Hello:

The Middle East is in revolt. It started in Tunisia. President, Zine el-Abidine Ben Alileader fled... Now, Egypt is under siege, and they're approaching a pivotal moment. Mubarak hasn't fled, and has called out the army - an army equipped and trained by the US.

We could be looking at another Tienanmen Square moment... If Egypt goes, they're all gone.

excon

Good morning Ex. Hope all is well with you.

Yes, this is a situation that is cause for grave concern. I don't believe it will turn out to be another Tiananman Square with the Egyptian government prevailing as China did. Yes, there will be many deaths. They are quickly racking up and if we ever find out the exact death toll, it won't be for a long time to come. But, the circumstances behind Tiananmen Square were far different than what is occurring in Egypt now.

While watching news reports last night, it appeared to me the police & army fear the masses more than Mubarak's ire. One group was hiding out waiting for the current wave of excited frenzy & anger in the streets to die down a bit before they ventured out again. From comments they made, it appeared their hearts weren't into their jobs. I am not surprised. The Egyptians do not train their children to place their government before all else as the Chinese do.

As of this morning, it appears Mubarek is now a one man operation. He has mistakenly assumed forcing his cabinet to resign and pledging reforms (without being specific) will appease the people. He has made a serious tactical error in his determination to dig in his heels and stay put. They want him gone. And he will be gone. In my mind this is more in line with the Shah of Iran's ousting than a Tiananman square situation.

Ex are you saying the US has been propping up arab dictators again? And that they are the source of the dictators military power? So when are you going to invade to force democracy upon the Egyptian people? Strange how these countries that have these problems have large reserves of oil.

Clete, we did supply the Egyptian government with military weaponry. Not sure you can call that propping up the dictators but maybe Israel will agree with you on that.

It appears democracy is exactly what the Egyptians want so there isn't any need for us to invade the country. However, I wouldn't be surprised if we sent in some help to keep Hamas, Hezbollah, or any other extremist group from taking over the country. And yes, doing that would go hand in hand with ensuring our supply of oil isn't disrupted.

Clete, we did supply the Egyptian government with military weaponry. Not sure you can call that propping up the dictators but maybe Israel will agree with you on that.

It appears democracy is exactly what the Egyptians want so there isn't any need for us to invade the country. However, I wouldn't be surprised if we sent in some help to keep Hamas, Hezbollah, or any other extremist group from taking over the country. And yes, doing that would go hand in hand with ensuring our supply of oil isn't disrupted.

I'm sure the supply of oil from Egypt to the US will not be disrupted since it isn't exactly important, but there are other issues such as the transit of US ships to and from other places, etc. Any person who has been in power for as long as Mabarak is a dictator and would own his tenue to the favourable patronage of the US, just as Saddam did so long ago. It is the price of empire. Egypt was a client state of USSR and so winning it over would have been a prize. The concern in Egypt is not Hamas or Hezbollah but the Islamic Brotherhood. Each of these places have their home grown versions of Al Qaeda, the US would be very busy if it tried to combat all of them, easier to give a local strongman support and let him kill his own, probably why the US didn't intervene when Saddam took revenge on the Shiia

You are probably incorrect in thinking the Egyptians want democracy, what they want is an end to tyranny, the two are not the same since arabs have no tradition of democracy. In islamic countries it is normal having one person making decisions whether at government, religious or family level. Debate is not encouraged.

POTUS spend very little time on foreign policy issues in his SOTU Address . He briefly paid lip service to US civilian accomplishments in Iraq and Afghanistan... Which fell in well with his general theme of 'soft power' and engagement .

"This year, our civilians have come down, and a new government has been formed,” “This year, our civilians will forge a lasting partnership with the Iraqi people, while we finish the job of bringing our troops out of Iraq."

"Thanks to our heroic troops and civilians, fewer Afghans are under the control of the insurgency."

Iran :
“Because of a diplomatic effort to insist that Iran meet its obligations, the Iranian government now faces tougher and tighter sanctions than ever before,”

Sudan:
“Recent events have shown us that what sets us apart must not just be our power – it must be the purpose behind it. In South Sudan – with our assistance – the people were finally able to vote for independence after years of war. "

You get the idea .You've heard this from him before speak long and loud... carry small stick.

Then there was Tunisia .There he supported the people who have succeeded in overthrowing a strongman corrupt despot.
“We saw that same desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful than the writ of a dictator. And tonight, let us be clear: the United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people,”

What is happening in Tunisia is having a ripple effect throughout the Maghreb and has reached Egypt. Cairo is the place where POTUS made his infamous outreach speech to the Muslim world at Al-Azhar University . President Hosni Mubarak's family has fled the country.

While it's all well and good to speak of the democratic aspirations of the people . He falls way short of the JFK "We shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty."

OBL is famously quoted as saying “when people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature, they will like the strong horse”.

POTUS consistently demonstrates that he prefers to be the weak horse. By backing engagement ,dialogue ,rapproachment ,and soft power ABOVE all else. He also demonstrates that he is the wrong horse.

Jihadistan is on the march . I see a Muslim Brotherhood dominated North Africa in our future.
The Bush doctrine was premised as offering a 3rd way... but you call it imposition even though the people have more than once went to the polls and voted in secular leadership .

I'm sure the supply of oil from Egypt to the US will not be disrupted since it isn't exactly important. I wasn't speaking about the supply of oil from Egypt. I was referring to a disruption of the flow of oil out of that region.



You are probably incorrect in thinking the Egyptians want democracy, what they want is an end to tyranny, the two are not the same since arabs have no tradition of democracy. In islamic countries it is normal having one person making decisions whether at government, religious or family level. Debate is not encouraged.

You are making a blanket generalization regarding the world's islamic community. I believe the Egyptian people are not that far out of touch with what is going on in the rest of the world.

