do what America has been doing for years (yeah thats right, funding terrorism).
Unless they are moderate and working within a secular democratic and independent constitutional and judiciary framework like in Turkey, they will - without a doubt - just be oppressive liberators of a former oppressor.

Basically Egypt needs more than just a new head of state. They need the entire state structure re-written from top to bottom. I genuinely believe we will not see much change in Egypt or Tunisia unless this happens.

And i also believe the Presidential system is very unsuited for Arab countries.

The panacea for Arab democracies right now is the devolution of powers from one person or institution to numerous persons and institutions, and a Parliamentary system can be of assistance in achieving this "state of democracy".

Click to expand...

So close yet so far away. The Muslim brotherhood is considered a terrorist organization by........Al Qaeda. Why? Because the MB wants modernity and not extremism rule. Basically what you wrote is what the MB believe in.

kaya'08 said:

America supports pro-American terrorism so thats okay (like the Taliban during the soviet invasion of Afghanistan). :roll:

MY concern of the Islamic brotherhood is ideological and not because they supposedly do what America has been doing for years (yeah thats right, funding terrorism).
Unless they are moderate and working within a secular democratic and independent constitutional and judiciary framework like in Turkey, they will - without a doubt - just be oppressive liberators of a former oppressor.

Basically Egypt needs more than just a new head of state. They need the entire state structure re-written from top to bottom. I genuinely believe we will not see much change in Egypt or Tunisia unless this happens.

And i also believe the Presidential system is very unsuited for Arab countries.

The panacea for Arab democracies right now is the devolution of powers from one person or institution to numerous persons and institutions, and a Parliamentary system can be of assistance in achieving this "state of democracy".

Click to expand...

This is the biggest problem. People hate America, mostly, because they're uninformed.

The United States never supported the Taliban during the Afghan-Soviet War. UBL never worked for the CIA.

If you want to complain about what the United States did wrong in Afghanistan, you would be more accurate to say that we didn't maintain our support for the Northern Alliance. Had we done that, the NA could have wiped out the Taliban.

GarzaUK said:

You mean there was no revolts before the invasion of Iraq? You sure about that?

Do you actually have proof that these revolts are inspired by Iraq?

Click to expand...

Well, let's see. You would have the world believe that these "nations" have tunnel vision and have no idea what goes on beyond their borders. That 1400 years of religious unnification amongst the tribes hasn't created a sense of togetherness in their sucesses and failures. That somehow you can allow religious zealots and their extremists their sermons and excuses to murder on behalf of the "Muslim people" everywhere, but deny them their sense of unification when it comes to bettering themselves. That somehow, American protection of the House of Saud angers people throughoiut the region, but America facilitating a blossoming democracy in the heartland cannotpossibly inspire regional cnahge amongst these same people.

You see, I have common sense. I believe you should know this about me by now. Before the entire region watched Iraqis vote and move beyond their tribal obsessions, there was no wide sweeping revolts throughout the region. No governments making political and social appeasements with their people. The Saudi government never allowed low level elections or a greater degree of female freedom. No sense of unified rage towards their governments other than terrorism. Before, people would simply express some resentment and resort to simply blaming the foriegn devil. Since globalization has allowed these people to watch and observe their neighbors without the absolute travesty og government media control, we have seen Iranians revolt largely on election day, Tunisians largely revolt, and now Egyptians threaten to overthrow their pharaoh. I wonder who's next. Of course, you will still have people believe that it would be yet another isolated incident that has nothing to do with regional change what-so-ever. Without understanding these cultures, you will never see the truth. Aren't you still trying to compare Al-Queda to the IRA?

Like it or not (which you don't because it smears your protest campaign) none of this would be going on had the most significant change in the region, since Turkey abolished the Sultan (caliphate) and then the "Independence Era," not taken place. Had the entire region not been given the opportunity too observe Iraqis (Baghdad being the heart of Islam for a thousand years at one point) braving the voting booths and working so hard to persevere beyond traditional prescription, this entire region would be business as usual.

My "proof" is my eyes.

GarzaUK said:

Sorry old boy.

Click to expand...

You should be. Your protests have always been shallow and this region will change despite your denials. Perhaps a less dedication towards sensational headlines and more cultural study would help you beyond the sophomorics of this issue. This has always been my edge. There's no secret to this.

GarzaUK said:

Except Egypt didn't oppose the war in Iraq.

Click to expand...

No..... Egypt did not support the war in Iraq and absolutely opposed it......

