Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

Egyptian uncertainty

So. Are we promoting a democratic uprising, and if so, where’s the proof? Are we naively helping usher in another Muslim theocracy, at the expense of long-time allies who have been amenable to helping US interests? Do “we” have any say in any of this at all…?

I don’t know. But here are some links to keep you up to speed on what’s happening in Egypt (courtesy geoffb):

An Overview of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s Stance on U.S. and Jihad; Translation of Its Draft Political Platform

Egypt Uprising: New Anti-American Tone on Egyptian TV – US, Iran Accused of Orchestrating Uprising; TV Host: We Will Not Have Abu Ghureib, Rapes, and American Ignorance Here

Egypt Uprising: London-Based Egyptian Islamist Yasser Al-Sirri Calls to Block International Shipping in the Suez Canal and to Halt the Flow of Oil

From de Spiegel online

Rural Poor Paid to Attack Opposition Supporters

Will Democracy Become Islam’s Best Friend?

A Nile Insurgency and Uncertain Egyptian Future

And others from Spiegel

197 Replies to “Egyptian uncertainty”

  1. happyfeet says:

    America is definitely not promoting a democratic uprising. Mostly we’re fecklessly wringing our hands.

    Very cowardly.

    The status quo is untenable and the future might suck, but the US has to do more than piss its panties. At the very least America could have used this crisis to reiterate its support for representative democracy and self-determination.

    Fail.

    And that sends a very very bad signal to democratic reformers across the middle east and beyond. There was a big picture here, but bumblefuck didn’t see it. The CIA, busily watching gay porn and eating twizzlers, didn’t see it. And the right has demonstrated for the people of the middle east that its yimmer yammer about democracy promotion was hollow and farcical.

  2. Darleen says:

    And the right has demonstrated for the people of the middle east that its yimmer yammer about democracy promotion was hollow and farcical.

    I feel like quoting McGehee here:

    FUHF

  3. Jeff G. says:

    America is definitely not promoting a democratic uprising. Mostly we’re fecklessly wringing our hands.

    You’re so stuck in your own narrative that you don’t even realize what’s happening.

    Go write a short story about feckless, pants-pissing America, set it to jazz music, and give it a reading at some hipster coffee shop. Adults are talking here.

  4. happyfeet says:

    really Darleen? You think the kids in Egypt believe a word about democracy promotion or self-determination? After America’s vice president couldn’t even call our rent boy dictator a dictator? And after Boehner and McConnell said teh administration was managing the fiasco swimmingly?

    I’m pretty sure the Egyptians what began these protests think them ones in America what have been yammering about democracy are really quite full of shit. Do you have any evidence that America’s timorous performance has enhanced people’s identification of America with ideas about freedom and self-determination.

    I bet you don’t.

  5. happyfeet says:

    there was a bigger picture than just the political fate of tourism-dependent Egypt here Mr. Jeff

    simple as that

  6. Darleen says:

    HF channels George Soros

    The main stumbling block is Israel. In reality, Israel has as much to gain from the spread of democracy in the Middle East as the United States has. But Israel is unlikely to recognize its own best interests because the change is too sudden and carries too many risks. And some U.S. supporters of Israel are more rigid and ideological than Israelis themselves.

    Damned Joooos. Too worried about the Muslim Brotherhood (kittens, really) stepping into the vacuum and creating an Islamist state.

  7. Darleen says:

    1979 never happened for you, eh, hf?

  8. happyfeet says:

    Darleen I never said anything about Israel being a stumbling block

    I hope America remains committed to Israel’s security I think that is very very important with respect to advancing our ideals of democracy and self-determination in the middle east.

  9. Jeff G. says:

    This protest was about bread prices. It’s been coopted by just about everyone — you included (and perhaps even especially), happy.

    If calling for Mubarek to step down now leads to a power vacuum filled by the Muslim brotherhood, the entire balance of power in the region changes, and not in our interests.

    Who are the democratic reformers, happy? Where’s the Egyptian Declaration of Independence? What do these reformers stand for? What do they want going forward?

    The trappings of “democracy” — the feel good bullshit that gave us one vote, one time, with Hamas assuming power in Gaza — is not something we need to promote so that we don’t look “feckless.” Instead, it’s best not to be feckless. And providing a veneer of legitimacy for the Muslim Brotherhood is both feckless AND insane.

  10. Joe says:

    The U.S. may be quietly saying to the Egyptian Army, do what you have to do to maintain order and prevent greater chaos, but try not to kill people, while openly denouncing violence and extremism. But I have doubts even that sort of realpolitik is taking place. I get the feeling that the Administration really is as disorganized and feckless as it appears to be.

  11. Ernst Schreiber says:

    I think Glenn Reynolds is right in that our hand was much stronger back before we dropped the ball in ’05.

  12. happyfeet says:

    the April 6 movement is not about bread it’s about freedom

  13. Joe says:

    Mumbarak is dying. He is old. He is saying he will hang on through the elections. Expect the Egyptian Army to run its own picked “reformer” in the elections, rig the result, and in the next half year crack down on those groups it considers extremist. After 30 years of holding down the Muslim Brotherhood, do you really think the Army (which was a central part of that crack down) is going to let the MB take over the country?

  14. Jeff G. says:

    there was a bigger picture than just the political fate of tourism-dependent Egypt here Mr. Jeff

    Guess what? You aren’t the only person who recognizes that.

    simple as that

    Simple is right.

  15. sdferr says:

    It’s striking that many commentators in the press today (setting aside the blog world) recognize what the US should have been doing to push Egypt towards liberalism years ago and conclude the Egyptians wouldn’t be in the tough spot they’re in now. But if these diagnoses are correct, how can we waste another day not applying those lessons to other autocracies nominally our allies who also have a day of reckoning on the way?

  16. Jeff G. says:

    What’s more? We’re seeing these things all throughout the region. As global food prices have skyrocketed. After we began dumping 600 billion pieces of paper into the money supply.

    But hey, the DOW is at 12K! PROSPERITY!

  17. happyfeet says:

    that is mighty big picture thinking there Mr. sdferr

  18. Carin says:

    We just need to get behind the democratic reformers in Egypt. Tell me when we’ve identified them.

  19. sdferr says:

    Don’t they mostly identify themselves Carin, both to themselves and then to one another?

  20. Carin says:

    As Robert Gibbs said, the time for transition is now.

    Transition to what? Lemme eat my waffle.

  21. happyfeet says:

    or, we need to not get behind ideas that benevolent dictators are unfortunately precisely what the Egyptian chattel need for so they will behave appropriately

  22. Carin says:

    You got a name? A party?

    Muslim Brotherhood “only” has 30% support in Egypt. And, the “democratic” groups have how much support?

    Revolutions don’t have the greatest track record.

  23. Jeff G. says:

    Big picture thinking doesn’t involve throwing an ideal in the air and hoping.

    Too much is at stake. The Muslim Brotherhood wants to destroy the west. We can’t allow them a foothold.

    I don’t care if I’m not holding a fashionable posture — running around, trying to show how pro-democratic I am. I have years of writing to speak for me on that, albeit I couple my pro-democracy stance with a pro-liberty stance. But what I’m seeing is a kind of Egyptian civil war — and that’s not the same as a pro-democracy uprising. It might be there, but what are its arguments and what is its end game.

    Burke didn’t support the French Revolution. He supported the American revolution. He had his reasons. And they were sound ones. Burke wasn’t anti-freedom. He was prescient.

  24. sdferr says:

    We know, as Americans, that Revolutions resulting in just and stable governments are rare. We can’t argue, as Americans, that the risks inherent in political Revolution are too great, so great that our own should never have been undertaken. We know, or should know, as Americans, the difficulties steering between the Scylla and Charybdis of too great a license leading to anarchy and too great a control leading to tyranny. It’s a fucking knife edge in any and every case. Always has been.

  25. Jeff G. says:

    Dont’ be a racist, Carin. Why do you hate freedoms? Why do you think the brown sand people are chattel?

    Let them rise up and be carefully ushered into a theocracy by the only real organized opposition. For freedom!

  26. happyfeet says:

    irrespective of all that Mr. Jeff America is taking a stance that it is every very powerless to influence events. It’s not powerless though. But bumblefuck and a passive Team R have handled this crisis such that America’s ideals are very much drawn into question I think… particularly in the popular mind in the middle east.

    There’s no upside to that.

  27. Carin says:

    Pryce-Jones:

    Orderly transition” is mere verbiage in the circumstances, displaying ignorance as well as imperialism. No mechanism exists to pass power from Mubarak to anyone else. The plastic hour fills with ambitious contenders: Omar Suleiman, Muhammad El-Baradei, the Muslim Brotherhood, and some likely generals who can command the army. It will be just good luck if the winner of this free-for-all is not brutal and corrupt, and now untrustworthy into the bargain.

  28. happyfeet says:

    oh. that should say very very not every very

    how silly

  29. Darleen says:

    hf

    what do you think is going to happen to the 8 million Coptic Christians in Egypt if the Islamists gain substantial power? The rights of women?