This morning, I have heard that Mubarek is listening to many other countries and is attempting to set up a more democratic style operation to appease his people. I still think they won't be happy until he is completely ousted. I guess we will just have to wait and see what ultimately happens.

IYou are making a blanket generalization regarding the world's islamic community. I believe the Egyptian people are not that far out of touch with what is going on in the rest of the world.

This morning, I have heard that Mubarek is listening to many other countries and is attempting to set up a more democratic style operation to appease his people. I still think they won't be happy until he is completely ousted. I guess we will just have to wait and see what ultimately happens.

It is a generalisation to say arabs want democracy, they want change and this fueled by what they observe in other places through the media. Many countries in the islamic world have repressive governments, even those that might be democratically elected. Mubarek has sacked a number of ministers and appointed others to the posts, certainly not a democratic style of operation. It may be that Egypt will need a different constitution before a more democratic regime could take over without revolution. There apparently is no opposition and therefore few who could take over without the taint of the current regime

What may have started as a legit positive profreedom protest is increasingly being coopted by the Muslim Brotherhood and other jihadists . As is too often the case ,the alternative the people will have is authoritarian military rule or radical jihadist takeover .

You can tell the general point when the Muslim Brotherhood coopted the revolt . What started as an intense but peaceful protest became riots ,gangs of thugs who attack police and fellow protesters ,car and building fires and looting and sacking of ancient artifacts .8000 Muslim Brotherhood prisoners escaped and have joined the death squads resulting in more civilian deaths.

Mubarak deserves whatever he gets . But what will result from this will not be better for the Egyptian people.

I know POTUS et al is talking like they sort of support the democratic asperations . If he is sincere then where was he last year ,when the only thugs on the streets where the minions of the Mahdi hatter murdering Neda Agha-Soltan, sparking a genuine people's revolt ?

Back then it was the Obots who thought it better to deal with the despots.

it was the Obots who thought it better to deal with the despots.

Obots, despots, is there really any difference? When a government panders to a despotic regime they make themselves the same. Obama will have no answers for this because he doesn't want to intervene in another Muslim country, one at a time is more than enough. Let a popular revolt run its course, sometimes it works, and something's get better, An assassination here, an exile there and everything goes back to being the same

Let a popular revolt run its course, sometimes it works, and something's get better, An assassination here, an exile there and everything goes back to being the same

Most revolutions follow the French Revolution model.. Popular revoltfirst ,then the extremists take over ,and a reign of terror and anarchy ensues... followed by the takeover by a military strongman.

It is a generalisation to say arabs want democracy, they want change and this fueled by what they observe in other places through the media.
You are right. That is a generalization. One I did not make. I was specifically discussing the Egyptian people.


Many countries in the islamic world have repressive governments, even those that might be democratically elected. Mubarek has sacked a number of ministers and appointed others to the posts, certainly not a democratic style of operation. It may be that Egypt will need a different constitution before a more democratic regime could take over without revolution. There apparently is no opposition and therefore few who could take over without the taint of the current regime I believe you are right about this current situation with Mubarek.

I stand by what I said. I do believe he will be ousted as the Shah of Iran was ousted. However, I am not so quick to assume the Brotherhood will be able to take over as completely as both you and Tom do. I am taking a wait and see approach on all of this. I do recognize the Brotherhood have quickly mobilized their followers. But, many countries have diplomatic relations with Egypt for various reasons. The most important from this perspective is Israel. They will do everything they must do to ensure their interests remain a priority with the Egyptian government.

This morning I have heard the Egyptian people who have spoken with reporters have stated they want Mubarak and his puppets out, very much want to maintain their relationships with the U.S. and Israel, and want a democratic government set up. They are naming Mohamed ElBaradei as the most practical choice to take over until a stable government is set up.

Hello again:

I wish I had something intelligent to say... But, I'm going to say it anyway...

While our dependence on strong men MIGHT have worked out in the short run, it's been a failure in the long run. Iran is a good example... Did that stop us? Nope. Now, 30 years later, here we are again. We don't know whether to support the bastard we KNOW, for fear of the bastard we don't know... Which, of course, makes our claim that we support democracy a BIG LIE.

So, who are we, after all? We're becoming MORE like the world, than the world is becoming MORE like us. I believe that our little flicker of freedom is coming to an end.

excon

Hello:

The Middle East is in revolt. It started in Tunisia. President, Zine el-Abidine Ben Alileader fled... Now, Egypt is under siege, and they're approaching a pivotal moment. Mubarak hasn't fled, and has called out the army - an army equipped and trained by the US.

We could be looking at another Tienanmen Square moment... If Egypt goes, they're all gone.

excon

Every time I think I have an opinion about what's going on and what it might mean for the future, I change my mind.

I've come to the conclusion that I'm so far from it - and know so little - that it would be impossible for me to come to any conclusions, or make any reasonable guesses about what it could come to.

I do, though, wonder about what's going on in Egypt particularly...

* Why all of the sudden, with (apparently) no hint that it was coming? Was there any hint that masses were against Mubarak 6-months or a year ago?

* With no apparent organizational leadership of the protesters, what are they thinking can happen? Even if Mubarak is a despot, what can he do now? Surely he couldn't just "step down"... or say "ok you protesters, what do you want?"

* If Mubarak stepped down or died today, who would become leader of the country? Might s/he be "worse" than Mubarak?

* A friend of mine proposes that there is some unknown entity who is orchestrating both the Tunisia uprising and the events in Egypt. I just cannot buy that conspiracy theory... but admittedly I have no alternative theory.

* As for references to Tienanmen Square: If this was another "Tienanmen Square" type of thing, then wouldn't it mean that nothing comes of it? Am I wrong in remembering that the government in China basically just quashed that uprising - and made little to no significant changes as a result of it?

