PDA

View Full Version : Int'l Issues Mubarak Steps Down


Pages : [1] 2 3

Jenson71
02-11-2011, 10:17 AM
'Egypt is free! Egypt is free!'

Wild cheers erupted from tens of thousands of demonstrators in Cairo's Tahrir Square after word spread that Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has resigned. Demonstrators chanted "Egypt is free!" upon hearing the news.

http://www.cnn.com/

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/12/world/middleeast/12egypt.html?_r=1&hp

Jenson71
02-11-2011, 10:20 AM
CAIRO — President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt turned over all power to the military, and left the Egyptian capital for his resort home in Sharm el-Sheik, Vice President Omar Suleiman announced on state television on Friday.

The announcement, delivered during evening prayers in Cairo, set off a frenzy of celebration, with protesters shouting “Egypt is free!”

The Egyptian military issued a communiqué pledging to carry out a variety of constitutional reforms in a statement notable for its commanding tone. The military’s statement alluded to the delegation of power to Mr. Suleiman and it suggested that the military would supervise implementation of the reforms.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/12/world/middleeast/12egypt.html?hp

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 10:22 AM
Good.

Hopefully an authentic democracy initiated by genuine Egyptians can follow.

Mr. Laz
02-11-2011, 10:25 AM
... be careful what you wish for ... /Fox News

mlyonsd
02-11-2011, 10:26 AM
... be careful what you wish for ... /Fox News

All you have to do is look as far as Iran to know that is absolutely true.

Fritz88
02-11-2011, 10:27 AM
A strong message to those who thought Arabs are a bunch of Barbarians who only talk with the language of guns and bombs. This is probably the greatest and most civilized way a revolution is managed. Christians and Muslims joining forces to take down one of the worst dictators Egypt has seen.

HonestChieffan
02-11-2011, 10:27 AM
Has Obama taken credit yet? Time for a speech or something

Jenson71
02-11-2011, 10:30 AM
Suleiman:

In the name of God the merciful, the compassionate, citizens, during these very difficult circumstances Egypt is going through, President Hosni Mubarak has decided to step down from the office of president of the republic and has charged the high council of the armed forces to administer the affairs of the country. May God help everybody.

Donger
02-11-2011, 10:33 AM
I wouldn't call a country which is under the control of the military "free."

Jenson71
02-11-2011, 10:37 AM
I wouldn't call a country which is under the control of the military "free."

Yeah, I'd say it's still in the process of becoming.

Jenson71
02-11-2011, 10:44 AM
Has Obama taken credit yet? Time for a speech or something

Obama to speak at 12:30 CST.

HonestChieffan
02-11-2011, 10:45 AM
Obama to speak at 12:30 CST.

I will change my schedule and DVR it for sure.

mlyonsd
02-11-2011, 10:47 AM
This could take years to play out.

chiefsnorth
02-11-2011, 10:51 AM
A strong message to those who thought Arabs are a bunch of Barbarians who only talk with the language of guns and bombs. This is probably the greatest and most civilized way a revolution is managed. Christians and Muslims joining forces to take down one of the worst dictators Egypt has seen.

We haven't seen anything yet to make any judgement about this being positive or not. We already saw Hamas get elected in one of these free and democratic elections. If the people want to impress anyone they'd better elect a government that will behave in a civilized manner and not another ally of Hamas or Iran.

I don't expect that to happen frankly. I hope this does not become another iteration of "Who lost China?"

Fritz88
02-11-2011, 11:02 AM
We haven't seen anything yet to make any judgement about this being positive or not. We already saw Hamas get elected in one of these free and democratic elections. If the people want to impress anyone they'd better elect a government that will behave in a civilized manner and not another ally of Hamas or Iran.

I don't expect that to happen frankly. I hope this does not become another iteration of "Who lost China?"

From seeing the way people protested and voiced their demands, I think I can say that if things are done the right way (According to what the people changed in the constitution) then someone worthy and civilized enough will be elected.

I am going to cherish this moment, I never thought it would happen in my lifetime.

Aries Walker
02-11-2011, 11:09 AM
All you have to do is look as far as Iran to know that is absolutely true.
Yeah, but this is a lot more secular, and totally home-grown, in one of the big three historical powers of the middle east. This couldn't be better news.

All because of one twentysomething fruit merchant in a tiny village in a third-world African country decided he'd had enough. It's amazing that it can all be traced back to one guy's one desperate, final act, which wasn't to shoot a place or blow up a national landmark somewhere. Mind-boggling.

chiefsnorth
02-11-2011, 11:12 AM
Yeah, but this is a lot more secular, and totally home-grown, in one of the big three historical powers of the middle east. This couldn't be better news.

All because of one twentysomething fruit merchant in a tiny village in a third-world African country decided he'd had enough. It's amazing that it can all be traced back to one guy's one desperate, final act, which wasn't to shoot a place or blow up a national landmark somewhere. Mind-boggling.

