Egypt

[Fragony]

Maybe a democracy just isn't what's best for them, and they are better off with a soft strong hand keeping things in check. Things are much more complicated there, it cannot be compared to European's rise of nations

[Fisherking]

Counter protests: http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsCont...ro,-antiM.aspx

[HoreTore]

Point is simple, there is no such thing as an arab-spring, it's business as usual. The arab-spring exists only the minds of leftist intellectulocos who know, for a fact, that they are screaming for democracy. The reality however is genocide of minorities, why do you think these backed Khadaffi and still back Assad. Let's not even begin about central Africa. Wrong as usual.

Why do you insist on showing us that you don't know what the Arab spring was about?

I'll say it again: the Arab spring showed that the population in Arab countries could successfully overthrow their dictator. It was the first time such an event had occurred in the region.


The "left-wing"(most of them are centrist, but I guess such nuances are lost on you) intellectuals are spot on as always, while the right-wngers are as clueless as they have always been.

[Fragony]

Why do you insist on showing us that you don't know what the Arab spring was about?

I'll say it again: the Arab spring showed that the population in Arab countries could successfully overthrow their dictator. It was the first time such an event had occurred in the region.


The "left-wing"(most of them are centrist, but I guess such nuances are lost on you) intellectuals are spot on as always, while the right-wngers are as clueless as they have always been.

Can I have a bit of that clueless stuff it sounds great. Sorry for giving you another facepalm du jour but do you even know remotely anything about the place and it's history. Do you actually think this is anything new, if so I'll arrange you an appointment, last room on the left, you want the door with 'total idiot support' written on it. And don't you dare drooling there.

[HoreTore]

Can I have a bit of that clueless stuff it sounds great. Sorry for giving you another facepalm du jour but do you even know remotely anything about the place and it's history. Do you actually think this is anything new, if so I'll arrange you an appointment, last room on the left, you want the door with 'total idiot support' written on it. And don't you dare drooling there.

Yes, this is new. Saddam was the only one of that batch of dictators who had been overthrown prior to the Arab spring, but he was invaded by the US. Iran preceded it, but it failed to spread.

The Arab spring was a wave of overthrows or attempted overthrows across almost an entire region. To say that isn't a momentous event makes you utterly clueless.

[Fragony]

Yes, this is new. Saddam was the only one of that batch of dictators who had been overthrown prior to the Arab spring, but he was invaded by the US. Iran preceded it, but it failed to spread.

The Arab spring was a wave of overthrows or attempted overthrows across almost an entire region. To say that isn't a momentous event makes you utterly clueless.

Iranians aren't Arabs they are (mostly) Persians. Can I have two clueless please, and a coffee.

[HoreTore]

Iranians aren't Arabs they are (mostly) Persians. Can I have two clueless please, and a coffee.

Wow - shocker!

[Fragony]

Wow - shocker!

No, coffee

[HoreTore]

No, coffee

The proper argument against the reference to Iran is that the Shah was not a dictator from the same wave and mold as the dictators who are overthrown now.

[Fragony]

The proper argument against the reference to Iran is that the Shah was not a dictator from the same wave and mold as the dictators who are overthrown now.

Still pretty off no. An arab spring without arabs. Ceci n'est pas une, what the que did you just call it? At least it would be somewhat artistic but like this it really makes no sense

[HoreTore]

Still pretty off no. An arab spring without arabs. Ceci n'est pas une, what the que did you just call it? At least it would be somewhat artistic but like this it really makes no sense

.....And so I stated that it didn't count.

[Fragony]

.....And so I stated that it didn't count.

Oh you did, sorry for missing it. Perhaps it's just that Iranians and Arabs are absolutely fed up with having to live under the rules of islamists, I don't blame them really, about time they are fed up with these beards and make something nice out of the place.

[Fragony]

Edit, say it twice. Even by accident it's just better

of course I simply screwed up but having an excuse is awesome

I don't have any, help needed

[Fisherking]

Not so good developments: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/w...w/20935811.cms

[Fragony]

I kinda like it really. Shoot to kill please. Or at least hurt very badly. Or at least very painfull.

[Fisherking]

I kinda like it really. Shoot to kill please. Or at least hurt very badly. Or at least very painfull.

Good thing you are not in the US! They would come and arrest you for that and forget about you.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-pol...-suicide-watch

Big brother is watching you.

