• 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

Ok, what do you think we should be doing?

I think that we should be making public statements in support of freedom and democracy and privately urging Mubarak to get the hell out tomorrow. Which is, I think, exactly what we're doing.

Score one for Obama. I bet that just galls you, doesn't it? ;)
 
I think the fact that conservatives are "all over the place" on this shows that the deluded and ignorant notion that conservatives are a bunch of mind numbed robots taking cues from "Faux News" and Rush Limbaugh is rather off base on a whole.
This may indeed be true, or it may mean that a lot of people, Faux and Limbaux included, aren't sure which way to fall yet. From a conservative point of view there is no clear position to take on Egypt. Whichever perspective you use - Realpolitik, Neo-con, isolationist, Atlanticist - the dilemma of having to choose between those advocating a style of Western democracy, and those advocating support for a key western ally is an almost impossible decision to take.

For those of us on the left, it's a little easier, but still not THAT clear cut if you maintain significant worries about the strength of the Islamicists.
 
Last edited:
I think the fact that conservatives are "all over the place" on this shows that the deluded and ignorant notion that conservatives are a bunch of mind numbed robots taking cues from "Faux News" and Rush Limbaugh is rather off base on a whole.

Or it could be they haven't figured out what the conservative position should be yet. Many conservatives on these forums are in fact mind numbed robots taking cues from Rush, Glenn, Sarah, and Fox news. If you disagree you are a liberal.
 
I think that we should be making public statements in support of freedom and democracy and privately urging Mubarak to get the hell out tomorrow. Which is, I think, exactly what we're doing.

Score one for Obama. ;)

Purdy much what I said. If you'll recall, I never said anything about doing nothing.

However, I don't think we should be urging Mubarack out anymore than we should be urging anyone else in.

I bet that just galls you, doesn't it?

I bet it galls you that it doesn't. huh?
 
Purdy much what I said. If you'll recall, I never said anything about doing nothing.

However, I don't think we should be urging Mubarack out anymore than we should be urging anyone else in.

You never said anything about doing nothing? Your glib tongue puts us all to shame.
 
I think that we should be making public statements in support of freedom and democracy and privately urging Mubarak to get the hell out tomorrow. Which is, I think, exactly what we're doing.

Score one for Obama. I bet that just galls you, doesn't it? ;)

My one thing I'd say on top of that would be urging, after the fact, for the Egyptian people to take the necessary steps to actually instill a workable democracy that is likely to remain a democracy and letting them know that IF they wish it and request it that we'll lend aid in taking such steps for their fledgling democracy. Essentially, once this happens, in front and behind the scenes work to try and urge an actual legitimate working democracy rather than a setup where within a few years they're just back to being under a "Democracy in Name Only" only this time one that is problematic to our goals. I think we should also definitely keep an eye on the country and take whatever needed diplomatic steps may be required in the future should it begin to look like Egypt begins to go down that path rather than the path of legitimate democracy.

That said, those are all actions I think we should be taking after the revolt...for the time being, I think we're doing essentially the right thing. I think we could come out a bit more strongly in support of democracy/oppositeion to Mubarak currently, but overall our general seeming strategy at this time is sound imho.
 
Or it could be they haven't figured out what the conservative position should be yet. Many conservatives on these forums are in fact mind numbed robots taking cues from Rush, Glenn, Sarah, and Fox news. If you disagree you are a liberal.

You're being just a tad bit hypocritical.
 
Or it could be they haven't figured out what the conservative position should be yet. Many conservatives on these forums are in fact mind numbed robots taking cues from Rush, Glenn, Sarah, and Fox news. If you disagree you are a liberal.

Well, thank you for illustrating my point wonderfully :roll:
 
I think that we should be making public statements in support of freedom and democracy and privately urging Mubarak to get the hell out tomorrow. Which is, I think, exactly what we're doing.

Score one for Obama. I bet that just galls you, doesn't it? ;)

Mubarak should call for a special election as soon as possible while he still has some power. If he just leaves now even more chaos could result. Mubarak has the opportunity to be a hero instead of a goat.
 
Mubarak should call for a special election as soon as possible while he still has some power. If he just leaves now even more chaos could result. Mubarak has the opportunity to be a hero instead of a goat.