Regardless of whether this had admirable aims to begin with, radical elements exist and will attempt to gain control. The people of Egypt have crossed the Rubicon, the die is cast. They must ensure that this turns out to have been good. If they allow the Muslim Brotherhood or similar to take over, matters are worse than before. This is only one step in a long journey that requires vigilance.

Mr. Laz
02-11-2011, 11:19 AM
All you have to do is look as far as Iran to know that is absolutely true.
which is not the point at all


"Hearken people around the world ... don't strive for freedom just look at what happen in Iran" /mlyonsd

:doh!:

Msmith
02-11-2011, 11:22 AM
The Butterfly Effect is gaining momentum. What country is next?

Fritz88
02-11-2011, 11:23 AM
I find it utterly despicable that some people still manage to taint this and fear monger. They would rather have Millions of people live under a brutal dictatorship, live way below poverty line, not experience or even sniff the God given right of freedom to express and live just because of the remote possibility (after seeing day in and day out the past 18 days reasons that suggest otherwise, reasons for hope) that this change could harm their interests. ****ing despicable shit. That is probably the lowest a human can get. Very selfish and sick.

Fritz88
02-11-2011, 11:24 AM
The Butterfly Effect is gaining momentum. What country is next?

Hopefully Libya.

Aries Walker
02-11-2011, 11:24 AM
Regardless of whether this had admirable aims to begin with, radical elements exist and will attempt to gain control. The people of Egypt have crossed the Rubicon, the die is cast. They must ensure that this turns out to have been good. If they allow the Muslim Brotherhood or similar to take over, matters are worse than before. This is only one step in a long journey that requires vigilance.
I can totally agree with this. They're in a good position to fight off the radical elements, but those same radical elements would see control of Egypt as being a huge feather in their cap.

HonestChieffan
02-11-2011, 11:24 AM
Al-Arabiya TV reports that the Army will suspend Parliament and sack the cabinet; The head of the constitutional court will lead along with the military council, it reports.

gblowfish
02-11-2011, 11:28 AM
So, you're saying Hosni "Walked Like an Egyptian?"
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/PS0P7w4YCDI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Fritz88
02-11-2011, 11:31 AM
Watch live

http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/

FAX
02-11-2011, 11:34 AM
So, you're saying Hosni "Walked Like an Egyptian?"
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/PS0P7w4YCDI" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

That, right there, is awesome.

FAX

mlyonsd
02-11-2011, 11:44 AM
which is not the point at all


"Hearken people around the world ... don't strive for freedom just look at what happen in Iran" /mlyonsd

:doh!:

Your comprehension skills are lacking.

FAX
02-11-2011, 11:51 AM
Al-Arabiya TV reports that the Army will suspend Parliament and sack the cabinet; The head of the constitutional court will lead along with the military council, it reports.

I have a question ...

To what extent is the military associated with Islamic fundamentalism?

FAX

mnchiefsguy
02-11-2011, 11:54 AM
I have a question ...

To what extent is the military associated with Islamic fundamentalism?

FAX

The military has leaned toward the secular side, but anything is possible now. I just hope the Egyptians make the right choice.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 11:56 AM
I find it utterly despicable that some people still manage to taint this and fear monger. They would rather have Millions of people live under a brutal dictatorship, live way below poverty line, not experience or even sniff the God given right of freedom to express and live just because of the remote possibility (after seeing day in and day out the past 18 days reasons that suggest otherwise, reasons for hope) that this change could harm their interests. ****ing despicable shit. That is probably the lowest a human can get. Very selfish and sick.

Get over yourself, Fritz88. No one here would begrudge the people of Egypt having a government that is genuinely based on individual freedom. But there's not a lot of that going on in the Arab and muslim world these days. It's perfectly reasonable to be skeptical and it's also perfectly reasonable to be concerned about what a contrary outcome would mean for our interests. F*** Egypt if it reverts to an alliance with anti-Western socialism or decides to side with anti-Western islamism.

Donger
02-11-2011, 11:56 AM
The military has leaned toward the secular side, but anything is possible now. I just hope the Egyptians make the right choice.

Yep, and our militaries are pretty close. I just hope that someone doesn't get power hungry.

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 11:58 AM
Has Obama taken credit yet? Time for a speech or something

Geez, let the guy at least finish his ice cream and golf.

gblowfish
02-11-2011, 12:01 PM
I can totally agree with this. They're in a good position to fight off the radical elements, but those same radical elements would see control of Egypt as being a huge feather in their cap.

Radical!

cdcox
02-11-2011, 12:05 PM
The out come rests with the military. So far they have been very benevolent to the wishes of the people and have not made an apparent grab for permanent power.

It also rests somewhat with economic conditions. I think the people will elect a reasonable leader. If that leader is successful and people are content, I think Egypt has a bright future as a democracy. If things go sour, the temptation to turn to more radical elements will become stronger.

