Thread: Egypt and what recent events mean

The most prominent culture/religion in that region is Islam. The Middle East if fucked.

I see one end for the Middle East: several of the dumb ass countries there will band together and attack Israel. They'll fail, but they'll keep at it. Eventually, they'll "win." And by win, I mean the Israelis will nuke the Middle East into a beautiful field of glass.

Originally Posted by Glycomann

I am very concerned about the recent events in Egypt. I am no history expert but Egypt has been one of the lynch pins in any stability that the West has enjoyed in that region over the last 35 years. The Suez canal is pretty damn important. It is a main thoroughfare for access to the Arabian Peninsula and South East Asia. Israel depends on it pretty dramatically as well. It is strange that so many signs at the protest are in English. It is also very concerning that Yemeni president will not seek re-election. Jordan seems on the brink. All these nations are are on the more moderate side of Islam and the most pro Western and all are on the brink of collapse. Yesterday the Ayatollah Khomeini, the supreme spiritual leader od Iran and argueably the leader as such of a large portion of Islam, at least the Shia, called for an Islamic transformation in Egypt. The West is weak right now and Islam is more than aware of this reality I am not liking the Obama response Mubarak has been a stabilizing force in the region regardless of his changes to the Egyptian constitution or strong arm tactics Seemingly, a strong man dictator type is what is needed to keep these Islamic states upright. I am not looking forward to the coming changes. If we start to see rioting in UK and France and other Western nations with large Muslim populations we all better sharpen our swords b/c the new Caliphate will be born and you can be sure that their sword are already sharpened.

it's the same story...countries fighting over natural resources and superpowers putting puppets in charge to keep those countries exporting those natural resources for sale to the world market. wealth is only accumulated by the elite and the vast majority of the population or citizens of those nations have very little...

it's pretty much just like the US with out the debt trap designed by the financial industry.

My persian collegues tells me this is a good thing. First, the west doesn't realize this is a direct domino effect from the Tunisian revolt where a fruit stand guy set himself on fire to protest corrupt government and their impedance on the citizen's individual rights. Essentially, the people want to take back the government and not let an corrupt despot continue his reign.This may the the equivalent of the French revolution. In Tunisia, women, without head scarves marched alongside men and successfully overthrew their corrupt despot, very progressive and liberal elements there are playing a big role. Isn't that the supossed "message " we sent taking out Sadam and enforcing democracy in Iraq? In fact, some of my collegues say that our pretense of establishing a democracy in iraq may be part of this catalyst. Most of Egypt is secular and democratic so maybe they won't be the fuck ups everyone else is. The problem is when the despot is pro american , we support him and are frightened by his potential successer, when the despot is anti -amerian, we take them out.

as for the suez canal, another reason to drill off our own shores and develop non petroleum alternative energy resources so we can wean our addiction.

By the way, contrary to public opinion, the radical muslims are not behind this movement and the muslim brotherhood is a tiny fraction of the protestors, thus, it may be exciting to see that more liberal elements are playing a greater role ( and liberal is a good word in that part of the world since it implies not radical muslim)
here is another link to stratfor, you may have trouble because it is also a video link

Only Members have access to this video | STRATFOR

They ( Muslim Brotherhood) are one faction, they are not the dominant faction. There’s a lot of people here who tend to see radical Islam behind everything that happens in this region. Certainly, they are interested in this, they are excited by the possibilities it opens up, but they had been under huge pressure from the Mubarak regime. They have been battered, and they represent the minority view. Egypt has been a secular country for a very long time, not just the leadership but in the public as well. The majority of the demonstrators appear to be secularists and democrats, not what the Muslim Brotherhood is. So the only thing we’ve heard from the Muslim Brotherhood is a tendency to want to take part in this general uprising, not to want to dominate it.

if Stratfor is right, if the secularist and liberal democrats take over, it might be for the better for all of us, but in the short run, our gas prices are going to hit the ceiling...

Originally Posted by bandaidwoman

article from stratfor which pretty much says we need to let mubarak leave

The article is not logically consistent. It claims that there are no political forces behind the uprising. Then brings up the Muslim Brotherhood's interest. Also it offers no analysis of the political backdrop. Does this author completely dismiss the facts that Albaradei was chosen as the Muslim Brotherhood's spokesman and potential replacement for Mubarak? It is also known that Albaradei was in the White House days before the uprising. Something here sticks to high heavens. Do we really want an Islamic state in Egypt, the proclaimed center of the Muslim world? Do we really believe there will be a democratic shift with a representative of the Muslim Brotherhood at the helm? What happens to the region of Iran, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan and Syria all transition to Islamic theocracies? What of Iraq in the midst of change currently under the heavy influence of the Theocratic Iran? What will Israel's response be with disruption of Straits of Tiran and the Suez Canal? What will happen when Israel responds with air attacks on Cairo or other Muslim capitals?

