Chaos in Egypt

Egypt is in chaos, the result of a civilian uprising that has been boiling in the country for years. Hosni Mubarak appears to be running on borrowed time now after 30 years or so of brutal authoritarian rule over the country. On Friday, protesters took to the streets and have been clashing with police in Cairo and other major cities. One group managed to set fire to the government buildings in the capital city.

In response to the initial uprising, Mubarak ordered the total shut down of the country's entire internet service as well as most mobile phone service. This did not have the desired effect as outraged citizens only poured out into the streets in greater numbers to voice their discontent. While Egypt has enjoyed a greater standard of living compared to some of its neighbors, the government there routinely engages in this sort of censorship and also routinely imprisons those who dissent against it.

Mubarak was scheduled to give a speech earlier in the day but for reasons which have not yet been explained, his address was delayed for several hours. Speculation was rampant at the time that he had either been assassinated or that the media stations had been taken over by protesters. He did however appear later, and gave an address to the people of Egypt which more or less asked them to knock it off and go back to their lives.

As an appeasement move (probably anyway) Mubarak fired his entire cabinet. There's conflicting information that says he also fired the entire parliament. What isn't conflicting though is that he said he'll be appointing new ones. While this might have calmed things down some, once it became clear Mubarak has no intention of stepping down himself, people once more took to the streets and have managed to overcome police enforcement in several areas.

There's been reports of police abandoning their posts to join the protesters instead. Even a couple of scattered reports of military doing the same. There's a fairly high chance at this point that the government in Egypt will collapse entirely. What that may mean for us is anyone's guess. Apparently even Obama doesn't know what that's going to mean. He's decided we aren't going to take sides. That's great, way to take a stand. Although later he did make the usual generic call for "reform". Yes Mr. Obama, I do believe the people of Egypt are looking to do just that.

Perhaps the people of Egypt saw what their friends down in Tunisia did when they got sick of it and overthrew their government. Hosni Mubarak may be about to join Anwar Sadat in the afterlife.
.........................
"It is pointless to resist, my son." -- Darth Vader
"Resistance is futile." -- The Borg
"Mother's coming for me in the dragon ships. I don't like these itchy clothes, but I have to wear them or it frightens the fish." -- Thurindil

Well. I guess that's that then.

       
« Dread Pirate Dean
Abortion »

Posted on Jan 29, 2011 1:35 am by Samson in: | 47 comment(s) [Closed]
Comments
Well, thats the end of my schools planned Egypt excursion this year...

The point you do miss though Samson is that America actually supported the current regime on the basis that it was a stable one. I mean, who cares about the civilian populace, they're just a bunch of Arabs, right? And now they're pissed off and the shortest straw has been pulled for Mubarak (funny, he's got Barak in his name).

I actually that it is for the best that America keeps out though. Egypt needs to be able to decide its own future; I doubt that foreign intervention might increase stability in the short term, but in the long term it is better for the people to establish their own government the way they want rather than getting someone from outside the sphere to do it for them. And the protesters aren't extremist groups that are seeking to 'destroy the west' or some other type of usual deluded but dangerous banter, so I think they can be left to run their own course.

Anyway, I'll be looking out to see how this mess ends up.

       
Well, if the Daily Telegraph is to be believed on this one, our "support" was a sham the whole time and we're actually behind the current revolt.

If this is true, and I'm not convinced it is, then it would at least explain why Obama can't come out on one side or the other because he's waiting to see if the revolt succeeds. Naturally he's not going to tell us this.

It also seems most of the western world is generally in support of the protesters and they're either waiting to see the outcome or as usual waiting to see what we do about it before committing one way or the other.

The protesters themselves may not be extremist groups, but you'd be a fool not to consider that organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood won't try to take advantage of it to overthrow the government. They're almost certainly out there goading people into keeping it up now. So long as such organizations don't begin to gain a foothold, yes, we can sit and wait for an outcome. If they do gain a foothold though, we need to step in and squash it, because having the Muslim Brotherhood in power in Egypt would be a really REALLY bad thing to allow to happen.