Am I wrong in remembering that the government in China basically just quashed that uprising - and made little to no significant changes as a result of it?Hello again, Rick:

You are NOT wrong... The Chinese military massacred a bunch of demonstrators, and that "quashed" it. THAT, apparently, isn't going to happen this time... IF the Chinese hadn't done that, we'd be facing a much different China today...

What I LOVE about this thing, is it appears to be people seeking to be free from the yolk of oppression... How can we NOT like that? That's OUR history? Certainly the Tea Party can relate with all their talk about the "tree of liberty" needing to be refurbished. Or, is that stuff just reserved for us??

No, Rick. I don't believe this is being guided by anybody...

excon

it appears to be people seeking to be free from the yolk of oppression... How can we NOT like that?

As a lover of freedom and democracy I certainly DO have thoughts of support for the people protesting... but in the back of my mind I am fearful of the potential outcomes since the many questions I have about the situation are yet unanswered.

It would be a tragedy if this did not result in more freedoms, and a move toward democracy, for Egypt and it's people.

I wish, hope and pray that it comes to a good, positive and non violent conclusion.

Rick
Isaiah 19:2

Rick
Isaiah 19:2That could be true of the US as well.

Of course it is .

Rick
Isaiah 19:2

I cannot agree that Isaiah 19:2 is referring specifically to what is going on today.

When Isaiah was written "Egyptians" meant something different than it does today.

Generally speaking, "Egyptian against Egyptian" has, methinks, happened many times since Isaiah was written - and may very well happen many times more in the future...

... which may very well be true about any other group of people that we can name today...

Yes ;that's why I agreed with NK's observation.

I'll be blunt here. The US policy has been correctly identified by Ex as naiive. The current POTUS has in Carteresque fashion 'spoken stupidly ' in this crisis,not quite supporting democratic movements ,while at the same time stabbing a staunch ally in the back. Mubarak has been a voice of sanity in a very volatile region for 3 decades despite his strong arm.

Further ,Obama did nothing to support the democratic asperations of the Iranian people when they were revolting and getting murdered in the streets by the jackboots of the jihadists . So where does he stand ? Is he for democractic reform if it's a dictator ,but against it if it's a revolt against the jihadists ? I think that's it.

Either way his inconsistency is a source of uncertainty that friends and foes will pick up on and weaken us further .

yes ;that's why I agreed with NK's observation.

I'll be blunt here. The US policy has been correctly identified by Ex as naiive. The current POTUS has in Cateresque fashion 'spoken stupidly ' in this crisis,not quite supporting democratic movements ,while at the same time stabbing a staunch ally in the back. Mubarak has been a voice of sanity in a very volatile region for 3 decades despite his strong arm.

Further ,he did nothing to support the democratic asperations of the Iranian people when they were revolting against the jackboots of the jihadists . So where does he stand ? Is he for democractic reform if it's a dictator ,but against it if it's a revolt against the jihadists ? I think that's it.

Either way his inconsistency is a source of uncertainty that friends and foes will pick up on and weaken us further .

Clearly you know more than I do of what is going on...

I cannot help but agree with your last point. Unless we Americans speak and do more intelligently than we have in the past many years, things can only get worse for us and our relationships with others.

Hey these Arabs are revolting. Did you see the horse riders get their licks? It is hard to imagine what is going on over there. It would all stop if they use the tanks

did you see the horse riders get their licks?...Hello again, clete:

You are as warped as I thought you were.

excon

No ex, I expect that they were paid stooges of Mubarak

Hello again,

They've confiscated the cameras and hassled the journalist's. It's morning, and NO pictures are getting out... I wonder what they're planning that they DON'T want us to see. It can't be good.

excon

Hello again,

They've confiscated the cameras and hassled the journalist's. It's morning, and NO pictures are getting out... I wonder what they're planning that they DON'T want us to see. It can't be good.

excon

Ex it is business as usual for a repressive regime. If the US stood up and told Mubarak to bow to popular pressure and call an election immediately this might stop before more are dead. I expect the outcome to be either one of two scenarios; a muslim extremist organisation takes over, or the army looses patience and there is a coup

Obama has recommended that Mubarak resign and hand over power to a transitional leadership headed by the new VP Omar Suleiman .
There is no reason to believe this offer will be accepted. There is also a problem in the fact that the offer violates the Egyptian constitution. The power is supposed to be transferred to the head of the Assembly upon resignation of the President.
Maybe the White House forgot to read the Egyptian constitution before making the offer ?

We will learn sometime after the noon prayers Mubarak's answer. As of now ,protesters are pouring into Tahrir Square for another day of demonstrations.

The Muslim Brotherhood is making their presence known during the riots .

Brothers — distinguishable by their close-cropped beards — dominated the front lines, often lining up to pray for "victory or martyrdom," before throwing themselves into the fray, hurling stones, sticks and firebombs at the attackers while shouting "God is great."

Amr Said, a 41-year-old chemist who said he is a Brotherhood supporter, told The Associated Press in Tahrir Square Friday morning that "our instructions are not to assume a role that is too visible at the moment, and to get along with all other groups including and leftist and liberals.

"We also refrain from making our typically brotherhood chants and when one of us does, we quickly shut him up," he said.
Anti-Mubarak activists pour into Tahrir Square - Yahoo! News (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110204/ap_on_re_mi_ea/ml_egypt)

There were plenty of examples of dictatorships being transitioned peacefully into democracy. Taiwan,Spain ,and the Philippines are examples of this.

In those cases the US played a role in helping the transition ,We should've pushed Mubarak harder .

Either a jihadist state run by the Brotherhood will emerge ;or that Tienneman scenario will play out. When that happens the revolt will go underground.