The people of Egypt have my best wishes.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 12:13 PM
The out come rests with the military. So far they have been very benevolent to the wishes of the people and have not made an apparent grab for permanent power.

It also rests somewhat with economic conditions. I think the people will elect a reasonable leader. If that leader is successful and people are content, I think Egypt has a bright future as a democracy. If things go sour, the temptation to turn to more radical elements will become stronger.

The people of Egypt have my best wishes.

Regarding the military (from a commentary by Fred Kaplan (http://www.slate.com/id/2284669/pagenum/all/)):

Military rule doesn't necessarily bode ill for its prospects. In some countries, Turkey for instance, the military has played a progressive role, advancing the causes of secular society and representative rule.
An Egypt untethered from Mubarak could follow a similar path. Most of its military's officers are college-educated, many have been trained at U.S. military academies, and the upper echelon—through extensive arms purchases especially—have maintained frequent contact with U.S., British, and French officers. The army is widely respected by the Egyptian people—a sentiment that's been solidified, and perhaps reciprocated, in these past two weeks of protests in Tahrir Square.

But on the other hand:

Some factions of the military may have their own material interests in mind when forcing Mubarak out. As in many undemocratic countries, the military is more than just the military. Egypt's officer corps is said to own or operate vast networks of commercial enterprises, including water, construction, cement, olive oil, the hotel and gasoline industries—in all, about one-third of the country's economy—as well as vast chunks of seaside property.

The protests and the chaos they have unleashed have caused grave economic damage—an estimated $315 million each day. These losses, much of them due to reduced tourism, will continue as long as the protests continue—and the protests will continue, it seems, for as long as Mubarak stays in power.

The army's material interests don't mesh so well with the premises of a thriving middle-class society. And the absence of such a society—the combination of large numbers of well-educated young people and few jobs to suit their talents—has no doubt fueled these last two weeks of protest.

That same WikiLeaks cable from the U.S. embassy in Cairo reported that the military views efforts at privatization "as a threat to its economic position, and therefore generally opposes economic reforms." To the extent the military does retain power in Egypt, the people's "rising expectations" may be frustrated, regardless of the outcome of this current clash. Whatever happens in the coming days and weeks, Egypt, once the emblem of Arab stability, might be locked in the dynamics of revolution for a long time to come.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 12:16 PM
I am glad this has finally happened and I hope the Egyptian people finally get true freedom.

Whether they decide to be pro-Western or not it is their fate to decide not ours. As Americans we should fully support their right to decide whether we agree with their decision or not.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 12:17 PM
Obama to speak at 12:30 CST.

Jake Tapper reviews the records of the past two Presidents on Egyptian political reform:

An accounting of the full two years of President Obama’s policy towards Egypt – prior to January 25, 2011 – may be in order.

As ably covered by the Washington Post’s Fact Checker – and former State Department reporter – Glenn Kessler, the Obama administration was far more quiet on the need for Egypt to engage in serious political reform, at least publicly, than the Bush administration.

Perhaps more glaringly, while the Bush administration tried to directly fund civil society in Egypt – pro-democracy groups and the like – the Obama administration changed that policy and cut funding significantly, ending an effort to provide direct funding to democracy groups not “approved” by the Egyptian government, and reduced funding in the budget for programs to promote civil society groups.

more... (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/02/taking-a-clear-eyed-look-at-the-obama-administrations-full-two-year-record-on-reform-in-egypt.html)

blaise
02-11-2011, 12:18 PM
I wonder if he set his Outlook message to Out of Office.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 12:20 PM
I am glad this has finally happened and I hope the Egyptian people finally get true freedom.

Whether they decide to be pro-Western or not it is their fate to decide not ours. As Americans we should fully support their right to decide whether we agree with their decision or not.

You don't want to let healthcare insurers decide for themselves how to run their own businesses, but you're first at the ramparts to defend foreigners' right to choose an anti-American path. Brilliant.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 12:27 PM
You don't want to let healthcare insurers decide for themselves how to run their own businesses, but you're first at the ramparts to defend foreigners' right to choose an anti-American path. Brilliant.

That is dumb analogy.

It is their country, their home, their lives and livelihood and it is their decision not yours.

As long as their elections are fair we shouldn't have a problem with it.

You would think any American would understand considering we had to run off a tyrannical government in order to gain freedom.

Donger
02-11-2011, 12:35 PM
As long as their elections are fair we shouldn't have a problem with it.

:spock:

Hitler was fairly elected, dirk.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 12:35 PM
Was I wrong in believing that all true conservatives believed in spreading freedom and democracy? Or at least until they vote they don't want to be pro-Western then we should try to force dictators on them that are sympathetic to us.

chiefsnorth
02-11-2011, 12:41 PM
Was I wrong in believing that all true conservatives believed in spreading freedom and democracy? Or at least until they vote they don't want to be pro-Western then we should try to force dictators on them that are sympathetic to us.

You are likely confused because the world is a complex place and your political opinions all seem to be childlike in their simplicity.