President Mubarak spoke out against the 2003 war on Iraq, arguing that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict should be resolved first. He also claimed that the war would cause "100 Bin Ladens." President Mubarak does not support an immediate US pull out from Iraq as he believes it will lead to probable chaos. Hosni Mubarak - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

Like all of the Arab leaders in the region, they were just fine with Iraqi oppression. It maintained "stability" and maintained the status quo in the region. The unspoken truth is that they knew that a free Iraq (full of Sunni, Shia, and Kurds) would be a danger to their own population control eventually. This is why they all refused to aid in Iraq's struggle as America was getting the black eye by people like you. They wanted failure. Since they have not gotten this failure, they have all had to appease their own populations with some social and political change over the years. And as Iraq gains in prosperity and moves forward in success, these crowds around the region will have more and more legitimization in their own protests and disruptions.

Many cultural experts have been forecasting this even before 2003, which is why even Clinton kept looking for a reason to kick in the door. He didn't have a 9/11 to use. Plenty (like you) will never attribute this massive cultural shift in history to the most significant change in recent history. But this is exactly what has happened.

Why...even TV is starting to pull Iran's policies into the "de-stabilizing" of the Arab world. This civilization is far more connected than you have ever given them credit for. You have underestimated them at every turn unless you can attribute negativity.

GarzaUK said:

Please logic man, it is useful.

Click to expand...

Logic? You can't even get a fact right about Mubarak's non-support of the Iraq War. Get the basics right before you attempt logic. You'll find that your logic gets clearer. My logic is sound. Even when the lot of you clung to sensational headlines and narrow minded pundits, it's my logic that has always relied upon cultural study. You can't face it because you would have to admit what you have been protesting since the beginning.

Anybody else noticing the American voice in this? In cities all over the U.S., people are protesting for the Egyptian people. This is the post Cold War America that I have been wanting. It is no longer the Cold War where we were stuck beating the Soviets to the dictators and where we got away with preaching about freedom and democracy, but also looking away.

I have stated this before. We have to start voicing for the people underneath these illegitimate governments and bullies. In this new globalized world where communications have no restrictions, we have to start behaving like we did prior to being sucked out into this wrecked world.

We stand for something. The world knows it and everytime we behave imperfectly for whatever reason, the global leeches grumble over it. They produce their polls and criticize. Anti-Americans everywhere gain more ammo for their decrepit complaining. Presidents Bush and Obama have both made it clear that we have to remove ourselves from the narcotic of oil, thereby removing ourselves fromhaving to support crooked and oppressive regimes. At the government level, we are still stuck in the publics eyes, but we can damn sure make 100 phone calls a day to these governments and insist constantly that they improve their situations. In the meantime, "We the People" have to stand by the globally oppressed.

Re: "Beginning of the end" for Egypt's Mubarak, as son and wife flee

Kandahar said:

OMG :shock:
I was of the opinion that there was no way the Tunisian unrest had the ability to spread to the rest of the Arab world. It now appears I was wrong. But an Egyptian revolution is far less likely to turn into a heartening success story than Tunisia, and far more likely to mirror what happened in Iran in 1979.

Click to expand...

Whoa!! Finally a liberal who is getting it.

apdst said:

This is the biggest problem. People hate America, mostly, because they're uninformed.

The United States never supported the Taliban during the Afghan-Soviet War. UBL never worked for the CIA.

If you want to complain about what the United States did wrong in Afghanistan, you would be more accurate to say that we didn't maintain our support for the Northern Alliance. Had we done that, the NA could have wiped out the Taliban.

Click to expand...

CIA agent alleged to have met Bin Laden in July (of '01)
“CIA worked in tandem with Pak to create Taliban”(march of'01)
ISI Chief's Parleys Continue in Washington(september 10, '01)
ISI pays Mohamed Atta $100,000
The CIA has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to Pakistan's intelligence service since the Sept. 11 attacks

we pretty directly funded the taliban and osama bin laden.

MSgt said:

A
We stand for something.

Click to expand...

Yea, you stand for the weapons and ammo being used to kill the protesters at the moment... Made in the USA is stamped on all of them (literally), and the people know this.

The people do not see any American's protesting in the US for the Egyptian people.. (hell we dont even see it over here), they see what Mubarak allows them to see and what the radical islamists allow them to know.

We can hope that a moderate secular government and nation comes out of this.. but I am not betting the bank on it that is for sure. At least it wont be the cluster**** of Iraq over again.