Obama has recommended that Mubarak resign and hand over power to a transitional leadership headed by the new VP Omar Suleiman .


Doesn't seem like they are going to take this suggestion any time soon. It's it funny how a well favoured regime is without support as soon as the people revolt.

Doesn't seem like they are going to take this suggestion any time soon. It's it funny how a well favoured regime is without support as soon as the people revolt.

Agree, now we can add this to our list of bad decisions.

Agree, now we can add this to our list of bad decisions.

Yes how is that going for you? Every dictator you support turns on you, amazing isn't it that the lesson is never learned

Not happy about it, however I am not negative about everything that my country does.

The way I see it most countries do attempt to do basically the right thing and what applies to any current situation requires action based upon those present circumstances.

... If only the State Dept knew what it was doing . The President sent special envoy Frank Wisner(AIG and State Dept veteran) to Egypt to speak to his personal friend Mubarak . He came back and stated that “President Mubarak’s continued leadership is critical — it’s his opportunity to write his own legacy.”

He said that Mubarak should remain in power until the Sept elections so there could be a smooth transition.

Problem is that is contradictory to the recent statements of the President and Sec State Evita Clintoon.

The Sec State said prior to this that Mubarack must step down and hand over control to VP Omar Suleiman and Mohamed Tantawi (in complete violation of the Egyptian Constitution) .

Evita reiterated those comments after Wisner's apparent snafu .


It is hardly the first time the Obama administration has seemed uncertain on its feet during the Egyptian crisis, as it struggles to stay on the right side of history and to avoid accelerating a revolution that could spin out of control.

The mixed messages have been confusing and at times embarrassing —


When the first protesters appeared in Tahrir Square, Mrs. Clinton, working off the traditional American script that portrays Mr. Mubarak as a reliable ally in need of quiet, sustained pressure on human rights and political reform, said, “Our assessment is that the Egyptian government is stable and is looking for ways to respond to the legitimate needs and interests of the Egyptian people.”

One week later, that script was cast aside for the first time in three decades. On Tuesday night, Mr. Obama and his top national security aides watched Mr. Mubarak’s defiant speech, in which he refused to resign but insisted he had never intended to run for re-election in September. It confirmed the conclusion they had gradually reached as the protest mounted: Instability would reign until the Mr. Mubarak got out of the way.

“He needed a push,” said one official who was in the Situation Room with the president. When Mr. Mubarak’s speech was over, Mr. Obama called him, for what turned into a tense 30-minute conversation.

Shortly afterward, Mr. Obama appeared in the foyer of the White House to declare that “orderly transition must be meaningful, it must be peaceful, and it must begin now.” He did not press Mr. Mubarak directly to resign, but Mr. Mubarak’s loyalists clearly interpreted it that way. The next day, government supporters were bused into the square and changed what had been a largely peaceful process in a day of rage, stone-throwing, clubbing and arrests, the most violent so far.
By Friday, it was clear that Mr. Mubarak would not go gently, which led to the third iteration of the White House policy. In private, the administration worked to peel away Mr. Mubarak’s key supporters in the Egyptian elite. His defense minister, Field Marshal Hussein Tantawi, went into Tahrir Square, ostensibly to inspect the troops there, but largely to associate himself with the protesters.

His appearance, along with a visit to the square by Amr Moussa, the head of the Arab League and a former Egyptian foreign minister under Mr. Mubarak, created the impression of the Egyptian leader’s increasing isolation.

Mr. Obama also tried talking about Mr. Mubarak differently, almost in the past tense. He described him as a man who had made “that psychological break” and urged him to ask himself, “How do I leave a legacy behind in which Egypt is able to get through this transformative period?”

Administration officials say that in phone calls and e-mails from the White House, the State Department and the Pentagon, they have urged a “council of elders” in Egypt to begin drafting revisions to the Constitution that could be sped through Parliament, while encouraging Mr. Suleiman to jump-start conversations with an array of opposition leaders, including the Muslim Brotherhood, from which some of Al Qaeda’s leadership emerged.

“We are not trying to be prescriptive,” a senior Obama adviser said on Saturday. “The Egyptian leadership knows what it needs to do, and they don’t need us to lay it out in detail.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/world/middleeast/06policy.html?ref=world
And yet the Obots continue to talk as if by some puppetry they can orchestrate the events unfolding . To make matters worse ,even the NY Slimes can't quite figure out what the Obama position is . Evidently neither can the State Dept. Certainly Egypt has no idea what the President's policy is.

And yet the Obots continue to talk as if by some puppetry they can orchestrate the events unfolding Hello again, tom:

When you're BLINDSIDED by your intelligence agencies, after spending BILLIONS upon BILLIONS for intelligence in THAT particular part of the world, it's understandable that you'd act like a deer caught in the headlights.

Same thing happened to Bush. The BAD news is, that the BILLIONS we're spending to COUNTER what happened to Bush, isn't COUNTERING squat.

excon

... that was an example of a President who cannot control the message coming out of his administration.

...that was an example of a President who cannot control the message coming out of his adminstration.Hello again, tom:

It's true. Republicans are MUCH better at marching in lock step. Controlling Democrats, is like herding cats.

excon

Waited all day for Mubarak to resign. He didn't... he kicked himself upstairs ,and appointed his Pharaoh in waiting as a caretaker.

VP Suleiman," a former army general and intelligence chief " told the crowds of protesters that they got their wish and they should go home now. When they don't ,the new Pharaoh in training will get on his mechanical chariot and send in the camel riders.

Meanwhile a man who has no legitimate claim to leadership in Egypt , Mohammed el-Baradei called on the military to force Mubarak's hand. Nice. However, this is a very possible outcome. The military will want to preserve the Nasser regime style of governance. Mubarak has put that at risk.