       
Oh, the Muslim Brotherhood are there, lurking around every corner, within every nook and cranny of Egyptian society, rubbing their hands together and cackling with glee. It's a fools bet to bet otherwise. As for the future of Egypt, I really don't see a bright shining pyramid on a hill, but a smoldering ruin inundated with blood.

       
Whether we supported the current regime or not, if we did on a basis of stability, I'd have to call a 30 year run fairly stable, thus we've won that bet if it's true.

As for Obama taking sides, he did supposedly contact Mubarak and suggest that we'd pull our $1.5 billion in support/aide if peaceful protestors were not left to their own devices. Maybe we're not officially taking sides, but we have, thusly, officially taken a stance none the less.

I'd been following this story on AP & Reuters since Friday and, I believe, the last official count was something like over 2000 wounded and 65 or so dead, including 20+ police. I also further undersand many of those wounded are so from bullets. That's taking into account the cops repeatedly firing tear gas, rubber bullets, and water cannons into the crowds as well as having arrested more than 500 of the protesters and having singled folks out to pull to the side and beat with batons.. as well as having the military brought in to enforce a curfew that few are abiding. It's gotten pretty serious over there.

       
I'm doubtful that this particular Muslim group is dangerous to other people in the world. They are campaigning for democracy against a dictatorship, not for the right to kill anyone who speaks out against the prophet Allah.

       
If you think the Muslim Brotherhood would be satisfied with toppling Mubarak and leaving it at that, you're naive at best and a total fool at worst.

They despise Israel, and an Egypt in their control would mean Israel would have to plan for the very real possibility of all out war. It's a virtual certainty that the Muslim Brotherhood would remove the blockade against Gaza on the Egyptian side of the border. That happens, it's going to be a huge mess. Bigger than the one that's there now.

It appears as though people in Egypt are looking to replace Mubarak with Mohamed ElBaradei. If the name sounds familiar, he's the toad who kept locking horns with the world over Iran's nuclear program. He's also backed by the Muslim Brotherhood. Which doesn't really sit well with me and shouldn't with anyone who wants peace and stability in the region.

       
Edited by Samson on Jan 31, 2011 12:55 am
Looks like Mubarak will be stepping aside come the elections in September. This after the Egyptian people staged a massive protest in Tahrir Square. Over 250,000 people showed up despite an attempt by the government to crack down on movement and transportation from outside the city. Fortunately the military has taken the stance that it's best to let them protest so long as it remains peaceful, which it so far has.

What's not so fortunate is that it looks like Mohamed ElBaradei is going to be the de facto leader until those elections take place. That gives the Muslim Brotherhood a bit too much of a hold on things. What that means for the treaty with Israel is anyone's guess at this point.

       
He's got til September to show us what it'll mean, unless he's actually elected to remain in office at that point too. :(

I'm not sure whether to be amused or dismayed that Obama was so quick to take credit for having talked Mubarak into his decision to step down and stand aside...

       
Vladaar [Anon] said:
Comment #9 Feb 4, 2011 2:03 am
Heh, I hate to point to Glenn Beck again, but his show the other day stated facts on the radical left getting into bed with the Islamics to allow for Islam to take over that how side of the world surrounding Israel. Even Hannity show had a Islamic guest a judge in England on the Shiree Law system, or however that is spelled. The Islamic guest stated the goal of Islam is to take over the world, and have Shiree law everywhere. They are on track too. Other then they probably don't realize that Jesus is going to come, and destroy them, after they try to wipe Israel out.

       
I hate to point this out to you, but Jesus is hardly going to be smiling upon Israel's behavior. God as I understand is fair and just so therefore God wouldn't endorse displacing an entire nations of people, institutionalizing their poverty and placing severe sanctions over there communities.