    In January 1963, the Shah announced democratic reforms as part of a six-point program called the White Revolution, a program of reforms to divide landholdings such as those owned by religious foundations, grant women the right to vote and equality in marriage, and allow religious minorities a greater share in governmental offices. Ruhollah Ayatollah Khomeini led a movement among radical fundamentalists to oppose equal rights for women and minorities and the reform policies of the Shah. On January 22, 1963, Khomeini dictated a vigorously worded declaration denouncing the Westernization of Iran and economic reforms and human rights as anti-Islamic. […]

    In contrast, the Iranian fundamentalists sought to eradicate pre-600 A.D. Iranian culture and history and supersede it with an exclusive focus on post-600 A.D. This is in line with Khomeini’s decrees, such as one issued on March 21, 1963 in which he declared that Persian New Year (“Norooz”) celebrations be cancelled and that references to pre-Islamic Iran be eliminated. In 1964 Khomeini was arrested and exiled to Turkey. On September 5, 1965 he left Turkey for Najaf, Iraq, where he spent 13 years as an exile, out of touch with the Iranian people and culture. On October 3, 1978 he left Iraq for Kuwait, but was refused entry at the border. After a period of hesitation in which Algeria, Lebanon and Syria were considered as possible destinations, Ayatollah Khomeini embarked for Paris. Once arrived in Paris, Khomeini took up residence in the suburb of Neauphle-le-Chateau in a house that had been rented for him by Iranian exiles in France. Subsequently, journalists from across the world visited the cleric, and the image and the words of Ayatollah Khomeini soon became a daily feature in Iran and across the world. The BBC and other agencies broadcast nightly interviews with Khomeini beamed into Iran, which incited the people against the Shah.

    In November 1978 then President Carter nominated George Ball as a member of the Trilateral Commission. The commission acted under the direct control of the National Security Council’s Zbigniew Brzezinski, an ardent opponent of the Shah of Iran. This commission cultivated a clandestine Iran task force. While serving on this commission, George Ball championed cessation of United States support for the Shah and clandestine support for Rubhullah Ayatollah Khomeini who, albeit in exile, led a proletariat Islamic opposition. […]

    In mid-January 1979, Ayatollah Khomeini returned and the monarchy collapsed on February 11, 1979. Subsequently, Iranians, many of whom believed in Ayatollah Khomeini’s promises of freedom and democracy, voted by a national referendum to become an Islamic Republic on April 1, 1979. They also approved a new constitution, and Khomeini became Supreme Leader of Iran. But Khomeini did not fulfill his pre-revolution promises to the people of Iran. Instead, he started to marginalize and crush the opposition groups and those who opposed the clerical rules. He ordered establishment of many institutions to consolidate power and safeguard the cleric leadership. During his early years in power he launched the Cultural Revolution in order to Islamize the whole country. Many people lost employment, and books were revised or burnt according to the new Islamic values. A newly established Islamic judicial system sentenced many Iranians to death and long-term imprisonment, as they were in opposition to those radical changes. The current regime continues many of the policies of the regime of the now-deceased Ayatollah Khomeini, including revising and eradicating Iranian history, culture and identity.*

    Your failure to learn from history is amazing, hf.

  30. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Fareed Zakaria was right when he argued that the world has too much democracy and not enough liberalism. Even if he was right for the wrong reasons.

  31. Pablo says:

    It’s powerless with Bumblefuck at the helm. Elections have consequences. We elected someone with no fucking clue as to how to conduct foreign policy.

  32. Carin says:

    If the American Revolution has taken place with today’s rules and standards and morals and media … the new government would have been skewered and held-up for war crimes before it had even finished the articles of Confederations.

  33. Jeff G. says:

    We know, as Americans, that Revolutions resulting in just and stable governments are rare. We can’t argue, as Americans, that the risks inherent in political Revolution are too great, so great that our own should never have been undertaken.

    Our own had a plan. I can show you the documents and charters, if you’d like.

    We know, or should know, as Americans, the difficulties steering between the Scylla and Charybdis of too great a license leading to anarchy and too great a control leading to tyranny. It’s a fucking knife edge in any and every case. Always has been.

    Knowing that, it makes sense to proceed with caution. And counseling caution — and planning, which of necessity cannot include the Muslim Brotherhood, if we’re to support it — isn’t the same as being colonialist or racist.

    Happy, like many on the left, tries hard to shame those who don’t allow marketing to dictate their positions. I remain unaffected. Suggest I’m a racist. I know that I’m not, and I know why I hold the position I do.

    I saw this same thing happen under Carter. That gives me pause.

  34. bh says:

    “[…]too much democracy and not enough liberalism.”

    + 1,000,000.

  35. Carin says:

    Let them rise up and be carefully ushered into a theocracy by the only real organized opposition. For freedom!

    You’re right. If they choose sharia and FGM, who am I to argue? It’s their choice.

  36. sdferr says:

    We elected someone with no fucking clue as to how to conduct foreign policy.

    Yes. This is a problem. Still, there are many people — in the Military for instance — who are not Obama.

  37. sdferr says:

    I don’t see the need for insult here.

  38. happyfeet says:

    differences between Iran and Egypt are include

    no ayatollah

    no oils

    tourism-dependent economy

    a much more open society

    a vastly more sophisticated communications/media infrastructure … poke me if you heart democracy

    no waters

    no foozle

  39. Darleen says:

    The similarities between Iran and Egypt [Egyptians believe —

    54%: Believe men and women should be segregated in the workplace

    82%: Believe adulterers should be stoned

    84%: Believe apostates from Islam should face the death penalty

    77%: Believe thieves should be flogged or have their hands cut off

  40. Spiny Norman says:

    Who cares if Egypt has “no oils”, they have the fucking Suez Canal.

    You known, that little ditch that runs from the Med to the Red…

  41. happyfeet says:

    what percent are concerned what the effect rampant adulterer-stoning would have on their tourism industry I wonder

  42. Jeff G. says:

    I don’t see the need for insult here.

    To whom is this addressed? The freedom lover, or the horrific anti-democracy failshit people who want to keep the sand niggers under our thumb like little brown sandal-wearing slave children because we aren’t as good and righteous as the freedom lovers?

  43. happyfeet says:

    the Suez Canal is one of those things that if you don’t manage it responsibly you lose it

    it’s like driving a car or like when you got your first bb gun

  44. Ernst Schreiber says:

    I’ll take a civic society over an open society. Plenty of societies in that part of the world that are “open” about the favoritism and skid-greasing that goes on.

  45. sdferr says:

    To anyone and everyone. Wherever it applies.

  46. Spiny Norman says:

    You *know*…

    Gah, even mere exposure to hf-speak has fucked up my grammar.

  47. Jeff G. says:

    differences between Iran and Egypt are include

    I guess you don’t recall how “cosmopolitan” was Iran before the revolution.

    As for the “no oils” bit, find the Suez on a map, and read some about Nasser.

    Carin asked specifically — and I’ll follow up and echo her sentiments — by asking who are the pro-liberty reformers and what is their plan going forward? I’d back them, as I did with the reformers in Iran.

    What I won’t do is cheer for a hasty overthrow that winds up with an Egypt controlled by Islamists.

  48. bh says:

    I think we’re too democratic here in the US, btw.

  49. Ernst Schreiber says:

    What do you call an argument that insists upon itself? That’s got to be mentioned by some rhetor somewhere, doesn’t it?

  50. sdferr says:

    Two plus years of the United States highest officials being unable to speak the words islamist jihadist isn’t a helpful condition to find ourselves in today, that’s for damn sure. The imbecile sitting on the top of the executive heap seems incapable of identifying the enemies of the US by name, so we and the rest of the world have a necessary confusion where it comes to the Ikhwan and their fundamentalist allies. This needs remedy, in plain language.

  51. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Amen bh

  52. Carin says:

    I say we go FULL BOARD and support the Pro-liberty Reformers of Egypt. In fact, I’m ready to commit 100%, full-throated support! Who’s with me?

    Perhaps we could interview them? Help design their shirts or something?

  53. happyfeet says:

    the pro-liberty reformers are the people what will vote in the open elections America isn’t doing very much to help orchestrate

    self-determination is the goal, and it’s a goal what looks very much in the cards by hook or crook, so bumblefuck and Team R need to get cracking on making sure that the Egyptian peoples have a choice

    chop chop

    And if it’s simply that case that America has dropped the ball? That’s no reason to compromise what we believe.

  54. Pablo says:

    What I won’t do is cheer for a hasty overthrow that winds up with an Egypt controlled by Islamists.

    Who’s got a plan, is my question. It isn’t the people in the street. They only have a goal. The government is offering a plan that includes the goal and a reasonable way of attaining it. The protesters seem quite happy to burn the whole fucking thing down just as long as they get the goal right this very minute I can’t wait another minute and I’m ready to die thank you very much.

    These children ought to be taking yes for an answer. The goal is admirable. Their ends to that means are needlessly destructive.

  55. Ernst Schreiber says:

    The imbecile sitting on the top of the executive heap seems incapable of identifying the enemies of the US by name

    Only the foreign ones.

  56. Pablo says:

    Egyptian people do not want bumblefuck dictating their affairs to them. They’re proud like that.

  57. sdferr says:

    Good point Ernst, exactly right.

  58. Darleen says:

    hf

    What happens to the 1979 Israel-Egypt peace accord if the Islamists take over? Did you forget that part of 1979, too?

  59. happyfeet says:

    I think it would be in a right sorry state Darleen. We’d probably have to send big boats with guns over there.