Originally Posted by Glycomann

The article is not logically consistent. It claims that there are no political forces behind the uprising. Then brings up the Muslim Brotherhood's interest. Also it offers no analysis of the political backdrop. Does this author completely dismiss the facts that Albaradei was chosen as the Muslim Brotherhood's spokesman and potential replacement for Mubarak? It is also known that Albaradei was in the White House days before the uprising. Something here sticks to high heavens. Do we really want an Islamic state in Egypt, the proclaimed center of the Muslim world? Do we really believe there will be a democratic shift with a representative of the Muslim Brotherhood at the helm? What happens to the region of Iran, Egypt, Yemen, Jordan and Syria all transition to Islamic theocracies? What of Iraq in the midst of change currently under the heavy influence of the Theocratic Iran? What will Israel's response be with disruption of Straits of Tiran and the Suez Canal? What will happen when Israel responds with air attacks on Cairo or other Muslim capitals?

First of all, stratfor says that the muslim brotherhood seems the most organized which is why its voice is being heard. they also pointed out how this is a fallout from tunsinia ( in another article which confirms my collegues impressions) which the american media has yet to point out.
actually if you just subsrcribe to stratfor there are about 20 articles which addresses everything you say, ( all in the form of quick stratfor updates, I just posted some general articles.) I don't want to just copy cut and paste as i'm working in the icu today so i just don't have the time, you can get a basic membership for a decent price. they could answer your questions better than I could. But lets face it, the only reason why we give a flying fuck is because of the suez canal. and honestly, I think it's high time the less radical elements ( tunsinia and egypt) are finally the ones shaking the tree, not the radical muslims. and we would look very hypocritocal if we didn't let their democratic process try to sort this out as that is the political movement we bought with us to iraq.

what is interesting as a key figure according to stratfor is this guy

...

, STRATFOR is told that the commander-in-chief of the armed forces, Field Marshall Mohamed Hussein Tantawi, who is also the country’s defense minister and emerged as deputy premier in the Egyptian government’s new Cabinet announced on Saturday, is looking at the Algerian model as a way to influence future politics in Cairo. The Algerian military in the 1990s was able to guide the formation of a new multi-party democratic political system, one in which all forces (centrists, Islamists and leftists) were accommodated. But the Algerian model was only made possible after a decadelong bloody Islamist insurgency, which was triggered by the army annulling elections in which the country’s then-largest Islamist movement was headed toward a landslide victory in the 1990 parliamentary elections, then the army engaging in a massive crackdown on the Islamists.

Clearly, the Egyptian army would want to avoid that scenario, especially given the state of unrest developing throughout the region. The other thing is that imposing martial law doesn’t appear to be a viable option. Not that such an outcome is inevitable, but the key question is how would the military react to a situation in which the MB would win in a free and fair election.

this guy may be the key to regime change from despot to military coup or true democracy that allows for non fundamental islamists to have a greater voice. Stratfor may or may not be right ( although eerily they predicted obama would be presdident three months before elections) but they do provide a different spin.

here is a link about the muslim brotherhood, its history etc.

Free Article for Non-Members | STRATFOR

With Egypt’s nearly 60-year-old order seemingly collapsing, many are asking whether the world’s single-largest Islamist movement, the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), is on the verge of benefiting from demands for democracy in Egypt, the most pivotal Arab state.

Western fears to the contrary, the MB is probably incapable of dominating Egypt. At best, it can realistically hope to be the largest political force in a future government, one in which the military would have a huge say.

The MB and the Egyptian State

The fear of Islamism for years allowed the single-party state to prevent the emergence of a secular opposition. Many secular forces were aligned with the state to prevent an Islamist takeover. Those that did not remained marginalized by the authoritarian system. As a result, the MB over the years has evolved into the country’s single-largest organized socio-political opposition force.

Even though there is no coherent secular group that can rival the MB’s organizational prowess, Egypt’s main Islamist movement hardly has a monopoly over public support. A great many Egyptians are either secular liberals or religious conservatives who do not subscribe to Islamist tenets. Certainly, the bulk of the people out on the streets in the recent unrest are not demanding that the secular autocracy be replaced with an Islamist democracy.....

Still, as Egypt’s biggest political movement, the MB has raised Western and Israeli fears of an Egypt going the way of Islamism, particularly if the military is not able to manage the transition. To understand the MB today — and thus to evaluate these international fears — we must first consider the group’s origins and evolution.