Donger
02-11-2011, 12:44 PM
Was I wrong in believing that all true conservatives believed in spreading freedom and democracy? Or at least until they vote they don't want to be pro-Western then we should try to force dictators on them that are sympathetic to us.

Yes, you were. My primary concern is about that democracy and freedom being non-hostile to us.

See Hitler above.

chiefsnorth
02-11-2011, 12:47 PM
That is dumb analogy.

It is their country, their home, their lives and livelihood and it is their decision not yours.

As long as their elections are fair we shouldn't have a problem with it.

You would think any American would understand considering we had to run off a tyrannical government in order to gain freedom.

So if we sat on our hands while Iran influenced the coming process, installed another Taliban/ Ahmadinejad, became a state sponsor of terrorism, destabilized the middle east and placed a very large military force in the hands of a malevolent regime, you would regard this as good, because in some vague way it is "more freedom".

No, the world is not as simple as a+b. Good does not always triumph after a good first step. Evil, hate, malevolence are always prowling about waiting for an opportunity. Culpability falls equally on those who do evil and those who allow it.

I'm not sure if your "hay guyz moar freedom = gud" view is intentionally obtuse, impossibly simplistic, or just the result of a phenomenal level of naïveté.

Jenson71
02-11-2011, 12:49 PM
Was I wrong in believing that all true conservatives believed in spreading freedom and democracy? Or at least until they vote they don't want to be pro-Western then we should try to force dictators on them that are sympathetic to us.

There is a long standing idea in political science that healthy democracies have 1) internal security 2) do not have conflicting or warring interests with other healthy democracies.

If true, it would mean that, if Egypt became a healthy democracy, 1) Egypt would be better able to temper radical Islamic elements and 2) remain at peace with Israel and the US.

Overall, I think democratic movements are causes of optimistic celebration, and that applies in this Egyptian case.

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 12:54 PM
I wouldn't call a country which is under the control of the military "free."

Even if they're backing the people the way they are here?

I wouldn't call a country labeled a democracy free because it doesn't necessarily follow.
In fact it's not even true that democracies don't war with each other—healthy or not. ( whatever that subjective term, healthy, means here )
Democracy just means majority rule so if the majority is bat-shit crazy you have a bat-shit crazy democracy who will even deem themselves "healthy."
We need to start question some of these political science myths that abound.

Donger
02-11-2011, 12:54 PM
Even if they're backing the people the way they are here?

Yes.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 12:59 PM
Yes, you were. My primary concern is about that democracy and freedom being non-hostile to us.

See Hitler above.

I understand that Donger and I don't want them for example to vote the Muslim Brotherhood in power.

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 12:59 PM
Yes.

Disagree. I think it ultimately depends on their policies and who is being ousted as well as who is the replacement. I mean you can have a monarch that is benign and generous in allowing freedom. The problem is these policies can't be gauranteed by the successor.

Donger
02-11-2011, 01:01 PM
Disagree. I think it ultimately depends on their policies and who is being ousted as well as who is the replacement. I mean you can have a monarch that is benign and generous in allowing freedom. The problem is these policies can't be gauranteed by the successor.

Are they "free" to vote out a monarch or military leader(s)? Did they elect them in the first place?

No. So shut your pie hole, woman.

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:01 PM
I understand that Donger and I don't want them for example to vote the Muslim Brotherhood in power.

Well, the MB will share some power. I think there's been changes in that group with different strands of it—not all strands are radical per recent info I've read.

Jenson71
02-11-2011, 01:02 PM
Even if they're backing the people the way they are here?

I wouldn't call a country labeled a democracy free because it doesn't necessarily follow.
In fact it's not even true that democracies don't war with each other—healthy or not. ( whatever that subjective term, healthy, means here )
Democracy just means majority rule so if the majority is bat-shit crazy you have a bat-shit crazy democracy who will even deem themselves "healthy."
We need to start question some of these political science myths that abound.

I must be off-ignore today ;)

I wouldn't call a bat-shit crazy democracy a healthy democracy. Our good political science foundations stem not from logic or ideals, but from experience. The 20th century did not see democracy fighting democracy, but democracy fighting dictatorship.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 01:03 PM
So if we sat on our hands while Iran influenced the coming process, installed another Taliban/ Ahmadinejad, became a state sponsor of terrorism, destabilized the middle east and placed a very large military force in the hands of a malevolent regime, you would regard this as good, because in some vague way it is "more freedom".

No, the world is not as simple as a+b. Good does not always triumph after a good first step. Evil, hate, malevolence are always prowling about waiting for an opportunity. Culpability falls equally on those who do evil and those who allow it.

I'm not sure if your "hay guyz moar freedom = gud" view is intentionally obtuse, impossibly simplistic, or just the result of a phenomenal level of naïveté.

Of course not. I could be wrong but from what I have read from your posts you seem to think they are a better off with Mubarak or someone like him instead of deciding for themselves.

