• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Riots erupt in Egypt as protesters demand end to Mubarak regime

My first hand experience in the region tells me a different story, but you go ahead and believe what you want.

I think there is very little chance you were dealing with people who are the types who end up in a position of real power when you were in the region.
 
No, I showed the content behind the number. Not surprising for a new democracy. You don't expect it to be an 8 after 7 years do you? Before we can say it was a successful start? It was a successful start and the men and women who died there for it did not die in vain.

Dying for your country is never dying in vain.

I dont think you realize there are problems with freedoms and equality which have contributed to this number. Sadr and his Islamic ilk (Maliki) are not interested in expanding freedoms.

Fair enough. But I know from translations that many of these publications are openly critical of the government and PM Maliki. That's probably not the case with the Iranian publications.

There is a high cost for those who speak out against the government.

nrc.nl - International - Features - Free speech behind armoured doors in Iraq

I am not merely trying to score points. I am asserting the recognition that what the US did was valuable and helpful to Iraq and the region. We acted appropriately. It is a model for the region.

And i have stated repeatedly why it most certainly is not. It benefited Iraqis yet the costs of the war and the rise in certain extremist factions has only eroded there quality of life further. There is nothing about the Iraqi state of being in terms of society and politics and even economics that one would dare aspire too. That is the sad truth.

I know Iraq is quiet in the news. Perhaps you are unaware of economic developments in Iraq brought about by a stable government and rule of law. Regionally, they are more aware of such developments.

It says nothing about the situation in Iraq, i am afraid. The driving force behind this growth is probably Kirkuk anyway.

You really are unbelievably uninformed about Iraq.

Thank you for addressing my statements.
 
Which one are you? I am a hands off kind of guy.

That's because your opinion has no bearing on the development of the civilization that has provided you your cheap gasoline by making the tough choices that you have the luxury of not making. Hands off is a foolish policy. The Middle East is begging for democracy.

* Radical Islam is mostly made up of frustration and people who have surrendered any hope in mankind and now rely upon divine intervention to lift them out of miserable failure.

* Modernist Islam is mostly made up of those who maintain hope and see the democracy of their neighbors or global "brothers" as the means to reach civilizational prosperity and success.


America's role in this world hase been clear over its history. Even for the most selfish and and self centered of America, the spread of democracy and freedom is very much about our personal security and prosperity.
 
America's role in this world hase been clear over its history. Even for the most selfish and and self centered of America, the spread of democracy and freedom is very much about our personal security and prosperity.

What does this mean in practical terms in Egypt?
 

And when this overwhelming crowd of democracy seeking individuals turn to the Muslim Brotherhood as their last resort for unity and organization, Joe Biden can join President Obama in his shame and tactical blundering. In the end, the Republicans may not get away with blaming "Carter" on this one. The NeoCons left the Democratic Party over Carter's decrepit behaviors. With the Republican Party now willing to back Mubarak over democracy, Washington is now without honor or good morality.
 
That's because your opinion has no bearing on the development of the civilization that has provided you your cheap gasoline by making the tough choices that you have the luxury of not making. Hands off is a foolish policy. The Middle East is begging for democracy.

* Radical Islam is mostly made up of frustration and people who have surrendered any hope in mankind and now rely upon divine intervention to lift them out of miserable failure.

* Modernist Islam is mostly made up of those who maintain hope and see the democracy of their neighbors or global "brothers" as the means to reach civilizational prosperity and success.


America's role in this world hase been clear over its history. Even for the most selfish and and self centered of America, the spread of democracy and freedom is very much about our personal security and prosperity.

I may draw different conclusions about how the US should behave towards the ME, but your analysis of Radical and Modernist Islam is very succinct and, I think, quite accurate. Thanks for that!
 
Was Barrack Obama not expected to pander to the religious right by showing that he was a church-attending Christian during the campaign? Oh wait. Yeah, he was.