  60. Ernst Schreiber says:

    the pro-liberty reformers are the people what will vote in the open elections America isn’t doing very much to help orchestrate

    They won’t be the only ones voting.

    self-determination is the goal, and it’s a goal what looks very much in the cards by hook or crook, so bumblefuck and Team R need to get cracking on making sure that the Egyptian peoples have a choice

    So who do they choose? The barbarians or the savages?

  61. Squid says:

    …the pro-liberty reformers are the people what will vote in the open elections…

    Much as I admire your insistence on treating people as individuals, one must recognize that in circumstances such as these, the identification of leaders, groups, and movements is critically important. It’s all well and good to recite “people everywhere just got to be free” like a mantra, but history (both ancient and contemporary) shows us that all too often, newly liberated people choose to be dominated by religious extremists.

    I add my voice to the chorus of those asking you to identify which groups and leaders in Egypt have the best chance of leading the country into a peaceful and mutually beneficial relationship with the United States. Because from where I’m sitting, turning Egypt into some kind of West Gaza seems like an extraordinarily bad idea.

  62. Carin says:

    So who do they choose? The barbarians or the savages?

    How ’bout those young fellows from the Muslim Brotherhood. They fixed up the school real nice. Such nice young men.

  63. Darleen says:

    Hey, look what that reichwinger extension of FauxNewz, aka the Los Angeles Times, is reporting

    Egypt’s Coptic Christians fear life without Mubarak

    Weeks before anti-Mubarak demonstrators in Cairo began their occupation of Tahrir Square, Copt protesters in Alexandria were choking on tear gas as they faced down government police.

    But now, many say they’re rethinking their opposition to Mubarak’s government, fearing its collapse might spur an anti-Christian backlash if the Muslim Brotherhood or other Islamist groups gain a foothold.

    “He’s the best of the worst,” said Sameh Joseph, a church worker at the Patriarch of the Orthodox Christians Church in Alexandria. “Whoever comes after him might want to destroy us.”

  64. sdferr says:

    Richard Fernandez points out that snap elections in the Philippines back when Marcos was on the way out happened to catch the powerful communists there unawares, resulting in their non-participation and subsequently in their marginalization. Not to say that the same would happen in Egypt, but that it’s a possibility worth consideration anyhow.

  65. cranky-d says:

    This thread doesn’t have to be about happyfeet. However, it will be.

  66. Squid says:

    What do you call an argument that insists upon itself?

    It’s called begging the question, and the daily misuse of the term sets my teeth on edge.

    !GEEZ I HATE THAT

  67. happyfeet says:

    could Obama repudiate America’s ideals of freedom anymore eloquently than by putting America’s imprimatur on a newly-minted dictatorship in the middle east?

  68. happyfeet says:

    jeez I am late for going to the workplace… *any more* I mean

  69. happyfeet says:

    why are you late pikachu my boss person will say

    for freedom!

  70. sdferr says:

    Of course Copts fear the future, since their present extending back a number of years has been awful as it is. All the more reason, given their fears, that they at least have the impetus to organize politically, (and probably on the liberal side of things, I’d assume, given their minority status). So that should be one identifiable group working for liberal politics right there.

  71. happyfeet says:

    copts and young people and businesspeople and mayhap the military will be all in cause they shore do likes our monies

  72. bh says:

    That’s ironic, Squid.

  73. Carin says:

    Don’t fear the Muslim Brotherhood, says the Brookings Institute:

    The crisis in North Africa has come up unexpectedly for President Obama and Secretary Clinton. They have moved quickly to grasp the challenge. They know the stakes and the delicacy of our options. Neither complacency nor panic is the right American response.

    They should not be afraid of the Muslim Brotherhood. Living with it won’t be easy but it should not be seen as inevitably our enemy. We need not demonize it nor endorse it. In any case, Egyptians now will decide their fate and the role they want the Ikhwan to play in their future.

    More:

    That said, with or without the Brotherhood, a democratic government will reflect popular preferences, and it happens to be the case that most Egyptians, secular and Islamist alike, share a rather pronounced dislike of Israel. This may introduce some tensions between Egypt and Israel, but it will not threaten the peace treaty the two countries signed more than three decades ago. Egyptian opposition figures across the political spectrum know this is a line that cannot be crossed.

    Jew hate is popular in Egypt. But there’s some line that won’t be crossed. yea. Right.

  74. happyfeet says:

    we gotta have some faith in the sound it’s the one good thing that we got

  75. geoffb says:

    The goal is admirable. Their ends to that means are needlessly destructive.

    An apt description of every campaign, protest, issue, pressed by all of Community Organizer-dom. It is their essence. Their raison d’être.

  76. Ernst Schreiber says:

    [I]n the last days of World War I [the German Marxist Rosa Luxemburg] summoned the European Left to risk everything in the battle to overthrow the democracies of the West, because the choice before them was “socialism or barbarism.” The slogan has been a battle cry for radicals ever since.

    If the choice is socialism or barbarism, of course socialism can still seem attractive to progressives[.] Apocalyptic choice is endemic to the revolutionary equation because it precludes coming to terms with the existing order or entertaining the possibility of piecemeal adjustments and reforms. The elimination of the middle ground justifies in advance the crimes that revolutionaries intend to commit. Before and afterward, it excuses them from drawing a balance sheet of the real-world consequences of their acts.[emphasis added] (David Horowitz The Politics of Bad Faith: The Radical Assault on America’s Future (New York, 1998) p. 22)

    Replace socialism with Islamism and the point holds.

    The lesson being, when you have to choose between Barbarism and Savagery, choose barbarism, because the Islamsists, like their socialist brethren before them, are the savages.

    Also, pikachus lurv them some revolutionary nihilism methinks.

  77. Bob Reed says:

    One of the problems with figuring out the lay-of-the-land, so to speak, is the effect of the timeless Arab mindset; “the enemy of my enemy, is my friend”. Many disparate groups with wildly different agendas have seized upon this convenient crisis, and are determined not to let it go to waste, in order to push their own agenda.

    And the useful idiots in the western press are allowing them under this umbrella of “peaceful protesters” who are only “yearning to be free!”; this is not only an asinine, but a dangerous romanticizing of what’s in play.

    The protests, first and foremost, were precipitated by the dramatic price hikes in food recently. Naturally, these afforded the opportunity to criticize the head of such a totalitarian, centrally controlled, state like Egypt. And some of these folks are legitimately calling for free election, self determination, self governance, and essentially US style “freedom”. But it’s important to realize as well that there are a great percentago of normally apolitical types, corresponding to the low information/low involvement voters here at home, who are just angrily calling for Mubarak’s ouster; and who either don’t care who replaces him, have given no thought to how he will be replaced, or will be counting on someone else to decide that for them.

    As long as that person can get the trains to run on time, will deliver stable food prices, and will “pivot” and “focus laser-like” on jobs for the masses; or, you know, give them free shit…

    And just as important to recognize is that there are a great many other players, marxists and Islamic Theocrats for instance, who are more than happy to ride the wave of discontent into power.

    Make no mistake. Once “legitimately” elected, one time, it would be a short interval indeed before a group like the Muslim Brotherhood would outlaw opposition and dispense with elections. It would be like Iran in 79 all over again…

    The Egyptian military, with US support, needs to ensure civil order, and work with the traditional civil authorities and sort the legitimate political players from the anarchists/Al Queda/Hamas types who would use a pretense of election to seize power for all time, if we really want to help the Egyptians find their way to an actual, western, republican style of government.

    And that, my friends, begs the question of whether that kind of governance is even congruent with religious fundamentalist Islam and society with no history of a separation of religion and governance.

    So it is indeed a legitimate question to ask who are the supposed freedom loving players in Egypts politics.

    And the biggest mistake Obama has been making has been not stressing enough the fact that the people of the US stand with our allies, the people of Egypt…

    just my two cents

  78. Bob Reed says:

    Sorry for the tl:dr comment, but this is not an issue where brevity can always suffice.

  79. Jeff G. says:

    I don’t care about being liked by people who are wrong. So long as I’m right, I’d prefer those who are wrong to either come around to my way of thinking — embrace what’s right — or else fear the fuck out of me.

    There’s an analogy here. Wherein “me” isn’t really just me.

    Some assembly required.

  80. sdferr says:

    Sometimes I get the impression that the presumption of the Muslim Brotherhood’s power — a fatalistic assumption that they will necessarily win this contest on account of being the most ruthless thugs at hand in Egypt — amounts to a nearly islamic “it is written” sort of stance. But we don’t believe that do we? Do we?

    So when we quit assuming they win, we ask how a better order comes about. So. How? First thing looks like identifying what we conceive as the better order. Second thing looks like means to that end, those means being, I suppose, mostly consonant with the end itself, or at least not in utter conflict with it.

  81. Pablo says:

    An apt description of every campaign, protest, issue, pressed by all of Community Organizer-dom.

    I will have to disagree. Often, their goals are repulsive.

  82. sdferr says:

    Bob, isn’t there a problem standing with the people of Egypt if the people of Egypt happen to be determinedly un-republican sorts intent on establishing a tyranny? That is, I’m not saying that they are of this sort, but if they are or should turn out to be, that we don’t stand with them just because they are people (that is to say, a vast and nasty swath of humanity).

  83. geoffb says:

    The crisis in North Africa has come up unexpectedly for President Obama and Secretary Clinton.