Jenson71
02-11-2011, 01:04 PM
I understand that Donger and I don't want them for example to vote the Muslim Brotherhood in power.

A senior member of the MB wrote just a couple of days ago that they would not be nominating a candidate for Egyptian presidency in September, so we will see if that promise is stuck with.

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:06 PM
Are they "free" to vote out a monarch or military leader(s)? Did they elect them in the first place?

No. So shut your pie hole, woman.

Voting doesn't not necessarily guarantee freedom either. We vote here and we continue to lose freedom.

However, let's take your scenario:
If the people are free and going about their business unimpeded, would they even care that they were not able to vote out that monarch? Unlikely. There have been some good monarchs. The main problem with monarchy is that there is no guarantee of the same good policies with succession as it's hereditary. The next best thing is a republic. There's different kinds of republics though. Even the Soviet Union was a "republic". It has to be the right kind of republic. See United States Constitution 1787 and circa early 1800s. Post Lincoln it starts to slowly deteriorate.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 01:06 PM
There is a long standing idea in political science that healthy democracies have 1) internal security 2) do not have conflicting or warring interests with other healthy democracies.

If true, it would mean that, if Egypt became a healthy democracy, 1) Egypt would be better able to temper radical Islamic elements and 2) remain at peace with Israel and the US.

Overall, I think democratic movements are causes of optimistic celebration, and that applies in this Egyptian case.

I agree Jenson

Jenson71
02-11-2011, 01:12 PM
Voting doesn't not necessarily guarantee freedom either. We vote here and we continue to lose freedom.

However, let's take your scenario:
If the people are free and going about their business unimpeded, would they even care that they were not able to vote out that monarch? Unlikely. There have been some good monarchs. The main problem with monarchy is that there is no guarantee of the same good policies with succession as it's hereditary.

Cool thing about a democracy is that you can keep voting in the guy who is doing a good job, making it a de-facto monarchy without the concern of "what if this guy becomes crazy!?"

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:12 PM
Of course not. I could be wrong but from what I have read from your posts you seem to think they are a better off with Mubarak or someone like him instead of deciding for themselves.

Fox News, the NeoCons and Israel favor Omar Suleiman for the same reasons.

In this particular case, I think Israel has a right to be worried.They had a peace treaty and they have a right to be scared if it isn't honored. It's their backyard. I see this as more of a legit concern than Iran which is trumped up nonsense by ideologues with another agenda as was Iraq. Israel has acted better than the US though by keeping their mouths shut pretty much.

alnorth
02-11-2011, 01:17 PM
Are they "free" to vote out a monarch or military leader(s)? Did they elect them in the first place?

No. So shut your pie hole, woman.

You are being silly. There is a simple logistical problem that cant be ignored, it is going to take at least half a year for them to organize elections, give parties time to select candidates to campaign for various offices, give the people time to judge and vote, etc.

In the meantime, someone has to run the country. It seems obvious that everyone in power wanted Mubarak to continue as a caretaker but the people essentially told the military "hell effing no, he goes right now, you run things for a few months."

It is not often at all that the people rise up and ask for a military coup, but here we are.

Egypt's High Military Council on Friday affirmed that it will be running the nation on a temporary basis.

The official said the military council would "issue more statements to outline the measures and decisions to be taken," while stressing that it was not a permanent replacement for a government.

chiefsnorth
02-11-2011, 01:18 PM
Of course not. I could be wrong but from what I have read from your posts you seem to think they are a better off with Mubarak or someone like him instead of deciding for themselves.

Everyone is saying the same thing. Mubarack may not have been great, but it's a hell of a lot better than how it will be if they make a poor choice in the coming weeks and months. If you haven't seen that you must not be reading.

Donger
02-11-2011, 01:18 PM
You are being silly. There is a simple logistical problem that cant be ignored, it is going to take at least half a year for them to organize elections, give parties time to select candidates to campaign for various offices, give the people time to judge and vote, etc.

In the meantime, someone has to run the country. It seems obvious that everyone in power wanted Mubarak to continue as a caretaker but the people essentially told the military "hell effing no, he goes right now, you run things for a few months."

It is not often at all that the people rise up and ask for a military coup, but here we are.

No, I'm not. It is premature to call Egypt free.

DJ's left nut
02-11-2011, 01:19 PM
Good.

Hopefully an authentic democracy initiated by genuine Egyptians can follow.

Of course.

Anytime you turn power over to a military backed, hand-picked ruler, things always work out for the best.

Sometimes the devil you know is better than the one you don't. While there's a good chance this improves things in Egypt, there's solid chance that it makes things worse as well.

Congrats, Egypt. You got what you were after - now don't fuck it up.