President Obama still talks like he is in control of the course of history . Here is a guy who can't control the message within his administration even when his Sec State and Special Envoy are in the same town.
Further ;he has demonstrated that he is more than willing to overlook the horrors of worse dictators than Mubarak in attempt to 'extend the hand of friendship' to the despots.

Looking forward for him to get on televison demanding the resignation of Castro ,Chavez ,the Mahdi-hatter in Tehran ,Kim Jong mentally-ILL ,and Hu Jintao.
Then I'll believe he gives a damn about the liberty of the people of Egypt.

Obama really wants the Muslim Brotherhood to take over and turn Egypt into another Iran. That's why he wants then out now... before proper elections can be arrainged and someone other than the muslim brotherhood terrorist organization can organize to get a chance to be duely elected.


Or does he actually believe the country can run on autopilot until that can happen...

He still acts more like a muslim than he does a christian.

Morons what him out now... but NOBODY discusses exactly WHO is supposed to take over in the vacuum that would result if that actually happened.

But then I suppose they Consider Iran... Syria, Lebonan and Yemen to be model societies.

Smoothy

Don't you think it is about time Obama did what Mubarak suggested and but out.

At the moment what Egypt is moving towards is an orderly transition. This doesn't suit all and it probably won't result in democracy, unless democracy can be intrepreted as an election. However it also means no violent conflict. The last Egyptian president was assassinated, I expect this one wants to avoid going the same way. The whole thing ha sbeen taken over by opportinists. If the egyptians choose to resolve this under their constitution, the rule of law then they should be allowed too. Could you see Obama resigning if a million people and the Chinese leader called for his resignation?

At the moment what Egypt is moving towards is an orderly transition. Hello again, clete:

That's not what the people want. I'll bet they GET what they want, and it won't be orderly.

excon

Hello again, clete:

That's not what the people want. I'll bet they GET what they want, and it won't be orderly.

excon

Yes Ex it is clear that there are some who want the chaos of revolution

Hello again, clete:

What's clear to me, is that the peaceful revolution is being resisted by those clinging to power. If chaos ensues, it's NOT the revolutionary's doing.

excon

Smoothy

don't you think it is about time Obama did what Mubarak suggested and but out.

At the moment what Egypt is moving towards is an orderly transition. This doesn't suit all and it probably won't result in democracy, unless democracy can be intrepreted as an election. However it also means no violent conflict. The last Egyptian president was assassinated, I expect this one wants to avoid going the same way. the whole thing ha sbeen taken over by opportinists. If the egyptians choose to resolve this under their constitution, the rule of law then they should be allowed too. Could you see Obama resigning if a million people and the Chinese leader called for his resignation?

I think Mr. Obama should do what the American people want him to do first (like step down himself)... THEN he might have a leg to stand on before he starts demanding things of others.


Yeah... he and Hillary both need to shut their collective mouths. Neither one of them have a clue about how to do their own jobs. Much less tell others how to do theirs.

Hello again, clete:

What's clear to me, is that the peaceful revolution is being resisted by those clinging to power. If chaos ensues, it's NOT the revolutionary's doing.

exconWon't be peaceful when you don't have anything to replace it with... and as it stands now... they don't.

September is reasonible... gives time for picking a successor by popular vote after groups who want to do it get a chance to organize prior to a vote. If the entire regiem walks away tomorrow (like those fools want)... exactly who is supposed to step into its place?? The only organized group there right now is a terrorist organization.. THe Muslim Botherhood... then we have another Iran and I bet they will be REAL happy with that bunch, if they think its bad now... just wait..

Won't be peaceful when you don't have anything to replace it with.......and as it stands now....they don't.Hello again, smoothy:

Sure they do. The military is the ONLY organization that CAN take over, and that would be cool with the demonstrators. The key to watch for tomorrow, is whether they'll back Mubarak and fire on their own people, or will they escort Mubarak out of town?

The right wing, ALL the dictators in the region, plus Hillary Clinton and Bill Gates are lined up on Mubarak's side. Me, and the rest of the good guys, are for democracy. Yeah, it'll mess up our ideas about the Middle East. So?

excon

Hello again, clete:

What's clear to me, is that the peaceful revolution is being resisted by those clinging to power. If chaos ensues, it's NOT the revolutionary's doing.

excon

Ex pehaps you haven't noticed but the reason there might be a "peacefull" revolution is the marches haven't been opposed by force. Whenever force is evident then it isn't "peacefull" and people get killed. Mubarek and the military, which is his power base, have shown restraint, but the country is decending into chaos and if Mubarak and the government go, there will be a vacuum, which inevietably leads to chaos and violence. The demands have gone beyond change of government and a new constitution but include all sorts of concessions.

No one needs another failed state in the northern sahara

Hello again, smoothy:

Sure they do. The military is the ONLY organization that CAN take over, and that would be cool with the demonstrators. The key to watch for tomorrow, is whether they'll back Mubarak and fire on their own people, or will they escort Mubarak out of town?

The right wing, ALL the dictators in the region, plus Hillary Clinton and Bill Gates are lined up on Mubarak's side. Me, and the rest of the good guys, are for democracy. Yeah, it'll mess up our ideas about the Middle East. So?

exconMaybe because of an inconvienient thing called history.

Military leaders don't like handing over power once its in their hands... too many examples of that in the past.

The military is the ONLY organization that CAN take over, and that would be cool with the demonstrators.Hello again, clete:

What I said above.

excon

Military leaders don't like handing over power once its in their hands....too many examples of that in the past.Hello again, smoothy:

I don't disagree at all. Mubarak is FROM the military. As you say, HE certainly doesn't like handing over power. But, the people are demanding it, and it looks like they're going to get their way.

