the situation in egypt

[pkay]

we are, because it suits our interest. the US gets a pretty good return on its investment.

As does the rest of the western world.

No european governments are really making too much noise about what the US and UK do because it generally benefits them all

Once again not condoning

[64hz]

yeah, i meant the whole western cabal, not just USA, sorry.

[TSH-Tim]

Its does seem to be getting a little better tho

[noam]

how so?

[64hz]

and what do you mean by better in the first place?

[TSH-Tim]

Well over 300000 people have moved off site

[pkay]

bill oreily just interviewed obama on the superbowl broadcast and Obama didn't seem like he'd be too thrilled at the muslim brotherhood being a part of the new government and said something to the effect of "they have certain anti-american elements".

[the acid never lies]

I hope the Egyptians one day get the revolution they well and truly deserve...

It is clear our leaders are only interested in exporting their own brand of democracy but what new about that?

Also, is this not another offshoot of the global economic collapse, rather than a pure political movement?

Has there ever been a 'pure political movement'? The Russian Revolution started from demonstrations calling for bread...

Also people need to cool it with fears over the Muslim Brotherhood. They are a deeply conservative organisation but do not confuse them with Al Quaida or label them simply as 'extremists' - that is patently wrong.

Some info on the Brotherhood:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/03/opini ... ef=opinion

http://www.merip.org/mer/mer250/stacher.html

http://www.merip.org/mer/mer245/lynch.html

[pkay]

Also people need to cool it with fears over the Muslim Brotherhood. They are a deeply conservative organisation but do not confuse them with Al Quaida or label them simply as 'extremists' - that is patently wrong.

dude... they tried to assasinate one president and are widely suspected of effectively killing another. Their ideals spawned Hamas.

Like saying Johnson & Johnson isn't a pharmaceutical company because they make tearless baby shampoo.

[the acid never lies]

Also people need to cool it with fears over the Muslim Brotherhood. They are a deeply conservative organisation but do not confuse them with Al Quaida or label them simply as 'extremists' - that is patently wrong.

dude... they tried to assasinate one president and are widely suspected of effectively killing another. Their ideals spawned Hamas.

Like saying Johnson & Johnson isn't a pharmaceutical company because they make tearless baby shampoo.

And the ANC set off a bunch of bombs in their anti-apartheid campaign. Big deal. In either case these organisations are not static but come to represent different things at different historic intervals. The point is they (like Hamas, mind) are used as a bogey-man to make us think that maybe Egypt shouldn't be trusted with democracy. And no your analogy is silly - to mirror Tony Blair's insistence that "Mubarak is not Saddam Hussein" - well - The Muslim Brotherhood is NOT Al Quaida.

Meanwhile...

Would the liberal commentariat be happy to sacrifice Egyptians for the sake of capitalism?

One of the guests, Professor David Cesarani, floated the idea of there being a Tiananmen Square-style massacre in Egypt as a way of quelling potential post-Mubarak anarchy. And there has been no outrage. No Twitterstorm, no blog-based apoplexy, no heated radio phone-ins. Perhaps talking about the massacre of Egyptians is normal these days.

Professor Cesarani was asked by Michael Portillo about the “moral dilemma” of how to deal with what comes after Mubarak. What if it’s worse than Mubarak? Should it be crushed? Professor Cesarani said that if one takes the “wholly pragmatic view”, then “the outcome of a Tiananmen Square-style crackdown is desirable and is predictable”. Because, he said, “if you allow this popular democratic movement to run on unchecked, you cannot predict what’s going to happen. But you can predict probably that after a short, sharp, massive clampdown at huge human cost, there will be a sullen stability.”

Portillo was startled. “Quite a lot of people would be quite shocked to hear what you said – that a Tiananmen-style outcome would be desirable.” Cesarani responded that “the West is no longer weeping that much over Tiananmen Square because we’re doing a lot of business with China. So, many business interests would say, quietly, that, perhaps, well the way in which the Chinese managed their transition was preferable.” Another panellist, Matthew Taylor, former adviser to Tony Blair and now chief executive of the Royal Society of Arts, later described Cesarani’s comments on Tiananmen Square as “incredibly brave” and said: “In a way, I can see his argument.”

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brend ... mentators/

[noam]

^
what he's sayin is perfectly true whilst disturbing and shocking at the same time.

if it meant a friendly government you can guarantee the UK and US would not only turn a blind eye but covertly fuel any such turn of events. i have literally no doubt whatsoever about the likelihood of that. same as i have no doubt that if the Muslim Brotherhood were to get any stranglehold we would be making every effort to disrupt and destabilise, possibly worse.

[pkay]

Also people need to cool it with fears over the Muslim Brotherhood. They are a deeply conservative organisation but do not confuse them with Al Quaida or label them simply as 'extremists' - that is patently wrong.

dude... they tried to assasinate one president and are widely suspected of effectively killing another. Their ideals spawned Hamas.

Like saying Johnson & Johnson isn't a pharmaceutical company because they make tearless baby shampoo.

And the ANC set off a bunch of bombs in their anti-apartheid campaign. Big deal. The point is they (like Hamas, mind) are used as a bogey-man to make us think that maybe Egypt shouldn't be trusted with democracy. And no your analogy is silly - to mirror Tony Blair's insistence that "Mubarak is not Saddam Hussein" - well - The Muslim Brotherhood is NOT Al Quaida.