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:20 PM
This is the conversation we'll be having in about 5-10 years about the United States.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:20 PM
Get over yourself, Fritz88. No one here would begrudge the people of Egypt having a government that is genuinely based on individual freedom (except the Israelis, who would rather just kill all of them). But there's not a lot of that going on in the Arab and muslim world these days. It's perfectly reasonable to be skeptical and it's also perfectly reasonable to be concerned about what a contrary outcome would mean for our interests. F*** Egypt if it reverts to an alliance with anti-Western socialism or decides to side with anti-Western islamism.



"anti-Western socialism" = being against fresh new Israeli land grabs


Truth be told, Iran was an "organic" democracy." Initially, in the overthrow of the brutal and corrupt Shah, the Iranian people found leadership in a radical, but a radical less into killing than "expelling the impure," which is why our hostages were returned alive, as opposed to AQ's hostages, which usually get decapitated. Now, when Saddam invaded, the Iranians eventually fought hard and won, and pushed Saddam out, and did not do the "Israeli thing," take territory, even though Iran really was attacked by Rummy's buddy at the time = Saddam. Now, after Saddam was neutered by Desert Storm, Iran started to moderate, and its authentic and organic "islamic (Shia) democracy" produced Rafsanjani, about as moderate and pro-western an Iranian as the Iranian people could elect. The US had a "national interest" in helping Raf stay in power, but W was not interested in US national interest. W was interested in sukking up to Zionism, and the "axis of evil" was trotted out with our troops still "allied" with TNA in Afghan with the mission not yet accomplished. W betrayed Raf. Then W invaded Iraq, and planned to invade Iran to, something "pat" would be 100% too.

Then someone told the SUB HUMAN TRAITOR that invading Iran from Iraq would be to start a war against Iran ... and 60% of Iraq....


Yes, indeed, the US installed at the point of a gun "demockeracy" in Iraq took toothless Saddam and Raf and replaced them with these two...


h ttp://ww w.cn n.co m/2008/WORLD/meast/06/08/iraq.iran/


TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Sunday tried to allay Iranian fears over a planned U.S.-Iraq security pact, saying his government would not allow Iraq to become a launching pad for an attack on its neighbor.
art.tehran.afp.gi.jpg

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:23 PM
hostages, which usually get decapitated. Now, when Saddam invaded, the Iranians eventually . "anti-Western socialism" = being against fresh new Israeli land grabs organicInitially, in the overthrow of the brutal and corrupt Shah, the Iranian people fought hard and won, and pushed Saddam out, and did not do the "Israeli thing," take territory, even though Iran really was attacked by Rummy's buddy at the time = Saddam democracy" produced Rafsanjani, about as moderate and pro-western an Iranian as the Then someone told the SUB HUMAN TRAITOR that invading Iran from Iraq would be to start a war against Iran ... and 60% of Iraq....Yes, indeed, the US installed at the point of a gun "demockeracy" in Iraq took toothless Saddam and Raf and replaced them with these two...



leadership in a radical, but a radical less into killing than "expelling the impure," which is why Afghan with the mission not yet accomplished. W

in sukking up to Zionismour hostages were returned alive, as opposed to AQ's Now, Iranian people could elect. The US had a "national interest" in helping Raf stay in power, but W was not interested in US national interest. W was interested after Saddam was neutered by Desert Storm, Iran started to moderate, and its authentic and organic "islamic (Shia) , and the "axis of evil" was trotted out with our troops still "allied" with TNA in Truth be told, Iran was an "nd betrayed Raf. Then W invaded Iraq, and planned to invade Iran to, something "pat" would be 100% too.

h ttp://ww w.cn n.co m/2008/WORLD/meast/06/08/iraq.iran/
art.tehran.afp.gi.jpg

ROFL

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:23 PM
Of course.

Anytime you turn power over to a military backed, hand-picked ruler, things always work out for the best.

Sometimes the devil you know is better than the one you don't. While there's a good chance this improves things in Egypt, there's solid chance that it makes things worse as well.

Congrats, Egypt. You got what you were after - now don't **** it up.



Keep watching the "24" reruns in case you forget why you exist in the eyes of Murdoch.

Oh, that scary "Muslim Brotherhood." Maybe we can get Keiffer Sutherland out of retirement...

Donger
02-11-2011, 01:24 PM
Nice to see TGF (or whatever its name was) is still a little Israel-obsessed.

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:25 PM
Everyone is saying the same thing. Mubarack may not have been great, but it's a hell of a lot better than how it will be if they make a poor choice in the coming weeks and months. If you haven't seen that you must not be reading.

It's none of your business. However, you are entitled to an opinion on it but he has to go or things could boil over making things even worse. It's the fear of the unknown, even someone like me has. Still, it has to be up to those people. So NO, not "everyone" is saying the same thing. That's a sweeping generality.

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:25 PM
Nice to see TGF (or whatever its name was) is still a little Israel-obsessed.

So isn't chiefsnorth.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:26 PM
ROFL


Rafsanjani is infinitely more pro-US than you are or ever were or will be as a sub human parrot of Murdoch's propaganda...