Once the people get a taste of the idea that THEY can decide who runs their country, instead of being dictated to, they're not going to give it up... They're kind of like us in that regard... Why SHOULDN'T they decide who runs things? Aren't they like YOU?

excon

Hello again, smoothy:

I don't disagree at all. Mubarak is FROM the military. As you say, HE certainly doesn't like handing over power. But, the people are demanding it, and it looks like they're going to get their way.

Once the people get a taste of the idea that THEY can decide who runs their country, instead of being dictated to, they're not going to give it up... They're kinda like us in that regard... Why SHOULDN'T they decide who runs things? Aren't they like YOU?

exconObama won't step down... why should Mubarak, before elections can be organized for September. Why immediately. We have to wait almost two more years and we have even more people that want him (obama) gone here.

If I got in that position with the military behind me... it would be hard for me to hand it over to just any idiot...

Not that I've been in the situation... but I can understand it.

If I got in that position with the military behind me.....it would be hard for me to hand it over to just any idiot.....Hello again, smoothy:

Once again, we agree. IF he leaves, it'll be because he was "escorted" out. He isn't going to go willingly. As I said above, the key is whether the military will support HIM or the people. We'll see how that pans out tomorrow, live on TV.

Democracy CAN bloom, even where there is NO history of democracy. Let's hope it's happening here. Wouldn't that be cool? I'd jump on the side of the people. Don't you think the people should RUN their own show??

excon

I disagree that the Military should be any form of interim government however. That's BEGGING for something worse to happen than him.

He's no angel and not perfect... but there ARE far worse things than him until a proper election can be held. And if the Muslim Brotherhood gets in their via fraud because nobody else had time to organise? Then THEY change the constitution... after all, they change it on a whim in places like that... they don't have the safeguards and protections we have.

Democracy CAN bloom, even where there is NO history of democracy. Let's hope it's happening here. Wouldn't that be cool? I'd jump on the side of the people. Don't you think the people should RUN their own show????

excon

That's american rhetoric Ex, by the way by "here" do you mean the US? Ex, Government exists because the people can't run their own show, they elect representatives who it is hoped have some talent for administration. Fallorn hope in most cases and particularly in a place which is already poorly governed. Government by the people is anarchy, or plan old american rhetoric. The US didn't arise with no history of democracy, the very process was democratic borrowed from their "oppressors".

Once again, we agree. IF he leaves, it'll be because he was "escorted" out. He isn't going to go willingly. As I said above, the key is whether the military will support HIM or the people. We'll see how that pans out tomorrow, live on TV.


So far the military supports the transition... I believe they'd like to keep the current Nasserism system.

More disturbing to me is the disconnected and disjointed messages coming from the top of our administration. Forgetting the President's cheerleading and pressuring Mubarak to create a power vacuum in Egypt... CIA boss Panetta got the days events completely wrong in testimony before Congress ;telling them that Mubakak wuld indeed step down yesterday .

DNI chief James Clapper incredibly told a House Intelligence Committee hearing that the Ihkwan (Muslim Brotherhood) was not extreme and largely secular. It is absolutley scary the lack of basic knowledge the top levels of our intelligence and diplomatic corp possesses. (was our Ambassador in Cairo surprised by Mubarack's decision also ?)

By their own admission the mission statement of the Ihkwan;their “key pillars”,is the imposition of sharia law and the reestablishment of the global caliphate .How could Clapper not know that ?

By their own admission the mission statement of the Ihkwan;their “key pillars”,is the imposition of sharia law and the reestablishment of the global caliphate .How could Clapper not know that ?

They don't know it Tom because it doesn't suit them to know it. This all has a very strange turn of events, the destabilisation of arab Governments in several countries similtaneously with the primary target a nation that led arab nationalism and their chief ally part of the destabilisation process. It smells of payback to me. Iraq has been taken out, now take out Egypt, and what is left is a shell, I expect the next target will be Syria.

Do you start to see it Tom?

Yeah sure do... and that wasn't really a plane flying into the Pentagon... it was a missile .

It is no secret that I'm no fan of this administration . But I don't see sinister motives. I see incompetence.

Odd how Obama is so behind THIS one where disaster is so much the likely outcome...

But when the People in Iran rose up not all that long ago... nObama was firmly behind Adolph THe Iraninan terrorist and against the people.

I see incompetence.Hello again, tom:

So, let's spy more on Americans... That'll tell us what's going on over there. Certainly, spying on the Arabs ain't working.

excon

I think the root of the faulty analysis is the cloud of political correctness ,faulty premises and wishful thinking .
It's the same crowd that told us in at the end of the Bush term (in the NIE )that Iran had stopped it's nuke program.

Further ,the intelligence agencies have yet to recover from the decision to scale down the HUMINT. Perhaps if we had more resources devoted to intel gathering in Egypt we would get a clearer picture.
That may explain Panetta.
Clapper is a different story. His "gaffe " may be clear spin, paving the way to a time when the Ihkwan are the power in the country . Obama has indicated more than once he'd be pleased to treat the Brotherhood as legitimate political entity instead of the jihadist terrorist organization it is. I think Clapper was saying what the President wanted to hear.

Comparing this to the NSA intercepts of enemy transmissions into the country is apples and oranges. The success of that program has been established .

Further ,the intelligence agencies have yet to recoverHello again, tom:

Oh, those poor intelligence agencies... Let's spend MORE money on 'em. Maybe then we might have a clue about what's going on in the world... We MIGHT have even learned that the Arab world was on the edge of revolt... I have a feeling that THAT wasn't so secret... But, nahhh... We missed it.

It IS easier to spy on Americans, though. Specially when they've got Americans like YOU telling 'em it's a good idea. I mean you don't have to learn a foreign language or nothing...

