• 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

Mira said:
The Brotherhood makes up nothing in the Parliament, they are illegal in Egypt and have been rotting in jails.
Click to expand...

The Los Angeles Times reports:

The Obama administration said for the first time that it supports a role for groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, a banned Islamist organization, in a reformed Egyptian government.
Click to expand...

White House open to role for Muslim Brotherhood in post-Mubarak Egypt - National Libertarian | Examiner.com

democracy and sharia---absurd
 
apdst said:
I agree, but at the same time, I think we need to be waiting in the wings to clean up the mess.

At some point, it should become obvious that the people don't know what the hell they're doing and there's a serious need for some adult supervision. This is quickly shaping up to be one of those situations.
Click to expand...

Personally, I say we let them work it out. Maybe it all works out for the best and they have a peaceful transition and democracy. OR...they still have no jobs because their country has little outside of the toruism industry, they end up in flames, and become a fundamentalist state. Either way...they kill each other off, have at it. They become a fundamentalist state and kill off the liberals and put women back in burkas, well...thats 'democracy' after all...isnt it? They attack our allies, well..we should come to their aid as quickly as we would France or England and turn the place into a great big giant smoking hole.
 
Female anti-government protester telling Al Jazeera that they cannot leave the square even if she wanted to - she is crying on air and sounds very scared and emotional. Telling Al Jazeera not to refer to the pro-government group as "demonstrators" because they are actually "violent thugs".


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqoRzSkmX88
 
Mira said:
Oh and if you think I give a bird's poo about what Gardener has to say about anything, then you're mistaken.
Click to expand...

Just knowing you have some bird's poo to give is comfort enough for me.
 
apdst said:
We still don't know that that is exactly what's going on. Iran's people had an, "uprising to obtain freedom and demoacracy for themselves", in 1979, but we've since learned that it had zilch to do with, "freedom and democarcy". They simplt exchanged one ruthless asshole, for a committee of ruthless assholes. They got rid of the Shah's secret police and in return got the Revolutionary Gaurd. The Spanish in 1936 could choose to be, "free", either with the Facists, or the Communists. IMO, the choice of the Egyptian people in this case isn't any different.
Click to expand...

You know what? You could be right. After Iran revolted (against a brutal dictator supported by the USA), the immediate aftermath left a power vacuum in which an expelled ayatolah was able to swoop in from Europe and install himself as the new dictator. So what? The people accepted him with open arms. He didn't turn out to be such a good deal in the long run, but if they want to implement another change, the people themselves will have to do so. It must be the choice of the people.

If Egypt ends up with a government run by the Muslim Brotherhood, the peace treaty with Israel is thrown out the window, and sharia law installed, then so be it. It's the people's choice. They will have to live with Mubarak's replacement, for better or worse, just as those in Iran have done. Or perhaps they will find the freedom and democracy they crave. Either way, they deserve the chance to have a real say in the way their country is run.

You're not understanding what I'm trying to say. The people of every country have the right to freedom and liberty, not just the people of countries whose governments we d not support. THAT is hypocrisy. If they chose badly for themselves then they will have grown wiser as a people and a nation, and they'll just have to do it all over again.

But under no circumstance should any American wish for these brave attempts to secure freedom for themselves to fail because it's not in our interests for them to be free.

Our government is clearly pro-demonstrators, and has done all it can do to encourage Mubarak to step down immediately without going public with such a demand, therefore scaring the collective pants off of our other ME allied dictators in Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Jordan.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
You seem to be under the false impression that the Muslim Brotherhood A) uniformly wants to go to war with Israel, B) actually would be capable of making that happen, and C) couldn't be dissuaded from doing so. All of those are incorrect. First of all, it's easy for people to say outlandlish things when you're the opposition or running for office, but when you're actually in charge you tend to tone it down a little bit. Second of all, the Egyptian military is not on great terms with the Muslim Brotherhood, and there's no way that they could go to war with Israel without the military's approval. And finally, it wouldn't even be in the Muslim Brotherhood's political interests to launch a war. They're pragmatic enough to understand that they would be crushed by Israel and fall out of favor with the Egyptian public.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily.

FrontPage Magazine - The Muslim Brotherhood "Project"
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
Really...a single document discovered 10 years ago? And reported by Front Page Magazine, of all places, 5 years ago? Yeah, somehow I'm not too worried about it. :roll:


:lamo
Click to expand...

Actually a great deal has been written about "The Project". If you want something more up-to-date, though that won't really make any difference to something discovered 10 years ago, then you can Google it.

Apparently Front Page Magazine doesn't meet with your approval either. Too Left Wing?