[Fragony]

Heard about it. Kid is kinda stupid, you have to be carefull, some words link together and people get nervous. But release him already, if you aren't stupid if you are 17 you will probably be boring at 18.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Good thing you are not in the US! They would come and arrest you for that and forget about you.

http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-pol...-suicide-watch

Big brother is watching you.

Fisherking is posting an article from AlterNet. What has our government become for this to happen?

[PanzerJaeger]

Thankfully, Morsi's rather overt overtures to China must have woken someone up at the State Department. I have said it once and I'll say it again, these people are not capable of secular democracy, and the United States' toxic, erratic mix of idealism and realpolitik in the Middle East has and will continue to hinder the pursuit of our interests in the region. Hopefully we have reasserted control through this coup, but this all could have been avoided if we had stood by Mubarak as he had stood by us for years. He was a reliable puppet and we abandoned him, a betrayal of which other reliable puppets across the globe will certainly take note. This 'revolution' resulted in needless damage to our regional hegemony and not much else. The Egyptians demanded democracy, and after a mere year of it, they came out in the millions to celebrate a military coup ending it. Is there any more vivid evidence of the infantilization of the Arab Street?

[Fragony]

51 dead, hundreds wounded, Morsi calls for a revolt

I got beer, need popcorn.

GO ARMY knit some carpets with these beards I'll buy one

[a completely inoffensive name]

Thankfully, Morsi's rather overt overtures to China must have woken someone up at the State Department. I have said it once and I'll say it again, these people are not capable of secular democracy, and the United States' toxic, erratic mix of idealism and realpolitik in the Middle East has and will continue to hinder the pursuit of our interests in the region. Hopefully we have reasserted control through this coup, but this all could have been avoided if we had stood by Mubarak as he had stood by us for years. He was a reliable puppet and we abandoned him, a betrayal of which other reliable puppets across the globe will certainly take note. This 'revolution' resulted in needless damage to our regional hegemony and not much else. The Egyptians demanded democracy, and after a mere year of it, they came out in the millions to celebrate a military coup ending it. Is there any more vivid evidence of the infantilization of the Arab Street?

Story seems to be a bit more complex then that. The democratically elected leader decided he was above the Constitution he was just elected by. The army claims to have a sacred kinship with the people of egypt which is why the army has so far refused to simply become a military dictatorship with a general in charge. This might actually be a good step towards moderating abuse of power by those elected. The situation has certainly damaged the credibility of the muslim brotherhood for the next election and the whole affair has given opposing, liberal camps time to organize for the inevitable second election cycle.

[Perditrix Mvndorvm]

Story seems to be a bit more complex then that. The democratically elected leader decided he was above the Constitution he was just elected by. The army claims to have a sacred kinship with the people of egypt which is why the army has so far refused to simply become a military dictatorship with a general in charge. This might actually be a good step towards moderating abuse of power by those elected. The situation has certainly damaged the credibility of the muslim brotherhood for the next election and the whole affair has given opposing, liberal camps time to organize for the inevitable second election cycle.

The army only supported the people because Morsi threatened the flow of military aid from the US. Morsi's totalitarian tendencies were merely convenient pretexts.

[Fisherking]

Morsi’s government did not seem that democratic. While Egypt had been a dictatorship or one party system it was more secularized.

He at least appeared to have hijacked a democratic process and was trying to make it into an Islamic State.

There is also the matter of Jihadists in the Sinai operating with his knowledge and consent.

This was both a popular uprising and a military overthrow, and I am sure the Army acted in its own best interest.

It is a bit too early to tell how it will all pan out. Most of the violence seems to have been started by the MB or their supporters and the interim government does have the appearance of being more secular and moderate. Let us hope it was a victory for the Egyptian People and that they can get a freer and more democratic government.

[a completely inoffensive name]

The army only supported the people because Morsi threatened the flow of military aid from the US. Morsi's totalitarian tendencies were merely convenient pretexts.

Interesting, but why did they then kick out Mubarak then? What ended the realpolitik connection between the US and a stable, secular dictator who had been causing no issues since the 1980s?

[Beskar]

I find Panzer's continued call for a realpolitik hegemony over the middle-east to be perplexing. Why do you think such a foreign policy is a good idea? We're on track to be self-sufficient in regards to oil very soon, and we'd do better to assert our strength to the south if we were going to exert it at all.