Raf was trying to off your hero, the "not a priority" Osama. That made him "evil" in your eyes... the FIXED eyes...

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:26 PM
No, I'm not. It is premature to call America free.

FYP

DJ's left nut
02-11-2011, 01:27 PM
Keep watching the "24" reruns in case you forget why you exist in the eyes of Murdoch.

Oh, that scary "Muslim Brotherhood." Maybe we can get Keiffer Sutherland out of retirement...

Just exactly WTF are you talking about?

This isn't Fox talking, this is the fucking history books. The annals of history are filled with rulers being overthrown by supposedly benevolent factions that plunge the country into darker times.

To believe otherwise is simply naive and to castigate other for being skeptical...well that just makes you a idealogical fuckwit.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:28 PM
It's none of your business. However, you are entitled to an opinion on it but he has to go or things could boil over making things even worse. It's the fear of the unknown, even someone like me has. Still, it has to be up to those people.


It is the basic instinct of the socialist to state that he or she "knows best" for everyone, even people they've never met in a country they've never visited.

Socialist beliefs require the arrogance that you know all, and much better than those who aren't socialists like you. Bible Thumping Socialists are no different in that regard from any other form of socialism, and are just as dangerous.

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:28 PM
FTR Iraq was technically a democracy. It had elections. It was socialist too. Like Israel is.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:30 PM
"The annals of history are filled with rulers being overthrown by supposedly benevolent factions that plunge the country into darker times."


LOL!!


Like the US, apparently, in 1776...


If you prefer dictatorship or just want to spend your life killing Muslims and Islamic types who had nothing to do with 911, why don't you GFT out of this country and move to Israel, and sign up. That would match NOISE with ACTION, instead of just noise and cowering under the white sheet...

Iowanian
02-11-2011, 01:32 PM
What is the over-under on the number of people who will be trampled to death and killed in this celebratory party?

Donger
02-11-2011, 01:32 PM
"The annals of history are filled with rulers being overthrown by supposedly benevolent factions that plunge the country into darker times."


LOL!!


Like the US, apparently, in 1776...


If you prefer dictatorship or just want to spend your life killing Muslims and Islamic types who had nothing to do with 911, why don't you GFT out of this country and move to Israel, and sign up. That would match NOISE with ACTION, instead of just noise and cowering under the white sheet...

So, you don't think that was Israel was right to occupy the lands she took over during wartime?

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:32 PM
Nice to see TGF (or whatever its name was) is still a little Israel-obsessed.



Nice to see you are still peeved at General Shelton for not conspiring with Clinton's Israelite National Security Team to murder an American pilot to start a war with precisely no US national interest...

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:33 PM
hostages, which usually get decapitated. Now, when Saddam invaded, the Iranians eventually . "anti-Western socialism" = being against Rummy's buddy fresh new Israeli land grabs Zionist organicInitially,SUB HUMAN TRAITOR in the overthrow of the Zionist brutal "demockeracy"and corrupt Shah, the Iranian people fought hard and won, and pushed Saddam out, and did not do the "Israeli thing," take territory, SUB HUMAN TRAITOR even though Rafsanjani, but W was not interested in US national interest. about as moderate and "demockeracy"pro-western an Iranian as the Then someone SUB HUMAN TRAITOR told the SUB HUMAN TRAITOR that invading Iran from Iraq would be to start a Zionist war against Iran ... SUB HUMAN TRAITOR and 60% of Iraq....Yes, indeed, the US installed at the point of a gun "demockeracy" in Iraq took toothless Saddam and Raf and replaced them with these two...in sukking up to Zionis leadership in a radical, but a radical less into killing than "expelling the impure," which is why Afghan with the mission not yet accomplished. W hostages were returned alive, as opposed to AQ's Now, Iranian people could elect. The US had a "national interest" in helping Raf stay in power, W was interested after Saddam Iran really was Zionist attacked by Rummy's buddy at the time = Saddam democracy" Zionistproduced was neutered by Desert Storm, Iran started to moderate, and its authentic and organic "islamic (Shia) , and the "axis of evil" was trotted out with our Zionist troops still "allied" with TNA in Truth be told, Iran was an "nd betrayed Raf. Then W invaded Iraq, and planned to invade Iran to, something "pat" would be 100% too.

h ttp://ww w.cn n.co m/2008/WORLD/meast/06/08/iraq.iran/
art.tehran.afp.gi.jpg

LMAO

Jaric
02-11-2011, 01:34 PM
Keep watching the "24" reruns in case you forget why you exist in the eyes of Murdoch.

Oh, that scary "Muslim Brotherhood." Maybe we can get Keiffer Sutherland out of retirement...

What if we buy the dvd set instead? Do the Zionist lizard people still get their cut?

Donger
02-11-2011, 01:35 PM
Nice to see you are still peeved at General Shelton for not conspiring with Clinton's Israelite National Security Team to murder an American pilot to start a war with precisely no US national interest...

Remind me: you are part Jew, yes?