Gray_Fox_86 said:

So close yet so far away. The Muslim brotherhood is considered a terrorist organization by........Al Qaeda. Why? Because the MB wants modernity and not extremism rule. Basically what you wrote is what the MB believe in.

Click to expand...

The Muslim Bortherhood has a written charter that would have you believe that they believe in democracy, peace, and religious freedom. But there's no coincidence that virtually every single Sunni terrorist over the last 50 years have been members. Ultimately they believe in the idea of the return of the caliphate. There is a contradiction within the Brotherhood and it is here where these extremists find some of their support. For an example....members of the Muslim Brotherhood assassinated Sadat over not just the Israeli peace deal, but over local radical religious crackdowns. Saayid Qutb (the man who legitimized hatred towards the U.S. and identified it as God's enemy in the 1950s) was a member of the Brotherhood and his wrintings for Sharia andJihad are among the most influential for Islamists.

Zyroh said:

CIA agent alleged to have met Bin Laden in July (of '01)
“CIA worked in tandem with Pak to create Taliban”(march of'01)
ISI Chief's Parleys Continue in Washington(september 10, '01)
ISI pays Mohamed Atta $100,000
The CIA has funneled hundreds of millions of dollars to Pakistan's intelligence service since the Sept. 11 attacks

we pretty directly funded the taliban and osama bin laden.

Click to expand...

So all those OPINIONS are credible because that is what you want to believe? Did you read the 9/11 Report that discussed the Taliban, al Qaeda, and the war in Iraq and Afghanistan? Looks to me like someone trying to sell books.

MSgt said:

Anybody else notice how all these Arab leaders who opposed the invasion of Iraq eventually began feeling tremendous pressure from their own people? No? Just that coincidence thing I guess.

Click to expand...

Yes, but I can also note a meaningless correlation where all those Arab and Iranian leaders who condemned 9/11 eventually began feeling pressure from their own people. Since they all condemned 9/11 and all opposed the Iraq War, either hypothesis claiming inspiration of the people is non-falsifiable.

Anyone remotely interested in the region knows unrest and revolt spreads through it in a short timeframe. This is because, as you say, these people don't live in bubbles, and I don't think anyone is ignorant of this fact. Mass communication, the availability of the internet and media leaks are responsible for this quicker domino effect. The Iraq War plays a part indeed, but to identify it as a major cause requires far more evidence then you've provided. Saying you know lots of stuff and read books doesn't cut it in legitimate debate.

PeteEU said:

Yea, you stand for the weapons and ammo being used to kill the protesters at the moment... Made in the USA is stamped on all of them (literally), and the people know this.

The people do not see any American's protesting in the US for the Egyptian people.. (hell we dont even see it over here), they see what Mubarak allows them to see and what the radical islamists allow them to know.

We can hope that a moderate secular government and nation comes out of this.. but I am not betting the bank on it that is for sure. At least it wont be the cluster**** of Iraq over again.

Click to expand...

Oh...no protests across Europe for the Egyptian people? Once again seeking to diminish America's efforts in the absence of European sweat? Your anti-Americanism is delicious as is your malicious denials and ignorances.

Well, business is business sweety. We can hardly be blamed for having allies. Even your country benefits from America's support. What your governments do with our support is up to you because we do not prescribe local agenda or social prescription. If Egypt manages to go through a change, then their new (democratic?) government will also benefit from U.S. support. It is far better to support democratic nations than oppressive ones. Of course, we could have went the European route and merely sought stability in the region by replacing Hussein with another dictator. That way it wouldn't have been a "cluster****." Of course, we are supposed to be better than the European way of things aren't we?

But, France actually supplies the gross amounts of weapons into Africa.

It's tiring.
The "we created Osama" crowd.. and it's twin.. "we supported Saddam".

Of course, as part of the Cold War we did help the Afghan resistance, and in our fight fight against "Death-to-America" Iran we supported Iraq/Saddam in that War.
Some have convenient memory loss, or no/selective knowledge of recent history.

One does what one has to in the world (and unlike other countries, the USA doesn't have the luxury of doing nothing)
and if those groups Later morph into something else or do something despicable, one adjusts one's position.

Blaming the USA for what these two became subsequently is the typical carping of the despicable left (or Euro-liberal).

Re: "Beginning of the end" for Egypt's Mubarak, as son and wife flee

Conservative said:

Whoa!! Finally a liberal who is getting it.