Origins and Evolution of the MB

Founded in the town of Ismailia in 1928 by a schoolteacher named Hassan al-Banna,.....

.......
Assessment

Because Egypt has never had free and fair elections, the MB’s popularity and its commitment to democracy both remain untested. In Egypt’s 2005 election, which was less rigged than any previous Egyptian vote, given the Bush administration’s push for greater democratization in the Middle East, MB members running as independents managed to increase their share of the legislature fivefold. It won 88 seats, making it the biggest opposition bloc in parliament.

But the MB is internally divided. It faces a generational struggle, with an old guard trying to prevent its ideals from being diluted while a younger generation (the 35-55 age bracket) looks to Turkey’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) as a role model.

The MB also lacks a monopoly over religious discourse in Egypt. A great many religious conservatives do not support the MB. Egypt also has a significant apolitical Salafist trend. Most of the very large class of theologians centered around Al-Azhar University has not come out in support of the MB or any other Islamist group. There are also Islamist forces both more pragmatic and more militant than the MB. For example, Hizb al-Wasat, which has not gotten a license to operate as an official opposition party, is a small offshoot of the MB that is much more pragmatic than the parent entity. What remains of Tandheem al-Jihad and Gamaa al-Islamiyah, which renounced violence and condemned al Qaeda, are examples of radical Islamist groups. And small jihadist cells inspired by or linked to al Qaeda also complicate this picture....



Read more: Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood: A Special Report | STRATFOR

long friggin article but I believe even a non member can access this one, not all of them let non members access them. Once again, one wonders if the idiotic notion that Bush had of bringing democratization to the middle east might actually be working.....

Originally Posted by Glycomann

I am very concerned about the recent events in Egypt.

Who cares? You're not Egyptian, I presume. It's all TV and Sony Playstation right? Just like the Gulf War I & II. Order a pizza and watch the war.

I am no history expert but Egypt has been one of the lynch pins in any stability that the West has enjoyed in that region over the last 35 years.

How? West enjoying "stability?"

Yes. Why? Because US elite foreign policy is concerned with only 2 things in the region:

1. Oil

2. Israel

The Suez canal is pretty damn important. It is a main thoroughfare for access to the Arabian Peninsula and South East Asia.

We know, Einstein. The Suez will remain open and running. Too much $$$$ involved, globally. Don't worry.

Israel depends on it pretty dramatically as well. It is strange that so many signs at the protest are in English. It is also very concerning that Yemeni president will not seek re-election. Jordan seems on the brink. All these nations are are on the more moderate side of Islam and the most pro Western and all are on the brink of collapse. Yesterday the Ayatollah Khomeini, the supreme spiritual leader od Iran and argueably the leader as such of a large portion of Islam, at least the Shia, called for an Islamic transformation in Egypt. The West is weak right now and Islam is more than aware of this reality I am not liking the Obama response Mubarak has been a stabilizing force in the region regardless of his changes to the Egyptian constitution or strong arm tactics Seemingly, a strong man dictator type is what is needed to keep these Islamic states upright. I am not looking forward to the coming changes. If we start to see rioting in UK and France and other Western nations with large Muslim populations we all better sharpen our swords b/c the new Caliphate will be born and you can be sure that their sword are already sharpened.

You must have copied and pasted the above. Cheers.

Cheney calls Mubarak a good friend, US ally

By MICHAEL R. BLOOD, AP Political Writer – Sun Feb 6, 6:58 am ET
SANTA BARBARA, Calif. – Former Vice President Dick Cheney on Saturday called Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak a good friend and U.S. ally, and he urged the Obama administration to move cautiously as turmoil continued to shake that nation's government.
Cheney's comments came a day after President Barack Obama pressed Mubarak to consider his legacy and exit office in a way that would give his country the best chance for peace and democracy.
Cheney said the U.S. should take measured steps in public, and suggested that too much pressure could backfire.
"There is a reason why a lot of diplomacy is conducted in secret. There are good reasons for there to be confidentiality in some of those communications. And I think President Mubarak needs to be treated as he deserved over the years, because he has been a good friend," Cheney said at an event commemorating the centennial of President Ronald Reagan's birth.

Sarah Palin: "Nobody yet has explained to the American public what they know, and surely they know more than the rest of us know who it is who will be taking the place of Mubarak and I'm not real enthused about what it is that that's being done on a national level and from D.C. in regards to understanding all the situation there in Egypt."


Cheney "There is a reason why a lot of diplomacy is conducted in secret. There are good reasons for there to be confidentiality in some of those communications. "