You can learn more about them on their own web site here. http://globalmbreport.org/?p=3892
 
Last edited:
Grant said:
Actually a great deal has been written about "The Project". If you want something more up-to-date, though that won't really make any difference to something discovered in the 80's, then you can Google it.
Click to expand...

I'd hardly call a document discovered in 2001 which was written in the 1980s to be an accurate representation of the Muslim Brotherhood today...if it ever was.

Grant said:
Apparently Front Page Magazine desn't meet with your approval either. Too Left Wing?
Click to expand...

Yep. That's it. :roll:
 
Kandahar said:
I'd hardly call a document discovered in 2001 which was written in the 1980s to be an accurate representation of the Muslim Brotherhood today...if it ever was.



Yep. That's it. :roll:
Click to expand...

and what do you think the Muslim Brotherhood represents today? Does their changing of tactics indicate the changing of their objective?

I'm reminded of a nasty group we have here in Oregon called the Oregon Citizens alliance. They have managed to get several ballot measures on the ballot targeting Gay people for persecution. The first was very direct and demanding, and was soundly defeated. They softened the language in the second, and it was defeated, too. They refined their language yet again the third time around. Did this represent a softer, gentler OCA? Of course not, as it only represented calculation.

I've noticed a curious phenomenon over the years in that those who describe themselves as liberal defending uber-conservatism as long as such conservatism arises from outside their own culture, while those describing themselves as conservative will take on the role of a liberal when confronted with the same conservatism. If a Christian group with beliefs similar to the Muslim Brotherhood were to arise in the United States, and with a similar degree of organization, the same people who are defending the Muslim Brotherhood would be all over it, and I dare say, many of the same ones pointing out its danger here would be looking the other way.

There is nothing moderate about the Muslim Brotherhood. They have eschewed terrorism for now, but that does not mean they have abandoned their agenda. Their agenda is totalitarian in nature, and they are VERY well organized, so let's not fool ourselves into thinking otherwise, o.k.?
 
Last edited:
Gardener said:
and what do you think the Muslim Brotherhood represents today? Does their changing of tactics indicate the changing of their objective?

I'm reminded of a nasty group we have here in Oregon called the Oregon Citizens alliance. They have managed to get several ballot measures on the ballot targeting Gay people for persecution. The first was very direct and demanding, and was soundly defeated. They softened the language in the second, and it was defeated, too. They refined their language yet again the third time around. Did this represent a softer, gentler OCA? Of course not, as it only represented calculation.

I've noticed a curious phenomenon over the years in that those who describe themselves as liberal defending uber-conservatism as long as such conservatism arises from outside their own culture, while those describing themselves as conservatism will take on the role of a liberal when confronted with the same conservatism. If a Christian group with beliefs similar to the Muslim Brotherhood were to arise in the United States, and with a similar degree of organization, the same people who are defending the Muslim Brotherhood would be all over it, and I dare say, many of the same ones pointing out its danger here would be looking the other way.

There is nothing moderate about the Muslim Brotherhood. They have eschewed terrorism for now, but that does not mean they have abandoned their agenda. Their agenda is totalitarian in nature, and they are VERY well organized, so let's not fool ourselves into thinking otherwise, o.k.?
Click to expand...

It is still better than letting them and the moderates continue to suffer under a dictatorship we support. Come what may, and Osama's strategy is still operational (change US FP, overthrow dictatorships, consolidate fundamentalists, create caliphate), we have to provide an opportunity to the moderates.
 
Gardener said:
and what do you think the Muslim Brotherhood represents today? Does their changing of tactics indicate the changing of their objective?

I'm reminded of a nasty group we have here in Oregon called the Oregon Citizens alliance. They have managed to get several ballot measures on the ballot targeting Gay people for persecution. The first was very direct and demanding, and was soundly defeated. They softened the language in the second, and it was defeated, too. They refined their language yet again the third time around. Did this represent a softer, gentler OCA? Of course not, as it only represented calculation.

I've noticed a curious phenomenon over the years in that those who describe themselves as liberal defending uber-conservatism as long as such conservatism arises from outside their own culture, while those describing themselves as conservative will take on the role of a liberal when confronted with the same conservatism. If a Christian group with beliefs similar to the Muslim Brotherhood were to arise in the United States, and with a similar degree of organization, the same people who are defending the Muslim Brotherhood would be all over it, and I dare say, many of the same ones pointing out its danger here would be looking the other way.