I've had an Aunt killed by Hamas attacks. They may not seem dangerous from your safe home in the western world but they are very real and the notion that they are simply scapegoats is categorically false and fairly ignorant.

I'm not sure how much you knew about the muslim brotherhood prior to 2 weeks ago, but I can assure you they are not simply some made up boogeyman. I'm not making them out to be al qaeda, and i'm not making them out to be hamas or hezzbollah... but I am saying that their ideals and openly admitted agenda would hinder progress in egypt and open up for some very dangerous scenarios in the coming years.

It's not always about violence.... it's about civil rights, progress, and countries living under democracies only by name.

Also the idea that the muslim brotherhood would somehow be good for democracy is comedic. An increased role of the muslim brotherhood could very easily set up Lebanon 2.0 in a matter of months.

[the acid never lies]

It's the

open up for some very dangerous scenarios in the coming years

that I disagree with. Like I said, they are a deeply conservative organisation but they are certainly moderate by most standards and they have played a marginal role in the uprisings. Anything insinuating that this is a lead up to an Iran & the Ayatollahs situation is pure, unfounded speculation. How this unfolds largely depends on the democratic councils and organisations that are and have been at the centre of this movement and whether these can develop into a position of taking power without the need for some third party to take the reigns, so to speak. All we can do is wait and see. Comparisons to Iran in the 1970s that I keep hearing are unhelpful and tiresome.

EDIT: I'm sorry about your aunt but a comparison with Hamas hardly seems appropriate. Anti-Imperialist struggles are not necessarily "pure" "moral" or "just" and I am not here to defend them. They are however an inevitable reality where imperialism continues to exist. The Brotherhood does not exist in the same context as Hamas - we shouldn't really go near that can of worms.

[pkay]

It's the

open up for some very dangerous scenarios in the coming years

that I disagree with. Like I said, they are a deeply conservative organisation but they are certainly moderate by most standards and they have played a marginal role in the uprisings. Anything insinuating that this is a lead up to an Iran & the Ayatollahs situation is pure, unfounded speculation. How this unfolds largely depends on the democratic councils and organisations that are and have been at the centre of this movement and whether these can develop into a position of taking power without the need for some third party to take the reigns, so to speak. All we can do is wait and see. Comparisons to Iran in the 1970s that I keep hearing are unhelpful and tiresome.

no ones comparing them to Iran. More to Lebanon where a political party causes enough trouble that the government collapses and they cease power.

Saying they are moderate is false as well. Last week they called for the dissolution of the peace treaty with Israel and stated support for Hamas. These are not the words of a moderate. Two sides of the same coin.

[noam]

but surely they're calling for a cessation of the peace treaty with Israel because Israel continuously and illegally persecute the Palestinian people whose side the Muslim Brotherhood will necessarily take?

[pkay]

EDIT: I'm sorry about your aunt but a comparison with Hamas hardly seems appropriate. Anti-Imperialist struggles are not necessarily "pure" "moral" or "just" and I am not here to defend them. They are however an inevitable reality where imperialism continues to exist. The Brotherhood does not exist in the same context as Hamas - we shouldn't really go near that can of worms.

As I said two sides of same coin. After all Hamas was spawned from the brotherhood. This is fact.

Enabling Hamas to flourish, supporting Hamas, and discouraging any peace between israel and hamas is just as bad as firing the weapon yourself in my opinion.

I'm also not saying that them becoming involved will result in war withing a month or two. I'm saying the political implications could cause problems for years to come. Given the fragility of the region, this works against stability. It works in the favor of groups who are fairly open about wanting radical change in the region.

[pkay]

but surely they're calling for a cessation of the peace treaty with Israel because Israel continuously and illegally persecute the Palestinian people whose side the Muslim Brotherhood will necessarily take?

That's a delicate situation that's probably for another argument. I'm half israeli and more than willing to admit that the situation is fucked (on all sides).

But Egypt was the first arab nation to recognize Israel. This peace treaty was the first step in recovery from the six day war. The implications of Egypt abandoning it are HUGE.

It'd be similar to the US or Russia backing out of nuclear arms pacts. The symbolism would be very bad and give spark an already volatile situation.

[the acid never lies]

^ I'm sorry but a situation like the one you are describing cannot be split into 'moderates' (i.e. those who support Israeli policy) and 'extremists' (those that don't)

[ghandi]

pkay, you know Israel helped create Hamas as a counter weight to the P.L.O right? And supported them while systematically targetting Fatah.

[pkay]

pkay, you know Israel helped create Hamas as a counter weight to the P.L.O right? And supported them while systematically targetting Fatah.

lol when you try and wiki knowledge something at least omit key words like 'counterweight' so you don't look like a muppet

so when you wiki'd hamas and saw this line

"In fact, Israel for many years tolerated and at times encouraged Islamic activists and groups as a counterweight to the secular nationalists of the PLO and its dominant faction, Fatah"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Hamas

You failed to interpret it correctly as you do not know the history of Israel and the PLO. Israel didn't help create Hamas. Israel tolerated Hamas, and other factions coming to power as it diluted the unchallenged power at the time of the PLO. Ultimately created more enemies but ultimately rid them of the PLO who are all but obsolete in the world today.

Had this not happened and the PLO grown as the undisputed voice of muslim extremists for the past number of decades you'd see 1 insanely powerful group instead of multiple moderately powerful groups.


Please don't try and drop wikipedia knowledge unless you know the context and revolving history around what you're quoting.