Panzer does have a totalitarian bend to his beliefs. Idea being, it is better to have a totalitarian middle east supported by US interest, like Saddam, opposed to any real opportunities of self-governance of the local populace.

Personally, I believe if the whole world was democratic, then a collective hegemony would naturally develop, simply because of the governmental make-up of a democracy requires explaining yourself to the people and be seen to use far less extreme or authoritative measures. As such, states are far more willing to compromise and settle issues than to just jump in guns blazing.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Personally, I believe if the whole world was democratic, then a collective hegemony would naturally develop, simply because of the governmental make-up of a democracy requires explaining yourself to the people and be seen to use far less extreme or authoritative measures. As such, states are far more willing to compromise and settle issues than to just jump in guns blazing.

Then explain how the past 60 years of increased democracy and self determination has brought more nation-states than ever before. Democracy is a combative process and it naturally tends to cause neglected minorities to break away in favor of a smaller but more representative impact on the world.

[PanzerJaeger]

I find Panzer's continued call for a realpolitik hegemony over the middle-east to be perplexing. Why do you think such a foreign policy is a good idea? We're on track to be self-sufficient in regards to oil very soon, and we'd do better to assert our strength to the south if we were going to exert it at all.

I do not subscribe to neoconservatism. That particular ideology, which was the result of post-Cold War hubris, is fundamentally flawed in its tenet that, at a fundamental level, all peoples aspire to the Western ideal of society - a democratic system based in civil liberties and human rights. The belief was that if these Muslim peoples could be freed from their authoritarian governments, they would become democracies and natural allies of the United States. The failure of neocon geopolitical strategy during the Bush administration is often blamed on the attempt at greater hegemony, which is a fundamentally flawed interpretation of the goals and motivations of its backers. The true cause of the failures in Iraq and Afghanistan was neocon faith in tribal Muslim societies to act in their own self interest, to come together to build a civil society based on Western ideals. The reality is that the Muslim throngs in the Middle East and Central Asia are not people in the same way that you and I are. Their beliefs, motivations, and social structures are so far removed from ours that the idea that they could function within Western norms is laughable. They simply do not have the intellectual capacity for it, due to a host of reasons I will not go into in this post. People get the leaders that they deserve, and far from being thrust upon them, authoritarianism is cultivated and rewarded through the zero sum politics of the region.

My geopolitical beliefs could best be described at this point as simple nationalism in the vein of Kissinger. We are a long way from 1991, and the United States can no longer afford to indulge in idealistic notions of spreading freedom and democracy around the globe. We need to pick winners and back them, regardless of the local power structure in which they operate. There are essentially two kinds of nations - powers and clients. Our status as a power comes with enormous benefits, benefits that we have come to rely on - most important of which at the moment is our ability to print endless money without being penalized with high interest rates in the global treasury market. If we lose our power status, we lose our default currency status and the whole house of cards implodes. We are no longer the only game in town, however, and clients recognize this. Observe Russia and China's steadfast loyalty to their man in Syria and compare that to our treatment of Mubarak when his tenure became slightly inconvenient. Now, if you were an aspiring autocrat in an oil rich Middle Eastern nation, who would you rather align yourself with? And if given a credible alternative, would you continue to sell your oil in dollar denominated currency? Just as in the Cold War and virtually every other period in our nation's history, we will have to sacrifice certain ideals to further our national interests in the new multipolar world.

[Kadagar_AV]

wrote stuff

[a completely inoffensive name]

OR and this might just be crazy.....

We could take our money and invest in ourselves and become energy independent so we don't need to care a single bit about the middle east. Let Russia and China play politics over the oil while we gain a decades long head start in energy generation.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Well, at least Panzer's honest. I think your interpretation of the middle-eastern mindset is a bit flawed and bordering on racist, but I won't deny that for the most part they definitely don't want any part of what we have to offer, at least not in a serious way. That's not because they don't have the 'capacity' for it, but because they are human beings with egos and a sense of history, and they don't like being pushed around. That's not hard to relate to.

What do you think of isolationism? Of minding our own business, and finding ethical and non-hypocritical ways to do business? Self sufficiency? Do we need to prop up dictators, in your opinion?

The problem with isolationism is that people assume the policy entails forcing oneself to be both blind and deaf and thus susceptible to another pearl harbor or 9/11.