If Jesus comes back, he's be more interested in pulling Israel's nose into line than defeating the 'evil' Muslims.

       
Vladaar [Anon] said:
Comment #11 Feb 4, 2011 2:24 am
read the bible. So far all of it that has been prophesized has come true.

       
Quite right. God doesn't endorse the idea of displacing an entire nation of people. Especially His people. Israel rightfully belongs to the Jews, not to the Muslims. So it pays to stop and think about who actually displaced who.

Also, Vlad is entirely correct about the Muslims wanting to establish a Caliphate. That's not really something we want to see happening in the world. Do you really think Tunisia, Egypt, and now Yemen and Jordan were accidents? The entire Middle East is boiling over into revolution. It's being instigated by someone, and all evidence points to that someone being the Muslim Brotherhood.

It's a subject I've covered in the past: http://www.iguanadons.net/Al-Qaeda-World-Domination-Design-134.html Read it over, follow to the original source if you prefer. They are in fact right on track according to the outlined plan. They're crossing from Phase 3 into Phase 4 as we speak.

This isn't something Glenn Beck started either. Al-Qaeda is the one who published the plan. It's all right there for anyone to see if you'll just open your eyes.

       
Wow, I'm not sure which of those two posts is more laughably insane.

Vladaar said:

Jesus is going to come, and destroy them, after they try to wipe Israel out.

I thought Jesus was all about peace and coexistence? He's going to come to destroy someone??

prettyfly said:

Jesus is hardly going to be smiling upon Israel's behavior. God as I understand is fair and just so therefore God wouldn't endorse displacing an entire nations of people, institutionalizing their poverty and placing severe sanctions over there communities.

If Jesus comes back, he's be more interested in pulling Israel's nose into line than defeating the 'evil' Muslims.

Even aside form this fascinating vindictive nature of Jesus the Destroyer you two seem to be espousing... Where do you get the notion that Israel has displaced anyone, let alone institutionalized anyone's poverty?? You're in need of a history lesson, my friend, or else you've been reading way too much Arabic propaganda. Israel wasn't established by displacing anyone, it's the Israelis who were displaced and attacked over and over and over since the 9th century BC. I would say we could invite Dwip to comment since he's the history major, but I'm not so sure that his studies really focused on middle eastern history.

       
Wow, I got double ninja'd. :lol:

I don't know about prophesies having come true, but Samson's got the right of it.

       
Vladaar [Anon] said:
Comment #15 Feb 4, 2011 2:51 am
Hey Conner,

Revelations Chapter 19 verse 14. And the armies which were in Heaven followed Him upon white horses. - Refers to the saints of God who have ever lived.

Revelations Chapter 19 verse 15. And out of His mouth goes a sharp sword with it. He should smite the nations. - Refers to the nations that joined the antichrist in attempt to destroy Israel.

Yes, Jesus is about Love, and Peace. However, with the second coming he is bringing the Kingdom of Heaven to Earth to be the King of Kings on Earth. So check out those sections of revelations and you can get the idea, that he is taking care of business this time.

       
Vlad ninja'd me, but:
I thought Jesus was all about peace and coexistence? He's going to come to destroy someone??

Revelation covers all this in some great detail. Boiling down to his second coming being all about a titanic battle at Armageddon. Perhaps you've heard of it? :P He's not just going to destroy "someone". He's going to destroy Satan, and his entire army.

       
Vladaar said:

And out of His mouth goes a sharp sword with it.

Eww.. that's gotta hurt.. ;) :P
Sorry, I get what you two are saying, I just couldn't resist the wise-crack.
I hadn't realized that Jesus's second coming was supposed to be the apocalypse, I always figured God would appoint a qualified agent for that job rather than Mr. Love & Peace, but I suppose it would make sense to have the Christ battling the Anti-Christ. Either way, I certainly wouldn't throw Israel in with Satan and his minions/army, whereas, I'm not so sure I'd discount the Arab nations for that party, but I freely admit my own bias in the matter too. :shrug:

       
Nobody is throwing Israel in with Satan. The battle of Armageddon is more or less Jesus stepping in to wipe out Satan and his armies when they come forth with the intent to destroy Israel.