Click to expand...

Oh sure. All these protestors and global leftists will eventually tie the Tunisias, Egypts and Irans together, but they will senselessy and narrowly cling to the notion that only Iraq's efforts (the biggest positive social disturbance in the recent history) sits outside the regional influence. Eventually, they will even start tying the social andpolitical changes in Saudi, Lebanon, and Syria - but never Iraq where adrenaline was shot into the civilization. It's actually pathetic.

mbig said:

It's tiring.
The "we created Osama" crowd.. and it's twin.. "we supported Saddam".

Of course, as part of the Cold War we did help the Afghan resistance, and in our fight fight against "Death-to-America" Iran we supported Iraq/Saddam in that War.
Some have convenient memory loss, or no/selective knowledge of recent history.

One does what one has to in the world (and unlike other countries, the USA doesn't have the luxury of doing nothing)
and if those groups Later morph into something else or do something despicable, one adjusts one's position.

Blaming the USA for what these two became subsequently is the typical carping of the despicable left (or Euro-liberal).

Click to expand...

You could of course do nothing. Whether that's the right thing to do in the end is another question entirely.

Ben K. said:

Yes, but I can also note a meaningless correlation where all those Arab and Iranian leaders who condemned 9/11 eventually began feeling pressure from their own people.

Click to expand...

Such a thing would be a desperate attempt to deny. 9/11 was an obvious offense and the governments merely agreed with most of their people. There was no local harm in it - in fact, it helped to legitimize them. But allowing a free and democratic Iraq in the heartland of oppression paradise is a local threat throughout. Do you actually believe that the House of Saud or the "pharaoh" of Egypt wants a free Arab nation to instigate political change in their own locales? None of this was going to happen without Iraq. Right now, the narrow minded will go ahead and lift Tunisia's example as the spark. Some are even skipping Iraq to go back to Iran's revolution (which isn't even an Arab nation). The mood to deny Iraq it's significance (for fear of having to look in the mirror) is becoming desperate.

Make no mistake. As Iraq improves, these surrounding governments will all receive more and more social pressure to change. Modernists have never been so significant as they have been over the last 5 years. They have never been able to grab as much support. And none of these governments have ever been so willing to bend as much. There is far too much local voice since the much televised "purple finger" for people to deny it's role. It's been a dominoe of events. One can only dream of what Egypt's example will serve elesewhere in this region.

Ben K. said:

You could of course do nothing. Whether that's the right thing to do in the end is another question entirely.

Click to expand...

In the mean time the entire world's oil supply goes to ****. Doing nothing is not an option for America. But there is a way to do the right thing. When people default to "you can't bomb into submission" this is exactly the kind of event that we can use. The people in the West are the power and even Leftist preach this. But when it comes to the Middle East we have a Cold War tradition (that was inherited from Euroipean colonialism) that has us only seeing governments. Times are changing and it began in 2003. Without healthy options to express political grievances, they will resort to violence and use religion to legitimize it.

Egyptians want democracy andsocial justice. Tunisia wants democracy and social justice. Sauds want democracy and social justice. One wonders if any of this steam would exist if Iraq's success did not exist. The region is tied and pretending that it is, with the exception of Iraq, is not only dishonest, but criminal.

Some are blaming us for supporting Mubarrak.. and his downfall.

Has Egypt really been that bad for the last 30 years?
On balance, I'd say we did the right thing.
If perhaps not pushing harder/sooner for purer democracy.
In case you missed last 30 years (and not 3 days), Egypt has basically been referrred to as a moderate, successful Arab country.

While certainly not perfect-- one only needs look at Egypt's Arab neighbors in any direction.
To the West, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria (Civil War), etc
To the immediate South, Sudan (Civil War Genocide).
To the East, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq/Saddam, Saudi Arabia, etc
Egypt could have been an Islamist bloodbath, at war with neighbors etc.

'Our' strongman wasn't that bad as Arab leaders/natural tendencies go.
Egypt has had a decent modern outlook and development, if not perfect by Western Standards.

So now if "we lose Egypt", it might only be to Egypt's original tendencies. Pan-Arabism or Islamism.
In the meantime/30-years, it's had more modern development and maybe/Ergo we'll "lose it" to "Our" net-connected young democrats.