    And if you believe that I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

    This was set up by our far left from the get go. All that they awaited was a proper lighting of the blasting cap to set off the already embedded C-4. The food price run-up brought about by our QE-2, ethanol policies, and the failure, or at least Russian government reported failure of the wheat crop in Russia at the same time that their rice crop came in at a new record, lit the fuse.

    Iran also was originally a revolution by the far left who believed that they too could control and use those benighted fundamentalists.

  84. Bob Reed says:

    It’s not an “it is written” thing sdferr, it’s “the enemy of my enemy, is my friend”; coupled with the MB’s willingness to be ruthless, like their derivative organization Hamas, in pursuing their aims.

    They get in as part of a coalition, and then through intimidation/terror/mafia-like tactics take control, after which opposition is outlawed.

    It’s not as far-fetched, nor tin-foil-hat-wearing-crazy as it sounds. Especially when the Israelis will provide a common hate object to focus on like in the third reich, or, you know, Iran.

  85. bh says:

    Sometimes I get the impression that the presumption of the Muslim Brotherhood’s power — a fatalistic assumption that they will necessarily win this contest on account of being the most ruthless thugs at hand in Egypt — amounts to a nearly islamic “it is written” sort of stance. But we don’t believe that do we? Do we?

    It’s my understanding this is not an actual quote but my take is more along the lines of: “I don’t try to predict the future. I try to prevent it.” When others paint an overly rosy picture, there is value in pissing on their parade.

    It seems to me that liberal democracy has prerequisites. Isn’t it worthwhile to see if those prerequisites have been met if we’re to identify the way forward?

  86. Jeff G. says:

    Sometimes I get the impression that the presumption of the Muslim Brotherhood’s power — a fatalistic assumption that they will necessarily win this contest on account of being the most ruthless thugs at hand in Egypt — amounts to a nearly islamic “it is written” sort of stance. But we don’t believe that do we? Do we?

    No. Which is why we’re counseling caution and a plan. Which is different from the impression I get that some here believe that the uprising in and of itself is the accomplishment.

  87. Bob Reed says:

    I only suggested that to be the safest and most benign rhetoric that Obama could have used sdferr. Much like he should have used when the uprising in Iran took place. Another place we couldn’t be sure how it would have worked out had the opposition risen to power.

    To say we stand with the people is not inconsistent with our own ideal of the right to govern coming from the consent of the governed.

  88. geoffb says:

    I will have to disagree. Often, their goals are repulsive.

    The goals they sell are ones like, eliminate racism, help the poor, more freedom. It is in what they choose as the means to reach those goals that the stink comes in. That is the aim of the Community Organizer types. To always push for “solutions” which have as their effect the destruction of freedom, liberty and the expansion of socialism.

  89. sdferr says:

    Right. So we want to consider the positive aspects of the plan to achieve a more republican end state and not simply assume one. At least, I don’t think I have been assuming one. So more on the plan and less on the horribles.

  90. sdferr says:

    . . . with our own ideal of the right to govern coming from the consent of the governed.

    But I think we often go something overboard in that direction nowadays. I mean, upthread there’s mention of the “too democratic” thing we do kneejerkedly today.

  91. sdferr says:

    Let me put it another way.

    Democracy stinks.

    But of course I have to hedge that in with stuff like “democracy in its purest form” and so on. Still, it stinks.

  92. Jeff G. says:

    I need to know whom I have available to me to craft a plan with, sdferr. And what it is they want.

  93. geoffb says:

    As food was the spark, so food will be a big part of the way this is damped down. That is a “weapon” or “carrot” if you will that the USA can use to influence events. If we don’t play it some other party of interest will.

  94. sdferr says:

    I don’t know any Egyptians. I do know that the US has to take a stance though, not just with regard to Egypt but with regard to many other nations and their politics. Ours, our own politics, sucks at the moment. We have trouble enough, in some ways, getting a handle on the corruptions of our own political philosophy, and to that extent it’s helpful to ourselves that we undertake to put a marker down how we think things should go. I mean, we’re still in the midst of political reorganization ourselves, what with the ongoing tea party movements.

  95. Jeff G. says:

    We have markers, sdferr. And they’ve been around in written form for over two hundred years.

    Sure, some of us think them old, unbinding, and silly, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t there and available to people who can access facebook.

  96. Darleen says:

    sdferr

    I don’t believe it is “fatalistic”, but a realistic reaction to the Left’s push that the Muslim Brotherhood is all sweetness and light.

    Why the hard sell, guys? What are you glossing over?

    By all accounts, MB is the most organized of political groups. Whatever the passions of the individual Egyptian wanting the 30 year reign of Mubarack to end, it is those with organizational skills and networks that will end up in power.

    There needs to be some plan to allow others to organize around their own interests to catch up and become participants … not just so much flotsam to be cleaved by the ship of MB as it sails into power.

    It’s like this continual loop of history that plays over and over again … from Lenin to Castro to Iran …

  97. sdferr says:

    We rightly complain everyday that our own markers have been written over or written out though, don’t we? I’ve worked some at attempting to understand where they came from, those distinctions, in order to better understand precisely what they are and what they lead to and I’m still not at all sure I’ve got the best grip on them I can achieve. So I’ve no problem putting them down again and again for examination. It’s not like they’re boring or the repetition becomes tedious somehow.

  98. Darleen says:

    I mean … SHEESH, Russ Feingold sez

    “No longer can we as a nation look the other way when ‘stable’ dictators sacrifice human rights and freedoms in the name of security,” Feingold said in statement. “This is a recipe for failure. The United States must engage with the people of Egypt to understand the hopes they have for their country, and then the U.S. can play a constructive role in helping Egypt achieve its goals.”

    Feingold also praised President Obama’s recent calls for Mubarak to step down immediately.

    Where the hell was Feingold as Obama was throwing a lavish state dinner for China’s Hu? Or Obama making nice-nice with Castro?

  99. sdferr says:

    It’s like this continual loop of history that plays over and over again. . .

    Just think “knife edge” Darleen. It stands to reason people fail to get it right more often than not.

  100. happyfeet says:

    As the dragon opened his jaws, Prince Bumbo finally appeared to hear the warnings. “What? You say there’s a big mean dragon behind me? Oh, come on, I don’t believe you,” he said.

    “We insisted it was true,” said audience member and mother of three Sherri Pryce, “so Prince Bumbo finally turned around to look, but Brimstone then shifted to the other side so that the puppet could not see him. We then told Prince Bumbo to look in the other direction, but when he did Brimstone only returned to his original position behind Prince Bumbo.”

    The monkey then accused the audience of “just being jealous,” and returned to inspecting his stolen silver bananas. It was then that the dragon struck, severely shaking Prince Bumbo in his felt-lined jaws and forcing the monkey to return the treasure.

  101. happyfeet says:

    […]

    “It’s unfortunate that Prince Bumbo didn’t pay attention to the audience and was attacked by the dragon,” assistant library director Patti Colby said. “But if he hadn’t been such a greedy, stubborn little monkey who didn’t want to share, it would never have happened.”

  102. Spiny Norman says:

    Where the hell was Feingold as Obama was throwing a lavish state dinner for China’s Hu? Or Obama making nice-nice with Castro?

    Those are Leftist leaders; benevolent father figures who only want what’s best for their people.

    AKA Democrat Party allies. Russ sees Hosni as a Republican.

    I wish I were only joking.

  103. Pablo says:

    The goals they sell are ones like, eliminate racism, help the poor, more freedom. It is in what they choose as the means to reach those goals that the stink comes in. That is the aim of the Community Organizer types.

    The goals they sell are marketing tools and mostly lies. The goals they hold are nefarious. They talk about racism and the poor, etc… They aim to take power and exert control. The goals they sell are never achieved. The goals they hold they’ve been all too good at attaining.

  104. Ernst Schreiber says:

    But the Muslim brotherhood is popular, Darleen. We can’t go against the Will of the People. That wouldn’t be democratic!

  105. Pablo says:

    I need to know whom I have available to me to craft a plan with, sdferr. And what it is they want.

    Right. And who in the mob has a plan already? Who has some sort of organization that isn’t Twitter/Facebook based? The Muslim Brotherhood does. Anyone else?

  106. Squid says:

    And who in the mob has a plan already?

    The Russians. Russians don’t take a dump without a plan!

  107. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Damn Russians. Ever notice how much vodka they drink? Probably poisoning the world’s water supply! Again!

  108. MC says:

    Give me political certainty or give me death. Oh, wait!

  109. Jeff G. says:

    Give me political certainty or give me death. Oh, wait!

    Give me a hungry mob and I’ll give you a classical liberal republican democracy based around the idea of natural rights and the rule of law that apply to all peoples and not just devout Muslim men, and that will prove to be a great help to the West’s attempts to spread liberty around the globe. Oh, wait!

  110. Makewi says:

    What if instead of helping to firmly establish the concept of religious freedom Thomas Jefferson had helped enshrine the notion that witches jus needa get burnt? Would have gone different for us I expect.

  111. Jeff G. says:

    They’re going through toom-ult, that ancient civilization with the uprising. They need to fix that now. And my staff better have fucking blue cheese dressing for the celery that goes with the wings and not fucking ranch, or heads are going to roll this Sunday.

  112. Stephanie says:

    And my staff better have fucking blue cheese dressing for the celery that goes with the wings and not fucking ranch, or heads are going to roll this Sunday.