Do YOU feel safer KNOWING that, in spite of the BILLIONS of $$$$'s we're spending, we MISSED this??

excon

Just to be clear... I'D like to see a proper democraticly elected leader there that's NOT part of a terrorist organization. And isn't reminiscent of Irans fake "Democracy". Which is actually a Theocracy that allows a certain idividual to play president or not as long as they cowtow to their wishes..

But legitimate... uncontested elections don't happen on a whim... or in a hurry.

I am neither advocating an increase in their resources or greater funding . They suffer similar bureaucratic inefficiencies that other Federal dept's do. Collectively they are top heavy ,overly bureaucratic ,and have group think.
Their message has been the same faulty one to the last 2 administrations so it's not a matter of sucking up to the boss .
I've said this before . They are convinced their world view is correct and if there is a POTUS in power who doesn't share their vision ,they are more than willing to wait the POTUS out. POTUS comes and goes .Their jobs are for life. This time around they have one that shares their myopic ,pie in the sky vision.

They are convinced their world view is correct and if there is a POTUS in power who doesn't share their vision ,they are more than willing to wait the POTUS out. This time around they have one that shares their myopic ,pie in the sky vision. Hello again, tom:

I don't want a spy agency WITH a world view... Then the intelligence they gather FITS their world view. That's not intelligence. That's propaganda.

Yes, I'm talking about WMD's, yellowcake from Niger, and aluminum tubes - ALL manufactured bullsh!t they called intelligence so it could FIT THEIR world view.. Yeah... They had a myopic one back then too.

excon

The one thing I'm sure of is that Saddam acquired yellow cake from Niger . We collected plenty of that in Iraq.
Interesting... the collective intelligence agencies of the world ,and the UN all shared that so called 'bullsh!te' assessment of Iraq's WMD program. Were they all wrong ?

Were they all wrong ?Hello again, tom:

They were! Are you saying that it was OK for OUR intelligence agencies to miss it because East Ferstanislan missed it too??

Well, it wasn't, and we're STILL paying the price with TWO unending wars that are BANKRUPTING us - instead, you want to cut funding for PBS, as you strum your fiddle. You guys are bonkers..

excon

Didn't the Wikileaks documents show WMD's were moved to Syria? Thus proving they existed...

http://www.examiner.com/public-safety-in-national/wikileaks-wmd-program-existed-iraq-prior-to-us-invasion

Didn't the Wikileaks documents show WMD's were moved to Syria? Thus proving they existed....

Wikileaks: WMD program existed in Iraq prior to US invasion - National public safety | Examiner.com (http://www.examiner.com/public-safety-in-national/wikileaks-wmd-program-existed-iraq-prior-to-us-invasion)
Why was this vindicating information kept secret?

Clearly it was known... also clearly opponents of the Bush Administration ignored the information.

So wikileaks doesn't release secret documents then? Just public information?

..also clearly opponents of the Bush Administration ignored the information.Hello again, tom:

Interestingly, Bush ignored it too (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM).

excon

Yes he did . I don't understand why .Nor do I understand why he has allowed himself to be slandered by the current occupant of the White House without comment.
Best guess is that he thinks history will vindicate him ,and that he thinks there should be a certain protocol for former President's behavior .

I was talking about General Sada's claims years ago. Then and now I am called 'bonkers' for saying it. I guess if Julian Assange reports it then I am absolved .

I am called 'bonkers' for saying it. Hello again, tom:

Ok, you're not bonkers. Not because Julian Assange says so - but because I say so.

excon

Hello again,

Ok, Mubarak steps down. Wouldn't it be cool if they ALL overthrew their yolks of repression? As Americans, we HAVE to identify with that.

excon

So wikileaks doesn't release secret documents then? Just public information?

Combination of both... while some events might not be classified... certain aspects and information about them might be. As was the case here and many other things you never even thought about.

Work in that environment long enough and you learn to be quiet rather than have to think about what you heard and where you heard it because you will hear things both public and secret.

I am in favor of democratic reform and liberty . It remains to be seen if that is where this leads. I'm still waiting for liberty in Iran 30 years after popular revolt.

Mubarak handed over power to the military today. Hopefully this ushers in institutional reform that leads to a free and moderate Egypt .
My gut tells me that the military wants to retain Nasserism . But I could be surprised.Egypt is returning to the 1952 model of ruling the state via a council of army officers. The question now is to what extent the military elite will share power with its civilian counterparts.(source Stratfor)

Work in that enviroment long enough and you learn to be quiet rather than have to think about what you heard and where you heard it because you will hear things both public and secret.yep, I know, I'm involved in that.

yep, I know, I'm involved in that.

'nuf said.

Isaiah 19 :25

Isaiah 19 :25Book of fables is not relevant here other than a reference to Egypt.

Hello again, tom:

Hmmf. Christian code to keep the Jew in the dark. I know what you're up to.

excon

The code exposed by WikiTom

"Blessed be Egypt my people, Assyria my handiwork, and Israel my inheritance."

Cool story bro.

Hello again,

This Jew is not comforted knowing that a bearded guy in the sky said that he was his favorite.

excon

Hello again:

Time to revive the "revolt" thread. I'll switch Bahrain to the "set free" thread if that happens...

Meanwhile, the question I have is, if we support a democracy movement in Egypt, why are we supporting a kindgdom in Bahrain who are killing their people to STAY in power.

Yes, our fleet is based there. So? We HAVE an interest in EVERY middle eastern state, and they're ALL going. What are we going to do?

excon

Not sure of all the facts. I think Iran is stoking this . This one is different because of the Shia Sunni split . I have never heard that the royals were despots ,and there was already a move towards democratic reform.

One thing I know for sure is that radical Islamists will dominate any popular government . They held Parlimentary elections in 2006 and no moderate won.
Currently there is not a more modern state in the Gulf region. Women are freer there than anyplace else in the region . If the monarchy falls it may be a plus for 'democracy' ,but it will be a major set back for liberty and rights.

One thing I know for sure is that radical Islamists will dominate any popular goverment . Hello again, tom:

We don't disagree. We DO disagree on its cause though. I say meddling in their affairs pisses them off. You say they hate freedom and want a caliphate.

Yes, each of the states are different, but the uprisings are the same. Somebody is oppressing somebody else, and it pisses them off. In Bahrain, it's religious repression. Yes, I'm sure Iran is meddling... What? They're not supposed to?? We're the only ones who can meddle?

excon

I'm for liberal democracy . Bahrain was /is moving towards that path .Not everything requires an overthrow. An overthrow of the monarchy will be a set back to reform.
Fact ,Bahrain moved to a Constitutional monarchy in 2002. There have been moves towards reform which did things like give the franchise to women and the right to run for political office. There is more religious freedom there than in most states . People all over the ummah flock there on vacation to unwind and get themselves some western style freedom(even the hypocites in Tehran) .
The Parliament has some real powers unlike the fake Parliament in places like Egypt and Tehran and Syria .

Another thing for sure that's true... Radical Islam and democracy are mutually exclusive.

The first thing any Islamic Radical does that ever gets elected is get rid of everything truly democratic in nature.

Look at the sham elections in Iran as a prime example.

Almost as big a farce as ELections in CHina... and elections in the old Soviet Union. (and today's Russia if you listen to certain perspectives)

Found this in Huffpo.


Many have misread the recent eruption of riots in the streets of Manama, capital of the tiny, oil-rich Persian Gulf island state of Bahrain.

The government of Bahrain points an accusing finger at Iran. They say that the riots in Bahrain resulted from a well-planned sinister master plan of Iran -- a next door neighbor -- to topple the government. There's more than a grain of truth in that accusation.

At first, the riots in Bahrain were perceived as another shaking Domino piece in the trembling Middle East, perpetrated by people demanding freedom and bread.

That is not the case in Bahrain.

Bahrain is neither Egypt nor Tunisia where poverty and oppression sent people to the streets. Bahrain is the most liberal of the Gulf States with a per capita gross domestic product of $40,400, the world's 19th highest, although its population numbers only 764,000, ranking the 163rd in the world.

Political and military observers say that culprit in the current Bahrain riots is Iran, for a reason: In 2001 Saddam Hussein announced that Kuwait was in fact the 19th province of Iraq, and his army invaded Kuwait. That was the official cause for the first Gulf War. Now there are official and public voices in Iran claiming Bahrain is the 14th Province of Iran.

Therefore, it is clear why Iran has a strong interest in political change in Bahrain. Its veiled agenda is to overthrow the Sunni Muslim regime of the King, Sheikh Hamad bin Isa Al-Khalifa, and replace it with a Shia Muslim loyal to Tehran. Bahrain has 70% Shiite majority, who are very politically engaged and follow ****e Iran. The Shia majority in Bahrain is significantly underrepresented politically and discontent at how 2,000 family members of the King and his circle deal themselves the best cards. Bahrain is the hub of the U.S. 5th Fleet in the Persian Gulf and of a major British fleet. It is also a major banking and trade facility for the region. Bahrain's oil production at about 40,000 barrels per day, and it natural gas sales, provide about 60% of its budget revenues. With those numbers, and with Iran ogling Bahrain's oil reserves and strategic location strongly coveted by the U.S -- the Iranians seem to have two goals. The first -- send a clear message to the U.S.: You stir riots in Iran -- an accusation the U.S denies -- then we'll wreck your strategic ally, Bahrain. That is not a small threat.

But even without wanting to get even for riots in Iran, Tehran has always had an independent agenda regarding Bahrain. That's the second reason for Iran's move to agitate the regime in Bahrain. The alleged subversive Iranian involvement in Bahrain this week is not new. Last summer the Bahrain government arrested 165 Shiites and accused them of being a part of "a sophisticated terror group supported internationally," that was trying to topple the regime by force. That was not a new isolated incidence. In 1981, just two years after the Islamic revolution in Tehran, there were Shiite attempts to overthrow Bahrain's government, and in 1995 there were Shiite riots in Bahrain, both supported by Iran. In 1996 an Iranian diplomat with contacts to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards was ousted from Bahrain for "undiplomatic" activities. Six individuals appeared on Bahrain TV and admitted that they were trained by Hezbollah in Lebanon, and received orders from an Iranian intelligence officer.

That pattern of Iranian involvement was repeated in 2005 when a Shiite crowed demonstrated in Manama in support of Iran's supreme leader. In 2008 the Shiite demonstrations took a turn when demonstrators demanded the removal of the U.S 5th Fleet from Bahrain.

Again and again, the foot prints of Hezbollah, Iran's terrorist organization subsidiary and dirty jobs contractor were visible in subversive activities in Bahrain.

If the Iranian plans to oust the Bahrain government and appoint a loyal head of state in his place succeed, their multiple goals would be achieved without any military movement. The Iranians will cause the ousting of the threatening 5th Fleet from Manama port. They will hold a strategic point near the straits of Hormuz where 20% of the U.S oil supply passes, and they will signal to the other Gulf states with Shiite population -- such as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia to get in line with Iran, or else.



This is a challenge the U.S. cannot ignore.

Haggai Carmon: The Riots in Bahrain: Not Another Domino Stone (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/haggai-carmon/the-riots-in-bahrain-not-_b_825672.html)

The Shia majority in Bahrain is significantly underrepresented politically and discontent at how 2,000 family members of the King and his circle deal themselves the best cards.Hello again, tom:

Not another domino? The king might be a real nice dictator, but if it looks like a duck...

Excon