MSgt said:

Such a thing would be a desperate attempt to deny. 9/11 was an obvious offense and the governments merely agreed with most of their people. There was no local harm in it. But allowing a free and democratic Iraq in the heartland of oppression paradise is a local threat throughout. Do you actually believe that the House of Saud or the "pharaoh" of Egypt wants a free Arab nation to instigate political change in their own locales? None of this was going to happen without Iraq. Right now, the narrow minded will go ahead and lift Tunisia's example as the spark. Some are even skipping Iraq to go back to Iran's revolution (which isn't even an Arab nation). The mood to deny Iraq it's significance (for fear of having to look in the mirror) is becoming desperate.

Click to expand...

Are you then saying that the protests in Iran had nothing to do with what happened in Iraq then, since they're not Arab? I don't think events like this are as tribalistic as you assume.

I'm one of those people who think that the American Revolution in of itself would precipitate the collapse of European empires in the twentieth century regardless of a lack of cultural ties on the part of some of the revolters or the long stretch in time separating the two events. Moreover, I find it far more likely that people are inspired by people like themselves revolting rather than a foreign military doing it for them. It certainly leads to a stronger national identity.

Conservative said:

So all those OPINIONS are credible because that is what you want to believe? Did you read the 9/11 Report that discussed the Taliban, al Qaeda, and the war in Iraq and Afghanistan? Looks to me like someone trying to sell books.

Click to expand...

senator max cleland on the 9/11 commission (of which he's a former member), "I as a member of the commission cannot look any American in the eye, especially family members of victims, and say the commission had full access," he said. "This investigation is now compromised . . . This is `The Gong Show'; this isn't protection of national security."

btw, these aren't opinions, these are actual news reports. to ignore them shows a willingness to justify american government actions no matter what they are.

Zyroh said:

senator max cleland on the 9/11 commission (of which he's a former member), "I as a member of the commission cannot look any American in the eye, especially family members of victims, and say the commission had full access," he said. "This investigation is now compromised . . . This is `The Gong Show'; this isn't protection of national security."

btw, these aren't opinions, these are actual news reports. to ignore them shows a willingness to justify american government actions no matter what they are.

Click to expand...

Yes, I elect to buy the entire 9/11 Commission report that is public knowledge, not one or two other opinions. Why we are reliving the Iraq War today is a waste of time. What is going on in Egypt today mirrors in some ways what happened in Iran in the late 70's according to Marc Ginsberg, Carter's Middle East Advisor and Clinton's Ambassador to Morocco. He supported the Carter actions then but now says they were wrong and we should have supported the Shah. The vacuum left by the fall of the Shaw led to the Islamic fundamentalist takeover of the country and will do the same thing in Egypt now according to Ginsberg.

Conservative said:

Yes, I elect to buy the entire 9/11 Commission report that is public knowledge, not one or two other opinions. Why we are reliving the Iraq War today is a waste of time. What is going on in Egypt today mirrors in some ways what happened in Iran in the late 70's according to Marc Ginsberg, Carter's Middle East Advisor and Clinton's Ambassador to Morocco. He supported the Carter actions then but now says they were wrong and we should have supported the Shah. The vacuum left by the fall of the Shaw led to the Islamic fundamentalist takeover of the country and will do the same thing in Egypt now according to Ginsberg.

Click to expand...

incredible amounts of revisionism going on here. we did support the shah! why do you think they captured our embassy took our people hostage? it's not because they're a bunch of evildoers that hate liberty and want to burn the earth. they wanted the US puppet out. if you want them to take out ahmadinejad out the first thing you do is have the US government say that we support him and offer him a bunch of military aid...

any king, shah, dictator that's in charge in north africa or the middle east was put there by the US/UK after WW2. any of them that don't have a religious title. think about what a monarchy is, it's reign by bloodline. you think the king of jordan, or the house of saud were kings during brittish occupation? or during the ottoman rule? no, we put them there so they'll do business with us.

this is the prime difference between the iranian election revolt and this egyption one, the iranians weren't revolting against a puppet of a foreign power.

Zyroh said:

incredible amounts of revisionism going on here. we did support the shah! why do you think they captured our embassy took our people hostage? it's not because they're a bunch of evildoers that hate liberty and want to burn the earth. they wanted the US puppet out. if you want them to take out ahmadinejad out the first thing you do is have the US government say that we support him and offer him a bunch of military aid...

Click to expand...

No, we supported the Shah until he was overthrown and then we didn't help him remain in power leaving a vacuum which helped radicals take over. You really are naive and always thrust your own beliefs and ideology on others. The people of Iran sought a better life and got radical Islam instead.