Mubarak has lost all credibility. He'll be lucky to leave with his life at this point, imo.
 
Mubarak has lost all credibility. He'll be lucky to leave with his life at this point, imo.

He still has the power to call for a special election in which he is not a candidate. He can welcome the new leader into power at least making the apearance of doing the right thing.
 
Ain't it funny how some folks can't resist making the thread about another poster.
 
He still has the power to call for a special election in which he is not a candidate. He can welcome the new leader into power at least making the apearance of doing the right thing.

He's toast, IMO. No candidate, at this point, wants to be tarred by being associated with Mubarak. Nice thoughts, though.
 
Actually, strangely enough, it just furthers what my view of a Neo-conservative is. A form of conservatism that see's the government not as something that should be minimized, but as a tool that should be used...domestically and internationally...to institute the moral and legislative based ideas you have that you believe is best for the countries longevity and security and that said ideals are more important than growth of government, reduction of liberty, or cost in dollars. In this instance, the "threat of islamofascism" is to them a greater hinderance to their goals than the "spreading of democracy" is a boon, and as such they are shifting their view point to accomodate.

To me, a neo-conservative is one who has little care for the governmental and fiscal sides of conservatism unless it suits them, an absolute extremist and somewhat distorted conservative view when it comes to the pillar of defense, and a similarly twisted and extreme view with regards to the social side all unified by a belief that ignoring, or outright rejection, of the first two pillars I stated in advancement of the latter two is worth while.

I think in general people are in the right ballpark with how they use the word Neo-Con when its used as anything other than a mindless insult. The problem is that, one, like any political philosophy there is some wiggle room and two, most of the time people just use it as a mindless insult.

NeoCons were origainaly on the Left. They defected to the Republican base under Carter. They were against allowing Saddam Huessin his throne in 1991 (at a time when Rumsfeld and Cheney supported his containment.) When Rumsfeld and Cheny began seeing the short sighted error in the late 90s they began to lobby President Clinton to take out Hussein. In 2003, they get to be labeled "NeoCons?"

How people have evolved to use it is wrong. The NeoCon agenda has always been about pushing democracy abroad with the absolute acknowledgement that it goes to serve our long term interests and security. It's these same short sighted dimwits, who are more scared of the Muslim Brotherhood and instability, that people still label as "NeoCons."
 
He's toast, IMO. No candidate, at this point, wants to be tarred by being associated with Mubarak. Nice thoughts, though.

The only way to save Egypt is for Mubarak to call for an election and agree to leave after it's held. He still has some control over the military.
 
The only way to save Egypt is for Mubarak to call for an election and agree to leave after it's held. He still has some control over the military.

YOu don't believe that there is an infrastructure in place to conduct an election sans Mubarak?
 
The only way to save Egypt is for Mubarak to call for an election and agree to leave after it's held. He still has some control over the military.

Another way, would be for Mubarack supporters to overpower the opposition.

There are 80,000 people in Egypt. If 50+% of them want Mubarack to stay, then guess what.

I don't think that a million +/- anti-government protestors is proof, yet, that everyone in Egypt wants Mubarack out of power, much less want to, "lynch", him.
 
NeoCons were origainaly on the Left. They defected to the Republican base under Carter. They were against allowing Saddam Huessin his throne in 1991 (at a time when Rumsfeld and Cheney supported his containment.) When Rumsfeld and Cheny began seeing the short sighted error in the late 90s they began to lobby President Clinton to take out Hussein. In 2003, they get to be labeled "NeoCons?"

How people have evolved to use it is wrong. The NeoCon agenda has always been about pushing democracy abroad with the absolute acknowledgement that it goes to serve our long term interests and security. It's these same short sighted dimwits, who are more scared of the Muslim Brotherhood and instability, that people still label as "NeoCons."

You've got it wrong. The neocon movement began with Reagan. Many in his administration were neocons. It has always been a right wing thing.
 
YOu don't believe that there is an infrastructure in place to conduct an election sans Mubarak?

No election administered by the Mubarak regime machine would command popular confidence. How many totally corrupted elections have they overseen in 60 years of Nasser/Sadat/Mubarak dictatorship?

Outside help will be required. Difficult to work out where that might come from in order to ensure legitimacy.
 
Back
Top Bottom