There is nothing moderate about the Muslim Brotherhood. They have eschewed terrorism for now, but that does not mean they have abandoned their agenda. Their agenda is totalitarian in nature, and they are VERY well organized, so let's not fool ourselves into thinking otherwise, o.k.?
Click to expand...

Come what may, I think the whole muslim thing is a "conservative vs liberal" thing, not a well thought out "right vs wrong". COnservatives take an anti-terrorist, anti-fundamentalist position, liberals must take a pro-muslim (notice I didnt say pro-terrorist) stance and defned against that which the conservatives oppose. They dont defend fundamentalists or extremists but invariably opt for the "but its not ALL of them argument.

Irony...the people they are pretending arent a viable threat would be the first to target women, gays, and liberals in general.

As I have said...I HOPE this works out well for the people of Egypt, but I believe it is likely to be just another Iran. When (if...and I hope it doesnt) that happens, libs get to own the fact that they endorsed blindly a process that killed thousands.
 
apdst said:
I agree, but at the same time, I think we need to be waiting in the wings to clean up the mess.
Click to expand...

Then obviously you don't agree. I guess the U.S. military should be called the Earth Police Department.
 
VanceMack said:
Personally, I say we let them work it out. Maybe it all works out for the best and they have a peaceful transition and democracy. OR...they still have no jobs because their country has little outside of the toruism industry, they end up in flames, and become a fundamentalist state. Either way...they kill each other off, have at it. They become a fundamentalist state and kill off the liberals and put women back in burkas, well...thats 'democracy' after all...isnt it? They attack our allies, well..we should come to their aid as quickly as we would France or England and turn the place into a great big giant smoking hole.
Click to expand...

That would make way too much common sense to be a foreign policy in today's America. According to the Right, if there is the potential, for a potential threat, to be somewhat possible, at some point possibly in the distant future, possibly, then we must attack.
 
VanceMack said:
Come what may, I think the whole muslim thing is a "conservative vs liberal" thing, not a well thought out "right vs wrong". COnservatives take an anti-terrorist, anti-fundamentalist position, liberals must take a pro-muslim (notice I didnt say pro-terrorist) stance and defned against that which the conservatives oppose. They dont defend fundamentalists or extremists but invariably opt for the "but its not ALL of them argument.

Irony...the people they are pretending arent a viable threat would be the first to target women, gays, and liberals in general.

As I have said...I HOPE this works out well for the people of Egypt, but I believe it is likely to be just another Iran. When (if...and I hope it doesnt) that happens, libs get to own the fact that they endorsed blindly a process that killed thousands.
Click to expand...

I think we all have a reactionary tendency in us to one degree or anoter, but if more of us would base our opinions upon a consistant value system rather than simply reacting against what the "other side" is saying, we might better avoid these sorts of double standards.

I don't think it is really a liberal tendency so much as it is a failure to view others using the same standards we view ourselves.
 
Gardener said:
and what do you think the Muslim Brotherhood represents today? Does their changing of tactics indicate the changing of their objective?
Click to expand...

I think that a changing of tactics indicates a bowing to pragmatism and reality. And let's also not forget that they were the only viable opposition group for the past 30 years, since Mubarak suppressed everything else. If Egypt transitions to free elections, they'll likely have a wide range of competition, and people who dislike Mubarak won't automatically gravitate to them.

Gardener said:
I'm reminded of a nasty group we have here in Oregon called the Oregon Citizens alliance. They have managed to get several ballot measures on the ballot targeting Gay people for persecution. The first was very direct and demanding, and was soundly defeated. They softened the language in the second, and it was defeated, too. They refined their language yet again the third time around. Did this represent a softer, gentler OCA? Of course not, as it only represented calculation.
Click to expand...

The Muslim Brotherhood is not a PAC of a few hundred people who organized for a specific political purpose. It's a nationwide organization that cannot be said to have a monolithic view of the world.

Gardener said:
I've noticed a curious phenomenon over the years in that those who describe themselves as liberal defending uber-conservatism as long as such conservatism arises from outside their own culture,
Click to expand...

Who is defending the Muslim Brotherhood? I'd hardly call stating that they are neither willing nor able to go to war with Israel to be "defending" them.

Gardener said:
There is nothing moderate about the Muslim Brotherhood. They have eschewed terrorism for now, but that does not mean they have abandoned their agenda. Their agenda is totalitarian in nature, and they are VERY well organized, so let's not fool ourselves into thinking otherwise, o.k.?
Click to expand...

I didn't say they were moderate. I said they were pragmatic, and we'll need to work with the next government of Egypt regardless of who they elect.
 
Last edited:
The more I learn, the more I think the idea that Egypt is going to become another Iran is ridiculous.