    Too bad I’m not JLo. I’m allergic to the moldy cheese and Obumbles would be wearing it shortly after my first mouthful. Or maybe my tenth. Just depends on how long it would take to cross the room and position myself properly while holding a plate full of barfy goodness whilst scarfing the moldiness down.

    Come on now, it wouldn’t be unmannerly scarfing it up like that with the wookie in the room would it?

  113. MC says:

    Give me a hungry mob and I’ll give you a classical liberal republican democracy based around the idea of natural rights and the rule of law that apply to all peoples and not just devout Muslim men, and that will prove to be a great help to the West’s attempts to spread liberty around the globe. Oh, wait!

    Give me autocracies across the ME for which we have implemented a long term FP of propping up with our funds, military equipment and training – because friends like that who vote with our interests in the UN less often than Cuba, who crush all dissent and desire for individual liberty with an iron fist, but who coddle the MB and global Wahabbists within their borders, and generally foment hatred against Israel – the only state in the ME that functions as a democracy

  114. MC says:

    – are the kinds of friends we need. In the days of contemplating 100 year bonds, that’s sustainable. Because of the political certainty!!. Those sand peeps wouldn’t know how to aspire to personal liberty to immolate themselves against those autocracies if they had a match. Oh, wait!

  115. LBascom says:

    MC, do you have a point, or are you just spewing stuff?

    Are you high?

    No, seriously. You smoke a little bit? I mean I don’t care, I just ask ‘cuz you sound like you’ve smoked a little is all I’m wondering.

  116. MC says:

    You’re bogartin’ again LB, ’cause you can’t read through the haze.

  117. Makewi says:

    You act as if it is an issue of supporting an autocracy or supporting the right of the people to rise up and get them some liberty, but is that in fact what is occurring MC? Is it what is likely to continue to occur?

    If the choice is, in fact, between the MB and a new military strongman, which one you gonna back?

  118. LBascom says:

    I read good.

    Still, not sure how you feel about what’s happening in Egypt. I mean, never mind what kind of friends we need, looking at the reality of the situation in the ME, which players should we back?

    I guess we agree that Israel, as the only state in the ME that functions as a democracy, has a high (if you’ll pardon me) priority when considering the problem.

  119. Jeff G. says:

    I was going to say something similar, Makewi.

    Thanks for saving me the time.

    It’s easy to be on the side of freedom. It’s more difficult to admit that not every freedom is equal. Are we happy that Lebanon is now a Hezbollahland? Because they voted, you see. FREEDOM!

  120. Jeff G. says:

    If the ME votes to wipe out Israel, we have to let them. Otherwise, we’re stepping on their freedoms! AND WE’RE BETTER THAN THAT!

  121. newrouter says:

    i’m glad baracky is working on a final solution

  122. Makewi says:

    Perhaps we simply need a new brand of foreign policy. One in which we simply assert that we are the protector of the flame of individual liberty and we also believe in the right of the people in other countries to decide for themselves what their government is to be. In this we would assert the right to remove by force, even by death, those who would seek to attack another democracy, or to subjugate a people, or to limit the liberty of a group beyond some acceptable level. We don’t need to invade or hold anything, and no one would be able to say they weren’t warned beforehand.

  123. MC says:

    Sorry to come down so kind of NeoCon on this Jeff. You know that I love and defend Israel as much as anyone you know. And I don’t subscribe in any way to the left’s catering to some imagined marginalized majority. For me, it’s come down to a Foreign Policy point of view – give me a bit and I’ll elucidate.

  124. Bob Reed says:

    I’m down with the Makewi doctrine, especially if it applies to foe and friend alike. And upholds the Monroe doctrine…

  125. MC says:

    In no particular order:

    – We are reaping the whirlwind of a long term American Foreign Policy failure – we’ve been propping up autocracies that marginalize their people and that coddle terrorists and terrorist organizations. We preach freedom around the world and invent technologies that spread freedom across borders, because people, you know, they actually want personal liberty having been endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. The tension has broken and the djini cannot be put back in the bottle.

    – Egypt is not Gaza, Egypt is not Iran, Egypt isn’t even Iraq or Afghanistan. The demographics are different and the stakes are much higher because of the Suez. This one’s really driven by oil. Blatantly, obviously so.

    – These events are not just happening in Egypt – besides Tunisia, there’s Algeria, Syria, Jordan, Yemen, still Iran, and yes, I’m talking about the house of Saud as well. It isn’t just one djini, it is the emerging Caliphate – or people en masse desiring personal liberty – or, most likely, some combination.

    “If the choice is, in fact, between the MB and a new military strongman, which one you gonna back?”

    – Neither. Because it doesn’t matter what the MB has planned or what some other military strongman has planned, it matters what the joint chiefs, the covert ops folks, and the West in general have planned. You think they’re sitting around contemplating their navels?

    – It’s definitely scary to contemplate a MB takeover, but that insinuates $250 oil. That would break everything so it’s just not going to happen. It aligns the entire rest of the world against an Egypt that’s declared a terrorist state with no American aid or support.

    – AQ has had some success hiding in the mountains of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Where’s the MB going to hide? In the pyramids?

    – Contemplate this: MB takes control of Egypt and shuts down or even threatens to shut down the Suez. Result: A coalition larger than for Iraq would mobilize to militarily internationalize the Suez. If not, Bibi takes them out. In a hearbeat. The US and the rest of the West don’t want Bibi taking them out because of the potential of an ensuing Israel/Caliphatus escalating conflict and Israel has, as they say, a new clear option which no one wants to see contemplated.

    – That means that 44 even with all the hopey changey cannot avoid participating in taking on the Caliphate now rather than later should the MB eventuality occur. When would you rather face them? Now, when on day one we take out the American supplied hardware and on day two we take out the camels? Or after they have the new clear option too (at some point Iran is going to get past stuxnet and spin centrifuges again or NK is going to pony up)? Or after they have the temerity to set off WMDs inside the US borders? Because it will be one or the other. That’s an eventuality we might all agree on.

    – We don’t need the left to become hawks in the face of this peril. Just some of the center. Keeping the status quo in the ME with the same failed policy allows the status quo to continue here – which may have already bankrupted us. It’s in our fiscal interest to take the gloves off re the ME. Folks like the MB or other kinds of autocratic islamist strongmen will force our hand.

    – Whether the change in FP by the current administration is founded in weakness or strength, and inadvertantly or not, it’s in the best interest of the US to cease funding our own destruction. Mark Steyn’s demographics demonstrate that we’ll all live under the Caliphate in the next 50 years because of its insidious progress if something doesn’t happen. Let’s at least stop paying these dictators to oppose us, stop paying them to play host to terrorists, and stop paying them to quash the aspirations of those within their populace that do crave liberty. Do the people in these countries yearn to be free? Or do they want to usher in the Crescent? Better to find out now, rather than later. Later might be too late.

  126. newrouter says:

    “We are reaping the whirlwind of a long term American Foreign Policy failure – we’ve been propping up autocracies that marginalize their people and that coddle terrorists and terrorist organizations”

    no we’re reaping the result of jimmy carter’s egypt- israel peace agreement which resulted in the assassination of anwar sadat by the mb which the next in line mubarak put a lid on.

  127. newrouter says:

    “Egypt is not Gaza, Egypt is not Iran, Egypt isn’t even Iraq or Afghanistan. The demographics are different and the stakes are much higher because of the Suez. ”

    no but the cultural theme is islam.

  128. newrouter says:

    “These events are not just happening in Egypt – besides Tunisia, there’s Algeria, Syria, Jordan, Yemen, still Iran, and yes, I’m talking about the house of Saud as well. It isn’t just one djini, it is the emerging Caliphate – or people en masse desiring personal liberty – or, most likely, some combination.”

    yea and bill ayers and code pink in the mix

  129. newrouter says:

    “Contemplate this: MB takes control of Egypt and shuts down or even threatens to shut down the Suez. Result: A coalition larger than for Iraq would mobilize to militarily internationalize the Suez. ”

    yea right

  130. newrouter says:

    “Let’s at least stop paying these dictators to oppose us, stop paying them to play host to terrorists, and stop paying them to quash the aspirations of those within their populace that do crave liberty.”

    who are we paying presently to do this?

  131. MC says:

    And she’s no Patrick Henry…

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SgjIgMdsEuk

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uzdOLXLoes

    Poor sand sheeples. Some of them actually think they have a right to human dignity…

  132. MC says:

    yea right

    .

    Ok, tell me what would happen then.

  133. newrouter says:

    mc – freedom for mb at any price for reparations

  134. newrouter says:

    “Ok, tell me what would happen then.”

    depends if iran has a nuclear device

  135. MC says:

    who are we paying presently to do this?

    Every state I listed receives foreign aid from the US. And some like Egypt and the Saud receive significant military equipment, training, and assistance as well. The MB exists and prospers in Egypt because the current regime allows them to and, except for Condi Rice, we haven’t put up much of a fuss about it. Do you think American tax dollars should fund a country that hosts terrorists?

  136. MC says:

    depends if iran has a nuclear device

    Iran does not presently have the new clear option. And Bibi’s not going to let them have one. Next?

  137. newrouter says:

    “Do you think American tax dollars should fund a country that hosts terrorists?”

    like the palestinian authority and gaza?

  138. newrouter says:

    “Iran does not presently have the new clear option.”

    their buddies the norks do and the chicomms may need some oil.

  139. MC says:

    like the palestinian authority and gaza?

    Of course. Take it all down.

    their buddies the norks do and the chicomms may need some oil.

    Better now than later. The norks shelled the souks and there have been no consequences so far – what are they going to do next to get the attention they crave? You tracking any chicomm boats on the way to the ME?

  140. newrouter says:

    “You tracking any chicomm boats on the way to the ME?”

    you should do a news search on china buying up africa.

  141. happyfeet says:

    oh yeah well you should do a news search on failshit America selling out freedom

  142. geoffb says:

    Where’s the MB going to hide? In the pyramids?

    They don’t have to hide. They only need a nuclear power protector who also benefits from turmoil in the ME, high oil prices, and who yearns to be back in the big leagues. Some thoughts.

    Who What Where When Why How

    Why-when
    The main precursors, besides the usual unstable stability, or perhaps a better term would be brittle stability of authoritarian regimes, are the spread, (facilitated spread?), of the techniques of organizing protests and manipulating groups and events that are used and taught for Community Organizing.

    Combined with the amplification of the numbers of people who could be “eye-witness” to a protest and the compression of the time domain made possible by use of text messages, Twitter, Youtube videos, blogs. The fact that Egypt has a huge population that is young, under 30.

    The sharp rise in the cost of food. The prospect of starvation is and has always been a powerful motivator. It is the main glue holding Water Empires together of which the ancient Egyptian one was the first and primary example. As with being hung on the morrow, the prospect of starving concentrates the mind.

    Causes of food price increases.
    The reported failure of crops in Russia due to drought. US turning 40% of corn production into fuel and 50% next year. Increase of relative wealth of millions in Asia with the then increase of the consumption of meat.

    Who benefits from ME turmoil?
    Russia.

    How?
    Higher oil prices. Much higher if KSA goes to chaos.
    If Suez and Egyptian pipeline stop then Europe becomes more dependent on Russian oil.
    Drive Egypt back into the Russian camp as it was with Nasser.
    Lessen the power and influence of the US throughout the ME and the World.

    Tunisian and Egyptian revolts both show evidence of the use of
    “Community Organizing” techniques/plans. US group Movement.org. Barrett Brown’s group. Leaflet. Code Pink, Ayers.

    What is Community Organizing?
    The founding of new, or the penetration of existing groups of a
    social/political nature in order to have a small secret cadre
    direct/manipulate the efforts of the larger group to ends which serve a
    hidden agenda along with the one publicly acknowleged.
    The actions of these groups is almost always disruptive and costly to the larger society as that is part of their intent.

    Who trained the original community organizers?
    KGB through CPUSA cutouts.

    Who made Community Organizing a main strategic focus of US socialist/progressives?

    1930s CPUSA operatives who brought back together the split parts of the 60s New Left with the idea of using the “Community Organizing” concept to bring back the Communist “Front” groups which they saw as successful in the 1930s US.

  143. newrouter says:

    “oh yeah well you should do a news search on failshit America selling out freedom”

    “freedom” is “gay”

  144. newrouter says:

    more “freedom” to stone the “gay”

  145. newrouter says:

    more “freedom” to hang the “gay”
    more “freedom” to push off buildings the “gay”

    yes dammit more “freedom” for the “gay”

    do it for the “freedom” fries

  146. MC says:

    So Russia is going to declare as our enemy and China is going to forego its economy over the Suez?

    Cripes, we have air bases that can put as much firepower as we want in twenty minutes anywhere in Egypt. Russia and China have no ME air power. They have no ME military presence at all, unless you count being decamped in Syria and Iran with transport trucks and training personnel.

    Folks have drawn attention to history – as in the case of Iran – in this post as a harbinger of what might be to come. The history of the Suez is clear as well. Britain and France won’t let it close. We won’t let it close. No one can stop us.

  147. newrouter says:

    “No one can stop us.”

    bush’s “freedom agenda” was stopped by the demonrat party and it’s communist friends. international ANSWER/code pink.

  148. happyfeet says:

    tonight we’re on the loose

  149. newrouter says:

    “tonight we’re on the loose”

    cue scimitar: chop, chop allenwest ackbar

  150. bh says:

    There are things I’d quibble with in your #126, MC. For instance, who’s to say that the MB will shut down the Suez or SuMed? If they don’t, where’s the casus belli? But, that, as I read it, really isn’t the thrust of your argument regardless.

    You seem to encapsulate it here: “Do the people in these countries yearn to be free? Or do they want to usher in the Crescent? Better to find out now, rather than later. Later might be too late.”

    Well, I’d say that’s the wrong way of looking at it. Because some want freedom and others want to start up a theocracy. It’s both. That’s why we’ve been debating which of these two groups is the stronger. If you think the yearning for liberty group is stronger then what do you base this on?

    Towards “now or later”: If one is of the mind that the theocratic supporters are the stronger group at the moment, then it makes little sense to say that now is better than later. And, perhaps, if we could strengthen the liberty minded groups, later would indeed be better rather than equally shitty.

    However, there is a general background argument here that I find compelling. Namely, that it would be in our best interest as a nation to promote the institutions and groups that increase the odds that a liberal democracy could emerge from one of these flashpoints.

    (Towards the discussion in general, it would certainly help if people could refrain from hinting at racism (or whatever else) motivating completely reasonable concerns.)

  151. MC says:

    bush’s “freedom agenda” was stopped by the demonrat party and it’s communist friends. international ANSWER/code pink.

    True. But 44 is a pussy. The military industrial complex will get what it wants on this one.

  152. McGehee says:

    Because some want freedom and others want to start up a theocracy.

    And some honestly don’t see a difference between the two — to them a totalitarian theocracy is teh perfect freedom.

  153. geoffb says:

    “Have”, “can”, “want”. We had/have, can/could if we wanted knocked out Castro’s Cuba, Nicaragua. They are very close to our firepower too. They came however under the protection of the USSR.

    The Democrats have proclaimed from the rooftops that a world with only the US as superpower is horrible. They wish, seemingly, to return to the good old days of deterrence and MAD. Under Obama help is on the way.

    Turmoil and chaos is all that they have to foment to benefit. Us attacking Egypt to prop up a failing tyrant would only add to that.

    There are things we could and should do but whether our CIC have any will to do anything that helps this country is a question.

  154. Bob Reed says:

    MC,

    Don’t discount the 175 or so F-16s that the Egyptians have (mostly block 42 variants). So unless you’re including all of the carrier borne assets in the general vicinity along with Air Force assets in Italy, you may want to consider the assumption that we have “overhwelming airpower in place” in the theater already. And you can’t include Naval assets from the Persian gulf since they wouldn’t send the entire air wing on a distant stike while in range of a belligerent Iran’s air power.

    Now, that’s not saying that a good number of aircraft couldn’t be assembled in striking range in a matter of days, but in place right now are 2 squadrons of F-16s in Aviano, Italy, 2 CSG’s in the Persian gulf area and another CSG in the Med.

    Also I have my doubts about any British participation in a coalition to “internationalize” the Suez Canal like you described. Especially considering the “smart power” snubs they have suffered at the hands of the Obama administration. The French under Sarkozy might be more reliable in this instance. But truthfully, with a weakling like Obama as POTUS, I’m thinking that aa whole lot of folks, including squishes here in America, would just say, “Frig it, sail around the horn Africa”…

  155. geoffb says:

    has not have

  156. Bob Reed says:

    Be back later gang.

  157. bh says:

    And some honestly don’t see a difference between the two — to them a totalitarian theocracy is teh perfect freedom.

    Quite true, McG. I’ve been stumbling around for a decent way to refer to one who wants universal liberty rather than one who wants the freedom to subjugate others.

    I keep wanted to say republican but that just seems so easily confusable.

  158. bh says:

    keep wanting to say

  159. bh says:

    To change gears for a moment, I’ve been thinking a bit about the ’86 Philippines model of using a quick election to catch the theocrats napping so they end up being marginalized rather than empowered by the vote. (Mentioned by Fernandez.)

    I doubt we could catch them napping but what if we could figure out a way to make the election distasteful to them.

    What if women were on the ballot? Something like that?

  160. newrouter says:

    “To those neighbors and allies who share our freedom, we will strengthen our historic ties and assure them of our support and firm commitment. We will match loyalty with loyalty. We will strive for mutually beneficial relations. We will not use our friendship to impose on their sovereignty, for our own sovereignty is not for sale. 26
    As for the enemies of freedom, those who are potential adversaries, they will be reminded that peace is the highest aspiration of the American people. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it; we will not surrender for it—now or ever.”

  161. happyfeet says:

    freedom is my favorite then cupcakes then illy issimo coffee then my turtles then The Walking Dead then baby A then Foals then Chris Cleave then persimmons

  162. newrouter says:

    “Our forbearance should never be misunderstood. Our reluctance for conflict should not be misjudged as a failure of will. When action is required to preserve our national security, we will act. We will maintain sufficient strength to prevail if need be, knowing that if we do so we have the best chance of never having to use that strength. 28
    Above all, we must realize that no arsenal, or no weapon in the arsenals of the world, is so formidable as the will and moral courage of free men and women. It is a weapon our adversaries in today’s world do not have. It is a weapon that we as Americans do have. Let that be understood by those who practice terrorism and prey upon their neighbors.”