The notion that Jesus is nothing but a peacenik like Ghandi has always been somewhat amusing given what Revelation has to say about him, along with other parts of the New Testament.

       
It sure sounded like prettyfly was to me, but he's obviously also got a pretty sadly distorted view of Israeli history. If it's all about stopping Satan from destroying Israel, then the Muslim Brotherhood sure would be easily confused for Satan's armies. ;)

I can't argue the point too much given what revelations so clearly tells the reader, but it is the image the church publicly likes to paint of him.

       
Vladaar [Anon] said:
Comment #20 Feb 4, 2011 3:44 am
Conner, as a Jew then...

What are your thoughts about Israel, should they be surrounded
by Islamic nations and a holy war beset them. Personally, I
question whether the United States, under this President would
help Israel. I don't think the United States is even mentioned in
the bible.

       
Conner said:

Even aside form this fascinating vindictive nature of Jesus the Destroyer you two seem to be espousing... Where do you get the notion that Israel has displaced anyone, let alone institutionalized anyone's poverty?? You're in need of a history lesson, my friend, or else you've been reading way too much Arabic propaganda. Israel wasn't established by displacing anyone, it's the Israelis who were displaced and attacked over and over and over since the 9th century BC. I would say we could invite Dwip to comment since he's the history major, but I'm not so sure that his studies really focused on middle eastern history.


Israel displaced the Palestines when the nation was formed in the 1940's. Its a simple as that. They did not just 'wander' onto empty land. The fact that they had been displaced from that area in the past some millennia earlier means zilch. Plenty of groups of people have been displaced from their land much more recently, and actually still have ties to the areas they have been farcibilly removed from, and inhabited it for far longer than Israel was ever around, yet aren't able to displace other people to get their land back (unlike modern day Israel).

Furthermore, they bitterly complain to the world that the Palestines attack them while they inflict strict sanctions upon them and continually displace them from their homes to make way for more Jewish settlers.

I don't view Israel as Satanic, and I certainly don't view all the other Arab nations itching for a chance to flatten Israel as good, but until you realize that Israel is the one causing the problems with the Palestines, there's going to be an endless torrent of bloodshed over there and Jesus won't be smiling upon you lot.

       
@Vladaar:
No, I don't think they should be surrounded by Arab nations, but it's fact that has always been. Most of those neighbors have been there just as long as Jewish people have and their holy war started out in the names of the ancient Egyptian gods, today it's in the name of Islam. Same war, same players, just different excuses.

So do I. I think the US should continue to help Israel, but I have to question whether Obama would want to. He seems, even setting aside all the claims of his Muslim sympathies and such, to be far more interested in the rest of the middle east than in Israel except to play into the Arabic hands by making remarks as silly as those prettyfly is spouting here. At least prettyfly can claim ignorance for an excuse and we can fault Islamic propaganda for his ignorance, but the President of the United States certainly knows better.

Um, no, whether you accept it as a work of fiction produced some 1200 years ago or a religious holy book written by God through the hand of Moses and other later prophets, was scribed long before the United States was conceived so it would be pretty incredible if it were mentioned in the bible.

@prettyfly:
Afraid not. Israel was established as an independent nation in 1947 after a war of independence fought against the British. Palestinians didn't exist prior to that advent.

They bitterly complain when the Palestinians attack them because the US and the UN are constantly telling them that despite being openly attacked they're not allowed to retaliate appropriately or they'll face sanctions, reduction in financial aid, and possible conflict with the few real powers of the world who do have a chance at beating Israel despite their superior training, superior weapons, and superior holy endorsement. ;)
Basically, if the US and the UN would give Israel free reign to handle their own affairs they'd handily eliminate the entire Arab threat despite drastically overwhelming enemy numbers and the insanity of "jihad" as they've nearly done more than once in the past. Israel has also demonstrated more than once in the past that if the Arab nations were really willing to simply live in peaceful coexistence with their neighbors like they constantly claim then Israel would be more than happy to let them do just that.