You mean to say he was pandering to the right for 20 years with a Preacher shouting "God Damn America"? How is this pandering? That was the Religious Left. btw.
You can call that "christian privilege." In other words, the ongoing pandering and accomodation that the religious right expects to see from anyone who wants to get elected in this country.

So he began this courtship of the religious right 20 years ago, and by voting "present" whenever possible after being elected?

If he wanted to pander to the religious right, why wouldn't he have run as a Republican? It would have saved him a life of hypocrisy.
 
What does this mean in practical terms in Egypt?

In practical terms, we had far better control with Egypt's future last week. Our military relationship with their military is solid. But as this goes on, the Muslim Brotherhood gets its claws deeper rooted into the movement and we look more and more as that "foreign devil" who would rather their oppressions be intact for our immediate and short lasting stability concerns than gamble on them being decent human beings in the end, which is better for our long term security.


But we have to accept that after decades and decades (even centuries for some of their societies), that they may choose a bumpy path. Like the French, maybe they will slaughter out polityical loyalitsts that disagree with them. But one thing is sure. They will not take 70 years to figure it out.

I try to see things from a tactical vantage point. And there has been nothing tactical about any of our Cold War behaviors, in regards to dictators, pharaohs, and twisted regimes, when it comes to our long term security. Israeli ambassadors to the UN and Republicans and Democrats are beginning to find their common voice and speak on behalf of Mubarak, because they fear change. European leaders are as absolutely useless as usual and waiting around to declare their "neutrality" on the issue if it comes down to responsibility. And they all fear "instability." Well, after 30 years of Mubarak, the entire Middle East faces a grave change. How "stable" has Mubarak been to our long term security? What if Egypt began experimenting with democracy 25 years ago? Where would we be today? People whine about Hamas. Well, maybe their first steps was to elect the immediate rhetoric. Maybe their next elections will be better and better and better. Maybe Iraq's future will show greater and greater improvement so that one day our business deals are no longer tied to Cold War dictators and twisted regimes, but legitimate democracies who prefer our business from the bottom up. In the end, this means that we see less religious rhetoric being legitimized by their zealots and far less impoverished, ashamed, and futureless youth willing to die for "God." Takes you back to 9/11, doesn't it? But do we really think this region is going to elect a Napoleon? With all of our stubborn and impotent fear about instability, we deny ourselves the perspective that even the almighty French elected in an emporer that went on to devistate all of Europe and North Africa before they fancied themselves as the inventor of democracy.

My point is that until we accept that democracy isn't just for white people in Europe and America (with black people along for the ride) and get away from our smug, self righteous, and racist attitudes towards the rest of the world, we will conitnue to put off the inevitable. And since the Middle East has been voicing for modernization and democracy since the beginning of European colonialism (which totally screwed up this region), we only encourage the transition to be worse and worse the longer we deny it. Either we take the hits now or our children take worse ones later.
 
Last edited:
What is the official conservative position on this crisis? Half say we should stand by Mubarak because the alternative will be worse and the other half say we should support the protesters and their quest for democracy. You guys better see what FOX wants you to think so you can all get on the same page..

Ah. I love this kind of thing.

"My stereotyping mind that likes to belittle and degrade people can't handle evidence to the contrary, so I must make a condenscending and insulting comment suggesting they're all mind numbed robots because I can't accept that my ignorant stereotyping of those I disagree with isn't possibly correct".

Its the same thing as people opining that Conservatives must not realize that Glenn Beck and his new co-host are a Mormon and an Athiest...because we all know Conservatives could never listen to someone other than old christian white men!!!!

News Flash, there isn't a uniformed conservative response on this because there's not a uniformed singularly conservative view point. There are many facets to conservatism and various conservatives hold various pillars in higher or lower regard thus creating different reactions to different political situations. Shocking I know, sorry to disrupted your stereotyped view of the world.
 
In practical terms, we had far better control with Egypt's future last week. Our military relationship with their military is solid. But as this goes on, the Muslim Brotherhood gets its claws deeper rooted into the movement and we look more and more as that "foreign devil" who would rather their oppressions be intact for our immediate and short lasting stability concerns than gamble on them being decent human beings in the end, which is better for our long term security.