  163. geoffb says:

    Link for #163.

  164. MC says:

    “There are things I’d quibble with in your #126, MC. For instance, who’s to say that the MB will shut down the Suez or SuMed? If they don’t, where’s the casus belli? But, that, as I read it, really isn’t the thrust of your argument regardless.”

    They’ve already said so. That’s sufficient cause in my book.

    “Well, I’d say that’s the wrong way of looking at it. Because some want freedom and others want to start up a theocracy. It’s both. That’s why we’ve been debating which of these two groups is the stronger. If you think the yearning for liberty group is stronger then what do you base this on?”

    I agree that it’s both. And I have no idea who is teh stronger. I just think it’s high time that we stop propping up these dictators in the name of stability. Stability is now, right now, crumbling before our eyes. Let the chips fall and support the paean to liberty wherever it is and wherever we find it. And if the worst happens rely on the fact that we are the meanest SOBs in the valley.

    “Towards “now or later”: If one is of the mind that the theocratic supporters are the stronger group at the moment, then it makes little sense to say that now is better than later. And, perhaps, if we could strengthen the liberty minded groups, later would indeed be better rather than equally shitty.”

    I don’t know if we’re in the endgame or not yet. But the endgame of the current status quo is that the Wahabbists and all of their ilk will prevail in those countries if left unchecked and funded by American tax dollars. Is there any question of that?

    I don’t know if exporting freedom is possible or not. I know that a few weeks ago a man in Tunisia had the temerity to think that the fruit that he was selling at his fruit stand was his to sell and that he had a right to sell it in the market and that he had the right to his own personal dignity to refuse to pay bribes to the fruit inspector. He was quickly disabused of those liberally democratic notions and we’ve been seeing what has transpired since then. I don’t recall that we’ve been dropping any freedom leaflets there recently. I do believe that those kinds of aspirations are universal. And, since we are a freedom loving people and have long been the recipients of such a precious commodity paid for in blood by our countrymen, we should be most encouraging of liberty whenever and wherever it breaks out of tyranny. But we all know on the scale of world history that any attempt to achieve liberty is a venture with very high risk and little chance of success.

    So, waiting to see if the bad guys will get any stronger is a losing proposition in my book. They’re going to. Let’s just please stop helping them in the name of stability and also trot out the new F-35s and keep them gassed up and on the tarmack.

  165. MC says:

    Oh, and bh, I don’t know who you were thinking was suggesting racism. I preemptively denounce myself. And demand pie.

  166. newrouter says:

    “I don’t recall that we’ve been dropping any freedom leaflets there recently.”

    no the islamocommie regime don’t like:

    Rock The Casbah

  167. newrouter says:

    “But we all know on the scale of world history that any attempt to achieve liberty is a venture with very high risk and little chance of success.”

    yea so go mb. good allan you are a putz.

  168. newrouter says:

    “But we all know on the scale of world history that any attempt to achieve liberty is a venture with very high risk and little chance of success.”

    Reagan – Tear Down This Wall

  169. bh says:

    Oh, and bh, I don’t know who you were thinking was suggesting racism. I preemptively denounce myself. And demand pie.

    Thought you were perhaps signaling that with #115 and #132, to be honest. If it wasn’t intended that way, my apologies. Here, have some pie.

    Towards #165, I’ve a couple different thoughts. Largely? I agree. (We could quibble each other to death over this or that detail.) I suppose my immediate fear is that we take a possible win for liberty and screw it up because we demand that our boy in Cairo leaves tomorrow rather than taking a breath and considering what could be done to increase the odds of success before we go ahead and roll the dice.

  170. newrouter says:

    “before we go ahead and roll the dice.”

    soros’ loaded dice?

  171. MC says:

    Bob, are you forgetting our in theatre assets in Iraq and Afghanistan? You’ve heard of the thousands of sorties we’ve flown there in the last six months, right? We could carve off a few of those and take down the Egyptian air force in a day. Kirkuk, Al Asad, Sather, Ali, and Bagram are United States Air Force air bases. Ali is closer to the Suez than Riyadh (where USCENTCOM operates a ‘joint training mission’ with the Saudis).

    And where are those newfangled F-35s? Don’t you know there’s some boys ready to fly circles around some Foxbats if the need arises?

  172. bh says:

    Btw, when I talk about promoting certain groups, yes, I am talking about rhetorically promoting them.

    In other threads though, I’ve also mentioned that they need guns and, possibly, training. That does help their odds.

  173. newrouter says:

    “We could carve off a few of those and take down the Egyptian air force in a day.”

    we could leave hosni in place and less blood on code pink’s hands. ax the mb! also see photos of media benjamin in iraq before the war.

  174. Rupert says:

    Pinochet was a dictator that got his country ready for a free market democracy. Why were we not shoving the Egyptian government in that direction?
    Yes, I know Pinochet did horrible things and is a favorite villain of the left, but better him than a Castro.

  175. MC says:

    #115, and #132? Hm, I think I need to trot out the old “Jeff G. tone” tag, ’cause I was working off of #42, which, among other things, is the answer to the universal question according to Douglas Adams.

    I shoulda said “sand peeps” so that no intentionalist or anti-semiotic meaning could be construed. Oh, and Jeff, I denounce myself all over again. PIE!

  176. MC says:

    And I put such nice brackets around that! Ooh, Jeff’s WP has big wampum bracket eaters nows.

  177. bh says:

    Okay, my bad.

  178. Ernst Schreiber says:

    MC, you’re overlooking basing (probably not the correct term) rights. I don’t think our hosts are going to look too kindly on us bombing Egypt from bases on their soil. I don’t think we’re going to want to pay what we would need to pay to make them change their minds.

    ‘night all

  179. Ernst Schreiber says:

    Pinochet was the greatest dictator since Sulla. And thanks to the assholes at the world court, we shant see his like again.

    (had to add that)

  180. Rupert says:

    I think George Washington would have stayed on if the happenings of the time required it. A true man of vision. When is the right time to step down?
    People don’t understand how fortunate this country was to have such leaders.

  181. MC says:

    Like I said Ernst, look on the map. That ain’t ‘their’ soil. Not yet anyway. And we fly many, many sorties from each of those every day right now and have been for a while – and we’re bombing the crap out of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Egypt ‘d be just a little extra buzz.

    Come to think of it, this might even give the sane part of the left a bit of pause about withdrawal, eh?

  182. MC says:

    Plus, we haven’t examined the whole sunni/shia thing here. Russia’s coddled up with shia Iran – and they’re going to cozy with sunni Egypt? Not going to happen. Shia Iraq won’t be bothered too much if we take out sunni Egypt. Sunnis hate shias almost as much as the islamofascists (of both sects) hate us.

    Come to think of it, sunnis represent 80% of the world’s islamic population. They could just vote the shia out and kill them all. An entire swath right through the ME – gone! It would be DEMOCRACY!

  183. Rupert says:

    Islam does not have two factions, it has dozens of them. They could only form a unified front with a strong, brutal leader as their head. I don’t see anybody stepping up to the plate, but you never know.

  184. Stephanie says:

    Plus, we haven’t examined the whole sunni/shia thing here. Russia’s coddled up with shia Iran – and they’re going to cozy with sunni Egypt? Not going to happen. Shia Iraq won’t be bothered too much if we take out sunni Egypt. Sunnis hate shias almost as much as the islamofascists (of both sects) hate us.

    1) Russia is coddled up with whoever will pay them for their weapons and stuff. Plus, they would love to poach a client-state of the US.

    2) Sunnis may hate Shi’as, but that hasn’t stopped them from joining together (Khilafat Movement) to wrestle with Ksfir especially if the Kafir are Western Civilization based (Crusades).

    3) Both are Islam and any Christian country or Jewish country (Kafir) coming in and seriously bombing the fuck out of any Islamist country ain’t gonna be looked upon favorably by any of their sects whether they secretly like the outcome (less Sunni or less Shi’a) or not.

    4) Saudi Arabia is much too dickless to ever agree to our using the bases there (ditto Qatar) to launch anything against a Shi’a/Iran backed country as Iran would retaliate and invade SA necessitating our divided attention to assist SA.

    5) With the current food shortages and grievances (perceived and real) over our still being in AF and Iraq and anywhere in the Ummah, plus the domino effect that the recent uprisings are giving to the populations in all ME countries, our operations would destabilize many of their governments past the tipping point and cause our resources to be divided to assist them should we ever mount significant operations against Shi’a strongholds or Sunni strongholds for that matter then our bases would be overrun by the locals and our assets could be compromised or even lost to enemy hands and our troops slaughtered by the sheer numbers of cannon fodder overrunning the bases. Yes, we have superior firepower, but we have a limited supply line into those countries to maintain those bases for long.

    6) Once we are forced to finally deal with the region as a whole (and the confrontation will be on that basis as Islamic consolidation is well underway), the most efficient response from us would produce enough glass to keep Coca Cola in the bottling business for eons.

    7) To the consolidationists, the Ummah is about land mass and control thereof. That they may have to subjugate other islamists or convert them to their flavor of islam is a feature not a bug.

  185. BJTex says:

    Islam does not have two factions, it has dozens of them.

    None of which are worth being concerned about other than radical Sunni or Shia. Stephanie has it exactly right up there, well done.

    What is interesting is the ongoing uncertain leadership principles that taunt many portions of the Ummah. There are secular colored religious leaders that wish to reward themselves and their friends rather than make Islam the ruler of the world. See especially Syria with the Baath party and remember former Baath control in Iraq. So far Iraq has been able to make the Sunni/Shia conflict mainly political rather than religious. If that changes, especially if Iran continues to radicalize and support the hard corp group of Shiites, then trouble will brew. The one good thing will be al qaeda’s Sunni concepts rattled in that dimension, making conflict with Iran/Shiites probable in some way despite their publicized handshake.

    Other minor aspects of Islam are too small to have any significant spots in the power struggle. Our one advantage is the potential for Sunni and Shia conflict for religious and political power.

    YMMV

  186. Bob Reed says:

    No MC, I’m not forgetting about our in theater assets in Iraq and Afghanistan…

    To start, our forces in Afghanistan are in large part ground attack, transport, and surveillance aircraft, with a very modest contingent of air superiority fighters. And for the analogous reasons as why carrier aircraft in the Persian gulf wouldn’t be sortied to Egypt, neither would forces from Afghanistan; not to mention the more than 1200 mile distance…

    Next, notwithstanding basing agreements and other political considerations, our forces in Iraq at this point are largely MAC units and the 321 AEW, which are simultaneously involved in training Iraqis and logistics, and a small contingent of ground attack aircraft.

    It may surprise you MC, but TACAIR support in Iraq comes from NAVAIR units offshore…

    Oh, and the F-35 hasn’t finished development yet, let alone been deployed. But I sense that you knew that, and were trying to be witty; but it came off as nit-witty instead.

    It doesn’t sound like you know much about military aircraft, nor military avaiation, nor any matters military MC; besides what you read at HuffPo or Danger room. Here’s a hint for you; I do

    Perhaps you should restrict your commentary to matters of opinion, because I’ve got to tell you, you’re getting some of your facts wrong here my man.

    Unless, of course, you’re simply trolling.

  187. MC says:

    The shia/sunni matter was a footnote to my points and BJ sums it up succinctly:

    Other minor aspects of Islam are too small to have any significant spots in the power struggle. Our one advantage is the potential for Sunni and Shia conflict for religious and political power.

    Pan-islamism is not currently what it eventually will be, which bolsters the idea that sooner rather than later is a good thing. The North African Ummah, the ME Ummah (as well as the central – east Shia swath), the Central Asia Ummah, and the East Asia Ummah are all very different today – different geographically, different demographically, and with significantly different politcal state arrangements and leadership. Only the Mahdi can change that.

    But, Stephanie, this:

    3) Both are Islam and any Christian country or Jewish country (Kafir) coming in and seriously bombing the fuck out of any Islamist country ain’t gonna be looked upon favorably by any of their sects whether they secretly like the outcome (less Sunni or less Shi’a) or not.

    4) Saudi Arabia is much too dickless to ever agree to our using the bases there (ditto Qatar) to launch anything against a Shi’a/Iran backed country as Iran would retaliate and invade SA necessitating our divided attention to assist SA.

    5) With the current food shortages and grievances (perceived and real) over our still being in AF and Iraq and anywhere in the Ummah, plus the domino effect that the recent uprisings are giving to the populations in all ME countries, our operations would destabilize many of their governments past the tipping point and cause our resources to be divided to assist them should we ever mount significant operations against Shi’a strongholds or Sunni strongholds for that matter then our bases would be overrun by the locals and our assets could be compromised or even lost to enemy hands and our troops slaughtered by the sheer numbers of cannon fodder overrunning the bases. Yes, we have superior firepower, but we have a limited supply line into those countries to maintain those bases for long.

    Is mostly hogwash.

    We have been bombing Iraq and Afghanistan for seven years with impunity. It doesn’t matter who likes or doesn’t like it, no one has or can do anything about it.

    I never suggested that the house of Saud would support air raids from the joint base – we’ve been there/done that (not) before. The point I was making is that we have US Air Force bases in theater that are closer to Egypt than the joint base in SA which is a strategic and tactical advantage.

    Heh, you used “tipping point”, coined by leftist Malcolm Gladwell, who also can’t do any semblance of math in public.

    We flew something over 33,000 sorties in the Iraq/AF theater in 2010. That’s about 7,000 more than we flew in 2009. In 2006 we dropped 3 million pounds of supplies in AF – in 2010 we dropped over 90 million pounds. We’ve been doubling the amount of supply drop every year since 2006. In the ‘air war’ no one is shooting back. We lost three ‘copters in 2010 – to sandstorms – and we haven’t lost a fixed wing aircraft in theater since 2008 – in 2010 we only dropped 8 munitions in total on Iraq – because there’s pretty much no one left there to oppose us. We have continuous 24/7 eyes in the air with Predator and Reaper drones, and manned Liberty’s. We have better observation of the borders of Iraq and AF than we have of the borders in the US.

    Despite those numbers being overwhelmingly beyond any possible measure of a “tipping point” it’s even more astounding to consider that we have more aircraft in theater than we’ve flown sorties. We have an almost inconceivable amount of air resources in the ME should we need them – about 36 times the size of the Egyptian air force – within 1,000 miles of Cairo.

    The people of Iraq and AF are better fed than any of their neighbors – because we are there. Should some cannon fodder show up for some reason, we’d first drop chocolate and biscuits on them. But, be assured, no local horde can get within 100 stone throws of any US airfield.

    Our supply lines can be completely airborne – in countries without much in the way of road systems it’s a requirement. They don’t drive – they drop or land. And when there’s no challenge to air superiority, there’s no supply line disruption. And we haven’t even discussed our boats in the surrounding waters.

    Egypt is, in effect, a US proxy in most respects already. It’s who controls the military. The military is composed of US equipment and US trained personnel. Joint Chiefs chair Mullen is in constant contact with counterparts in Egypt and has been assured that the Egyptian military won’t attack its people.

    These things just underscore my key point: The Muslim Brotherhood cannot take over Egypt. We will not allow it.

  188. MC says:

    Bob – The above underscores that I know what is and isn’t in theater. I get my information from the United States Air Force. How about you? Less than 20% of Iraq/AF sorties in 2010 were NAVAIR and you should know that.

    And I’ve been commenting on PW on and off since JG was still fooling around with that monkey. Not interested in wasting my time.

  189. MC says:

    And I must correct some of my facts in the most recent post – those 33K sorties were ONLY close air support in AF. We flew over 6K sories in Iraq – and we flew almost 29K intell/surveillance/ recon sorties in the entire theater in 2010.

    Just because the press doesn’t report this stuff doesn’t mean that it’s not happening.

    We have unchallenged air superiority in the ME and plenty of resources to divert if we need them.

  190. Bob Reed says:

    MC,

    “The above” underscores nothing but your ability to transcribe an Air Force Times article, but I would like to know where you got your figures for CAS participation broken down by service.

    Now granted, I left the word “too” off of my sentance regarding their participation in ME activities, but I’m not known to be the best typist at PW by any stretch of the imagination; so my apologies there.

    I’m not questioning your record of commenting here. I’m sure you’ve been doing so much longer, and with much more authority, than I have. But your assertions regarding the quantity and types of US air power currently in the vicinity of Egypt are mistaken.

    I’m not trying to offend you MC, I’m just keeping it real.

    Sorry to waste your time.

  191. sdferr says:

    Can we consider the birds at Whiteman as in the vicinity? Not that I think they’ll have a role there anytime soon, but still, anyone else’s AF is entitled to pause to puzzle on ’em.

  192. bh says:

    Some quibbles need quibbling perhaps.

    This whole train of discussion is based on two elements that I simply don’t think are proven or even necessarily likely.

    1. That the MB are so unsophisticated that they’d give immediate cause for outside forces to attack them. Sure, some dude or another might pop off that they’ll shut down the Suez but that is a very different thing than them actually doing it once they’d face real repercussions for doing so.

    2. That the West and Obama specifically have any real hunger for conflict regardless.

    Again, I think there is some merit to the larger argument but their actions and our responses are in no way likely, let alone given.

  193. Rupert says:

    Jordan actually let Israel fly over their airspace when they were being threatened by Iraq. Survival comes before religion in most of these governments so who knows what will be allowed.
    Egypt would have almost no ability to project power once we cut off aid and make a few air strikes. It’s the millions of potential, paradise seeking, suicide bombers that should scare everybody.

  194. Rupert says:

    You’re right rupe. Nobody bothers to pick up a history book or study the tedious problems of logistics. At least Glenn Beck is trying and has admitted to not knowing anything during his twenty year binge. Still, you would expect conservatives to avoid the traps that liberal America has fallen into, i.e. – spouting talking points and slogans. It is no substitute for knowledge. Politics is not the same as sports. You can’t root for one side without knowing the complete profile of the players. QED.

  195. Rupert says:

    BJTex #186 – Yes, that was the Iran/Iraq war. Millions were killed but it was Iran that grew its population. Very few of our leaders think in terms of decades. The Muslim world can unite for brief periods of time. Until that happens the level of violence and threat will stay the same – that is to say very high.

  196. MC says:

    US warships are deployed in the Suez Canal.

    https://proteinwisdom.com/pub/?p=3487

Comments are closed.