Iran has oil which is toxic for democracy; Egypt has very little oil. Iran is a melting pot of ethnicities; Egypt is almost universally Arab. Iran is Shiite and therefore tends toward hierarchical religious structures; Egypt is Sunni and therefore tends toward decentralized religion. The Iranian model is in no way replicable in Egypt. Egypt may or may not have an easy transition to democracy, but it certainly isn't going to become Iran. I think Turkey is a much more likely role model.
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
The idea that Egypt is going to become another Iran is ridiculous. Iran has oil which is toxic for democracy; Egypt has very little oil. Iran is a melting pot of ethnicities; Egypt is almost universally Arab. Iran is Shiite and therefore tends toward hierarchical religious structures; Egypt is Sunni and therefore tends toward decentralized religion. The Iranian model is in no way replicable in Egypt.

Egypt may or may not have an easy transition to democracy, but it certainly isn't going to become Iran. I think Turkey is a much more likely role model.
Click to expand...

Quit with your logic and facts Khandahar, it's getting really really old ok...
 
And now, much the same thing is bubbling up in Yemen. Who's next? Jordan? Pakistan? Algeria? Morocco?
 
Erod said:
And now, much the same thing is bubbling up in Yemen. Who's next? Jordan? Pakistan? Algeria? Morocco?
Click to expand...

Jordan and Algeria have already pledged immediate democratic reforms.
 
Kandahar said:
The more I learn, the more I think the idea that Egypt is going to become another Iran is ridiculous.

Iran has oil which is toxic for democracy; Egypt has very little oil. Iran is a melting pot of ethnicities; Egypt is almost universally Arab. Iran is Shiite and therefore tends toward hierarchical religious structures; Egypt is Sunni and therefore tends toward decentralized religion. The Iranian model is in no way replicable in Egypt. Egypt may or may not have an easy transition to democracy, but it certainly isn't going to become Iran. I think Turkey is a much more likely role model.
Click to expand...

The simple fact that Egypt HAS no real industrial base makes it MORE likely, not less likely. When the season of discontent is over and their new government is installed, where will the new jobs come from? Where will the nations financial support come from? Home much of a blow will this be to their tourism trade?
And if you have noticed, Turkey is starting to get a little froggy itself.

I dunno...I hope you are right. Still...
 
VanceMack said:
The simple fact that Egypt HAS no real industrial base makes it MORE likely, not less likely. When the season of discontent is over and their new government is installed, where will the new jobs come from? Where will the nations financial support come from? Home much of a blow will this be to their tourism trade?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure why any of these factors would lead support for theocracy as opposed to democracy. If their next government doesn't solve the economic problem, they could vote them out and replace them with someone who does.

VanceMack said:
And if you have noticed, Turkey is starting to get a little froggy itself.
Click to expand...

Turkey's democracy is imperfect (as I expect Egypt's would be), but it is leaps and bounds better than any Arab state.
 
Kandahar said:
I think that a changing of tactics indicates a bowing to pragmatism and reality. And let's also not forget that they were the only viable opposition group for the past 30 years, since Mubarak suppressed everything else. If Egypt transitions to free elections, they'll likely have a wide range of competition, and people who dislike Mubarak won't automatically gravitate to them.
Click to expand...

They were actually banned in Egypt.



The Muslim Brotherhood is not a PAC of a few hundred people who organized for a specific political purpose. It's a nationwide organization that cannot be said to have a monolithic view of the world.
Click to expand...

In fact the MB is aligned with Muslim orgaizations all over the world, including CAIR in the United States and are well established in the UK.

The Advance of the Muslim Brotherhood in the UK » Current Trends in Islamist Ideology

Who is defending the Muslim Brotherhood? I'd hardly call stating that they are neither willing nor able to go to war with Israel to be "defending" them.
Click to expand...

By making the claim that they are unwilling or unable to go to war with Israel you are obviously defending them, and you have guessed incorrectly as well.

I didn't say they were moderate. I said they were pragmatic, and we'll need to work with the next government of Egypt regardless of who they elect.
Click to expand...

And what evidence do you have that they are "pragmatic"?

You are guessing again, and simply expressing your hopes..
 
Kandahar said:
I'm not sure why any of these factors would lead support for theocracy as opposed to democracy. If their next government doesn't solve the economic problem, they could vote them out and replace them with someone who does.
Turkey's democracy is imperfect (as I expect Egypt's would be), but it is leaps and bounds better than any Arab state.
Click to expand...

Might want to check into the hotbeds of fundamentalism in the ME and see what the primary factor is. Just sayin...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom