• 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

I am not convinced that there was only that binary choice. Truth was, we valued controllable and influencable allies much more than spreading democracy. We could have forced our despotic allies to democratize. That would have been a more consistent FP. Especially in the ME.


Now, of course, this must be tempered by the fact that the number of democracies in the world flourished while we have been a superpower, and we certainly helped do that with soft power, i.e. foreign policy and economic policy and McDonalds and music and movies.

Before 1941, the United States had a totally hands off policy. After WW2, they had learned a hard lesson from that policy and weren't going to make the same mistake twice.

In 1937, we were like, "Let the Germans invade Austria. Let'em invade Czechoslovakia. Who cares?" But then, they invaded Poland, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, France and were knocking on England's door. That's the perspective that they were viewing the world from.
 
What's laughable is that this part of the world even comprehends what democracy is.

They understand two things: absolute dictorship and Islamic military rule.

Fyi, when you're allowed to beat your women in public, democracy is a bit far-fetched for you to grasp.
 
That's recent phenomena. The umbrella org of other secular groups pre-dated his adoption as representative.

But, he's still the head honcho, which makes me doubt their motives.
 
What's laughable is that this part of the world even comprehends what democracy is.

They understand two things: absolute dictorship and Islamic military rule.

Fyi, when you're allowed to beat your women in public, democracy is a bit far-fetched for you to grasp.

Oh oh.
You mean like how in the US Black people had little to no rights and were treated like sub humans up until a few decades ago.

:roll:
 
There is no democratic infrastructure in any Arab country. The Arab world has tried fascism, pan-Arab nationalism, socialism, and now Islamism. They have been in a Dark Age for centuries.
 
But this is ridiculous.
The one main reason there is not alot of opposition is because (in MANY cases) the Western backed dictators and tyrants have oppressed and suppressed any opposition politically and ensured their voice is the only one. If there is weakness in who should come to power or a legitimate opposition to Government. It is because it was deliberately done!

What is highly amusing to observe. It is some of those countries which have a secular dictatorship, are the ones which are breeding more and more extremist ideas. Look at Tunisia, it is not a secular country. Islam is recognised, aspects of Sharia is recognised. Yet it has a secular society
The Muslim brotherhood should have been included into talks decades ago, now it is too late. Hamas should have been incorporated years ago, now it is too late.
Saudi Arabia is screwed anyway so who cares about that country.

The point is that yes, many Muslims if they had a vote would choose to have a religious leaning Government but I do not think Egypt will be one of them.

Fair points, all. But let's look at immigrant communities under democracies. No confrontation or battle of ideas seem to be taking place. No anecdotally, I can say that I know maybe 5 or 6 muslims and they are all mostly secular and liberal. They may adhere to strict islamic principles like eating halal meat and not dating or kissing non-muslims (to my infinite regret as Shahreen is absolutely wonderful!) but they don't pray 5 times a day. So perhaps the transformation happens quietly. I do find it interesting that most of the 9/11 terrorists came from immigrant communities and were highly educated in western schools. Does a liberal society with all of its constituent moral decadence promote a stronger Islamic movement than you may see in the ME?
 
Before 1941, the United States had a totally hands off policy. After WW2, they had learned a hard lesson from that policy and weren't going to make the same mistake twice.

In 1937, we were like, "Let the Germans invade Austria. Let'em invade Czechoslovakia. Who cares?" But then, they invaded Poland, Norway, Denmark, Belgium, France and were knocking on England's door. That's the perspective that they were viewing the world from.

Good point. Not black and white at all. Oh that it were, we'd have nothing to argue about here at DP! ;)
 
Oh oh.
You mean like how in the US Black people had little to no rights and were treated like sub humans up until a few decades ago.

:roll:

But, not anymore! Right??

I think that's something else that's been blown out of proportion by the Libbos.
 
But, he's still the head honcho, which makes me doubt their motives.

That seems to also be the position of many protesters regarding ElBaradei. How the hell will they come up with some leaders to promote their democratization cause, if none of them can agree on more than "Mubarak must go and we need a new gov't/constitution"?
 
That seems to also be the position of many protesters regarding ElBaradei. How the hell will they come up with some leaders to promote their democratization cause, if none of them can agree on more than "Mubarak must go and we need a new gov't/constitution"?

They won't, which is exactly what the Brothas want to happen. If the mayhem lasts long enough, they'll vote for Mickey Mouse to be prez for life.
 
They won't, which is exactly what the Brothas want to happen. If the mayhem lasts long enough, they'll vote for Mickey Mouse to be prez for life.

Well, given that MB only gets 20% support, I figure a conservative coalition will form after elections, where MB plays a role like Sadr in Iraq - partial power - perhaps the Presidency. I say let em run the show. Really. Whoop-ass is ready if needed.
 
Oh oh.
You mean like how in the US Black people had little to no rights and were treated like sub humans up until a few decades ago.

:roll:

Good gawd, don't even start. If we were in Cairo, I could probably stone you to death for that.

There isn't a single true democracy in the Middle East. They aren't capable of it.

They have to get out of the Middle Ages first.
 
Good gawd, don't even start. If we were in Cairo, I could probably stone you to death for that.

There isn't a single true democracy in the Middle East. They aren't capable of it.

They have to get out of the Middle Ages first.

What do you call Lebannon?
 
Occupied. If we leave, it'll be run by Islamists in no time.

Bollocks, it's not occupied. They have a legitimately elected coalition government.
 
You mean Hezbollah. And no, they aren't.

My bad. And you're kidding yourself if you think Hezbollah isn't pulling all the strings there. Please.
 
My bad. And you're kidding yourself if you think Hezbollah isn't pulling all the strings there. Please.

They are a major player, but they certainly aren't pulling all the strings. Stop with the black and white thinking. Lebanon is too diverse.
 
The Muslim brotherhood should have been included into talks decades ago, now it is too late. Hamas should have been incorporated years ago, now it is too late.
Your saying then they should talk to the Muslim brotherhood.... the same brotherhood who killed Mubaraks predesessor (Sadat) who made peace with Israel.

The same Brotherhood that murders coptic Christians on a regular basis.

The same Brotherhood that killed German tourists.

The same Brotherhood whose splinter groups (Hamas & Al Qaeda) have killed many Israelis & Americans.

The same muslim brotherhood which backed the Nazis in WW2 & supplied troops to them to kill Serbs.

The same brotherhood who says that once in power will resume war with Israel.

The same Brotherhood whose stated goal is to overthrow Western democracies & impose Sharia law worldwide.

This idea that this group is someone that could be a responsible partner in government with secular democratic elements is nothing but a Liberal pipe dream.

My guess is if the brotherhood joins in a unity government with El Baradi this guy will be assasinated (mysteriously) within a year and the Brotherhood will take complete control.

The point is that yes, many Muslims if they had a vote would choose to have a religious leaning Government but I do not think Egypt will be one of them.
Really? Besides the military the most powerfull group in Egypt is the Brotherhood and if its not them running the show it would be a military dictatorship.

If the brotherhood somehow gains control my guess is that as bad as Mubarak is someday his dictatorship will be known as " the good ole days" especially for Egypts minorities.

So.... Hows that democracy in Lebanon working out?
 
Last edited:
The point is, they would have gotten the weapons from somebody. Egypt has been buying weapons from Russia for decades. If we hadn't sold them weapons, they would have just bought them from the Ruskies.

It's irrelevant to the larger picture.

Mubarack repressed the people and now the Muslim Brotherhood is going to repress the people.

I reckon when the MB turns out to be as bad as Mubarack, that'll be our fault, too. The stupidity has to end, at some point.

I think that's unlikely. I'm actually in the process of conducting a statistical analysis on the relationship between democracy and economic development for countries that don't have oil-based economies. Egypt has far less freedom than one would expect given its level of economic development, so I expect that deposing Mubarak from power will be a very positive step in the right direction.

I've heard lots of comparisons to the Islamic Revolution in Iran...but this overlooks the fact that Iran is sitting on top of a huge amount of oil, whereas Egypt has very little. Oil is a major factor in how authoritarian a country is. Egypt may not have an easy path to democracy, but I think they'll do far better than Iran did for the simple fact that they aren't cursed with oil wealth.
 
Last edited:
I think that's unlikely. I'm actually in the process of conducting a statistical analysis on the relationship between democracy and economic development for countries that don't have oil-based economies. Egypt has far less freedom than one would expect given its level of economic development, so I expect that deposing Mubarak from power will be a very positive step in the right direction.

I've heard lots of comparisons to the Islamic Revolution in Iran...but this overlooks the fact that Iran is sitting on top of a huge amount of oil, whereas Egypt has very little. Oil is a major factor in how authoritarian a country is. Egypt may not have an easy path to democracy, but I think they'll do far better than Iran did for the simple fact that they aren't cursed with oil wealth.

I think you're dreaming, but only time will tell.
 
Here's a list of the countries that I think are primed for serious democratic revolution or democratic evolution in the near future, starting with the best candidates of all. This is based on the results of a statistical analysis I'm doing, and isn't just a list I developed on the fly.

1. Tunisia
2. North Korea
3. Uzbekistan
4. China
5. Djibouti
6. Cuba
7. Egypt
8. Laos
9. Swaziland
10. Singapore
11. Burma
12. Vietnam
13. Tajikistan
14. Guinea-Bissau
15. Jordan

What these countries all have in common is that they have very little oil, and have far more authoritarian governments than the average country at their level of economic development. I think that nearly all of them will make substantial democratic progress in the next decade. It's no coincidence that the three Arab states on this list are the epicenters of the protests.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom