Quote Originally Posted by PanzerJaeger View Post
The problem is that there are other emerging and re-emerging powers who are all too willing to prop up strong men around the world. Speaking as an American, standing for democracy and human rights is all well and good, but not if it leaves the United States at a strategic disadvantage in a critical region.

Egypt was a key ally against the Soviets and later against Islamic terrorism. Hopefully this unrest will yield a secular, democratic state that embraces Western values (lol), but President Obama needs to be prepared to deal aggressively with whoever comes to power to keep Egypt in the US' corner.
As an American, I would tend to agree with you. However, abscense a clear and immediate military threat it is hard to justify to anyone other than Americans that we support a bad regime to benefit us at their expense. Furthermore, where do we draw the line? Can nations continue to support oppressive regimes because it keeps their energy, labor and agricultural prices low? Doing such things also minimizes true acts of international humanitarianism and defense of human rights on the part of Americans.

There is no doubt that whoever takes the reigns in Egypt must be held accountable by both regional and world leaders. I can think of far worse regimes than the one being ousted in Egypt, and I find it highly likely that a fledgling democracy is going to fail, at least initially, and will require its problems to be ironed out.

The question is what level of patience do the Egyptians have, and what are their short term expectations? Short of long term financial infusions by multiple world partners, nothing is going to create equality and jobs overnight, but all too often the people involved in fledgling democracies and revolutions expect immediate results. I would hope the education level of Egyptians as a whole would prevent them from the same path as, say, Bolivia.