But we have to accept that after decades and decades (even centuries for some of their societies), that they may choose a bumpy path. Like the French, maybe they will slaughter out polityical loyalitsts that disagree with them. But one thing is sure. They will not take 70 years to figure it out.

I try to see things from a tactical vantage point. And there has been nothing tactical about any of our Cold War behaviors, in regards to dictators, pharaohs, and twisted regimes, when it comes to our long term security.

I'm actually okay with how the state department has handled it, so far. I strongly believe that they have been applying pressure, behind the scenes, for Mubarack to step down. However, I do think that we need to be making clear statements, as a country, both from the president and the officials in the state department, that the U.S. supports democracy, and self-governance for all people around the world.

Do you agree or disagree?
 
News Flash, there isn't a uniformed conservative response on this because there's not a uniformed singularly conservative view point. There are many facets to conservatism and various conservatives hold various pillars in higher or lower regard thus creating different reactions to different political situations. Shocking I know, sorry to disrupted your stereotyped view of the world.

I'm actually loving this, to be quite blunt, for the fractures it is creating and revealing behind the conservative facade. There are wide divergences amongst political commentators, and I will enjoy watching the fracas (in the U.S., not Egypt...in Egypt, I hope most of all for a peaceful transition to self-governance, and very little fracas, unless camels are involved).

I like it when you people fight, particularly when it is loud and public. ;)
 
I will say this, I'm not thrilled with how we're handling Egypt but I'm much happier with it then I am with regards to Iran...which I was, and continue to be, furious towards Obama and his administration for.

In this case I think a mores restrained and behind the scenes approach with sparce but pointed public statements is the proper course of action due to our issues in the past with supporting said dictator.
 
I will say this, I'm not thrilled with how we're handling Egypt but I'm much happier with it then I am with regards to Iran...which I was, and continue to be, furious towards Obama and his administration for.

In this case I think a mores restrained and behind the scenes approach with sparce but pointed public statements is the proper course of action due to our issues in the past with supporting said dictator.

Yes, I would have liked to have seen much more forceful statements directed at Khomeini et. al. However, i fully recognize that there was some risk associated with the U.S. attempting to link itself too closely to the green revolution (to the green revolution itself). It was a delicate and nuanced thing, and I'm not sure exactly what the right move should have been.
 
I'm actually loving this, to be quite blunt, for the fractures it is creating and revealing behind the conservative facade. There are wide divergences amongst political commentators, and I will enjoy watching the fracas (in the U.S., not Egypt...in Egypt, I hope most of all for a peaceful transition to self-governance, and very little fracas, unless camels are involved).

I like it when you people fight, particularly when it is loud and public. ;)

I don't think its really revealing much behind the "conservative facade" as you put it, because I don't think there's some fake front being put forward. I think its clear, and has been clear for some time, that various constituencies within the conservative movement view the various principles of Conservatism...or the four pillars as I keep labeling them...differently in regards to how important or unimportant they are and how the play between them should work.

I think this is a situation which highlights well some of the various TYPES of conservatives you have, but I don't think many of them are really hiding being some kind of "facade" and are pretty apparent to anyone giving them substantial honest and realistic viewing. There's nothing wholey unconservative in and of itself with regards to either defending the notion of proping up the Mubarak regime or in defending the notion of supporting the protesters. Its the ways and means in which one reaches those conclusions that gives a highlight as to whether or not the person is making it based on conservative principles...but the end points can both be reached through conservative thought.
 
Its the ways and means in which one reaches those conclusions that gives a highlight as to whether or not the person is making it based on conservative principles...but the end points can both be reached through conservative thought.

+10,000

This is true for many other issues besides this one.
 
News Flash, there isn't a uniformed conservative response on this because there's not a uniformed singularly conservative view point. .
Then why do conservatives label people that don't agree with them liberals?
 