I'm glad to hear that you don't really feel that Israel is satanic and that you don't believe the other Arab nations are in the right either, but your facts are a bit discolored from the historical truth. As for the bloodshed over there, it's been going on since before the great Pharaohs and isn't likely to end suddenly because of anything any Muslim decides. Whether or not Jesus chooses to smile upon Jews of the world is, honestly, of very little consequence since the primary distinction between Jewish and Christian beliefs is the fact that we Jews don't accept that Jesus was the messiah to begin with.

       
So what are you saying - Israel was vacant when the nation was formed in 1947?

btw, I would suspect that the main reason Israel have the military edge (and enormous edge to) in the middle east is primarily because of the support that comes from America. If you cut off that support they'd be in a dire state of affairs...

As for people constantly killing each other, of course they're not going to stop fighting over there, but thats no justification for Israel pathetic and highly provocative behaviors towards Palestine (oh, and you know how they 'celebrated' Obama being elected?- by going into the west bank and killing 300 Palestine civilians...not good for keeping the peace). Shooting people and inflicting sanctions upon them for being upset that they've been kicked out of their homes isn't going to ever solve anything.

       
Prettyfly, you're wrong. Dead wrong. Israel has only existed as a modern state since 1947 but they existed as an independent nation several times in the past in the ancient world. Stop listening to muslim propaganda and go do some serious research on the subject. The Arabs are flat out lying about the circumstances. There never was a "Palestinian" state. They made it all up and the left has swallowed it whole.

       
No, prettyfly, I'm not saying at all that it was vacant. Well, much of it was as it was a section of desert, but that's completely aside from the point. As Samson said, the propaganda from the Arab world is pure and utter BS that left wing politicians, for whatever reason, love to eat up like it was going out of style.

While I'm sure that the support from the US (and Russia earlier) has made many things possible that would not have otherwise been so, that is NOT why Israel has it's military edge. Their edge comes from constant training/experience, mandatory military service for all citizens, and incredible scientists who've invented things that most other countries use for their own military. In fact, the US and many other countries routinely send special forces and intelligence agents to Israel to be trained because they can't train their people better anywhere else in the world. If you really think the might of Israel comes from American monetary influx, take a closer look at the history of Israel, the real history or the propaganda you've swallowed, and you'll see that prior to America stepping in as Israel's primary backer, Israel managed to destroy the entire air force and most of the military might of three separate Arabic nations (Egypt, Syria, & Jordan) all back to back in a defensive action known as the six-day war in 1967. That's actually what prompted America to start backing Israel, they'd thoroughly proven themselves on their own against incredibly overwhelming odds with major powers backing those they'd defeated.

Oh my lord, where do you get your information?!? Do you get it all from Time and other Muslim propagandist publications?? What an absurd thing to even be willing to believe. They most certainly did not rush over to the west bank to kill 300 Palestinian civilians to celebrate Obama's election. *shaking his head in disbelief* :headbang: :facepalm:

Israel was first founded as a Jewish nation back in the 9th century BC an has been held by several people since then before the Jewish Israelis took it back (once again) in 1947 from the British and managed to finally get UN recognition of their sovereignty which required giving up about half the actual land they'd won to create the "Palestinian" region, which they did willingly in an effort to establish peace for which the Arab nations immediately thanked them by declaring "a war in which no quarter would ever be asked nor given" against any Jewish person ever to be associated with the newly recognized Israeli State.

       
<< prev 1, 2 next >>
Comments Closed
Comments for this entry have been closed.
Anonymous
Register

Forgot Password?

SuMoTuWeThFrSa
 1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31