I'm actually okay with how the state department has handled it, so far. I strongly believe that they have been applying pressure, behind the scenes, for Mubarack to step down. However, I do think that we need to be making clear statements, as a country, both from the president and the officials in the state department, that the U.S. supports democracy, and self-governance for all people around the world.

I think the way they are handling the current situation, with good crisis management skills, is fine. The fact that they (and I'm referring to The West in general, not just the US) have had so little influence in promoting democracy amongst the ME allies is the very reason why these countries are suffering the convulsions they are doing now. Would the Moslem Brotherhood even be a serious force in Egypt now had the democratic aspirations of the Egyptian people had any outlet for decades; had the régime been seen as even remotely accountable to the people. Could the Egyptian people have been forgiven for believing that Mubarak listened more to Brussels or the White House than to them? And what do you believe the Egyptians believe the White House or the EU were saying to him?
 
Dying for your country is never dying in vain.

Then clearly Iraq was a success.

I dont think you realize there are problems with freedoms and equality which have contributed to this number. Sadr and his Islamic ilk (Maliki) are not interested in expanding freedoms.

And thus it is a perfect model for integrating the MB into a democratized Egypt. Fundamentalist Islamic groups exist side by side with moderate and secular groups making up the polity.


There is a high cost for those who speak out against the government.

nrc.nl - International - Features - Free speech behind armoured doors in Iraq

There are risks. But the point is that opposition voices are heard.

And i have stated repeatedly why it most certainly is not. It benefited Iraqis yet the costs of the war and the rise in certain extremist factions has only eroded there quality of life further. There is nothing about the Iraqi state of being in terms of society and politics and even economics that one would dare aspire too. That is the sad truth.

It's a mixed bag, but getting better all the time.

It says nothing about the situation in Iraq, i am afraid. The driving force behind this growth is probably Kirkuk anyway.

Sure it does. Iraq is growing.
 
I'm actually okay with how the state department has handled it, so far. I strongly believe that they have been applying pressure, behind the scenes, for Mubarack to step down.

I really don't know what is going on. I do know and I can contest with great conviction that the Pentagon has been in contact with Egyptian generals. If you know the history behind Clinton's reajustment of the regional commanders (known as "CinCs" back then) there is no way the phone calls haven't been made. There are unintended consequences to almost everything we do as individuals and as governments. America's problem is that it has a habit of looking at the short term security since the end of World War II (Granted that much of this is due to competing with a Red enemy that had no scruples and looked for the short cut in everything). President Obama is absolutely looking at the long term while maintaining a gamble on preserving the short term. We need to be finished with this short term madness. In the end, I firmly believe that by living up to our historic rhetoric (sometimes very hard in this world, I know this) that we maintain our long term security and guarantee our prosperity and preservation. And hey...maybe some folks outside our nation gets to experience some freedom along the way.

However, I do think that we need to be making clear statements, as a country, both from the president and the officials in the state department, that the U.S. supports democracy, and self-governance for all people around the world.

Do you agree or disagree?

It's this or we aren't "America."
 
Then why do conservatives label people that don't agree with them liberals?

SOME of them probably do for the same reason your ridiculous comment was made....out of an apparent desire to refuse to deal with anything out side of the stereotypical world view they've created for themselves.
 
President Obama is absolutely looking at the long term while maintaining a gamble on preserving the short term. We need to be finished with this short term madness. In the end, I firmly believe that by living up to our historic rhetoric (sometimes very hard in this world, I know this) that we maintain our long term security and guarantee our prosperity and preservation. And hey...maybe some folks outside our nation gets to experience some freedom along the way.

It's this or we aren't "America."

Complete, total agreement in every way. We accomplish the most by remaining true to our founding principles.

I wish I could like your post x 9000.
 
I like it when you people fight, particularly when it is loud and public. ;)

You have a point. FOX has been leaning more and more towards supporting Mubarak in light of a possible Muslim Brotherhood takeover. This is a lack of vision and a lack of true wisdom, which is proof that people's idea of the "NeoCon" has been wrong all along.
 
Back
Top Bottom