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:35 PM
Rafsanjani is infinitely more pro-US than you are or ever were or will be as a sub human parrot of Murdoch's propaganda...

Raf was trying to off your hero, the "not a priority" Osama. That made him "evil" in your eyes... the FIXED eyes...

I'm a Mossad agent. Didn't I tell you that already?

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 01:36 PM
Everyone is saying the same thing. Mubarack may not have been great, but it's a hell of a lot better than how it will be if they make a poor choice in the coming weeks and months. If you haven't seen that you must not be reading.

Pretty much what I thought.

Whether they make a great choice or a bad choice at least they have a choice which is something you don't seem to want to give them.

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:37 PM
SUB HUMAN TRAITOR in the overthrow of the Zionist brutal "demockeracy"and corrupt Shah, the Iranian people fought hard and won, and pushed Saddam out, and did not do the "Israeli thing," take

Ha ha ha!

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:39 PM
So, you don't think that was Israel was right to occupy the lands she took over during wartime?



"she" for that you love and only care about...


The real question is whether or not Israel was "attacked," or whether that claim is something akin to what General Shelton encountered in that meeting with Tenet, Burglar, Cohen, Albright...

The same question applies to the USS Liberty. As with USS Liberty, every single Iscariot funded sellout in America made all sorts of excuses, that it was an "accident." The "US media" obliged and refuses to this day to cover the story's main character, the captain, who still has his website up today...



ht tp://ww w.gtr5.co m/


"Despite a near-universal consensus that the Israeli attack was made with full knowledge that USS Liberty was a US Navy ship, the Johnson administration began an immediate cover-up of this fact (for precisely the same reasons why W thought it would be a good idea to attack Iraq despite not knowing what Sunnis and Shias were = money and media coverage). Though administration officers continued individually to characterize the attack as deliberate, the Johnson administration never sought the prosecution of the guilty parties or otherwise attempted to seek justice for the victims. They concealed and altered evidence in their effort to downplay the attack."

Donger
02-11-2011, 01:41 PM
"she" for that you love and only care about...


The real question is whether or not Israel was "attacked," or whether that claim is something akin to what General Shelton encountered in that meeting with Tenet, Burglar, Cohen, Albright...

The same question applies to the USS Liberty. As with USS Liberty, every single Iscariot funded sellout in America made all sorts of excuses, that it was an "accident." The "US media" obliged and refuses to this day to cover the story's main character, the captain, who still has his website up today...



ht tp://ww w.gtr5.co m/


"Despite a near-universal consensus that the Israeli attack was made with full knowledge that USS Liberty was a US Navy ship, the Johnson administration began an immediate cover-up of this fact (for precisely the same reasons why W thought it would be a good idea to attack Iraq despite not knowing what Sunnis and Shias were = money and media coverage). Though administration officers continued individually to characterize the attack as deliberate, the Johnson administration never sought the prosecution of the guilty parties or otherwise attempted to seek justice for the victims. They concealed and altered evidence in their effort to downplay the attack."

So, you are suggesting that Israel's enemies were NOT preparing to attack Israel in 1967, and she acted pre-emptively? You are also suggesting that she wasn't attacked in 1973?

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:41 PM
anti-Western socialism" = being against Rummy's buddy fresh new Israeli land grabs Zionist organicInitially,SUB HUMAN TRAITOR in the overthrow

ROFL

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:42 PM
ht tp://ww w.gwu.e du/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/



A photo of a Saddam-Rummy handshake, for the mentally handicapped....

Donger
02-11-2011, 01:43 PM
ht tp://ww w.gwu.e du/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/



A photo of a Saddam-Rummy handshake, for the mentally handicapped....

That isn't a photo. That is perhaps the most grotesque attempt at posting a link I've ever seen.

And, what about it?

Iowanian
02-11-2011, 01:45 PM
LaDingleberry might be the biggest nutjob to every take a dump via keyboard clicks in the history of the internet.


This is the kind of shithead that has 5 other shitheads duct taping cell phones to bags of nails and ball bearings in the back room.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:45 PM
So, you are suggesting that Israel's enemies were NOT preparing to attack Israel in 1967, and she acted pre-emptively? You are also suggesting that she wasn't attacked in 1973?



I don't accept Israel's "word" and just that for beans. Israel is obsessed, religiously obsessed, with the re-conquest of the Promise Land, something Einstein and others warned us about. Our CIA had concluded that Israel lied at least in one of those, where Israel claimed it was attacked but was, in fact, the aggressor.

I tend to trust General Shelton, and the credibility of Tenet and Burglar, who have not issued denials, is right up there with your level of patriotism to the US = absolute ZERO...


I believe the US and the UN should see no difference between Saddam taking Kuwait and Israel expanding in any way outside of its 1948 border.

You, and the Iscariot silver in your pocket, think that some are "Chosen" and some aren't...

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:45 PM
ht tp://ww w.gwu.e du/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/


Maybe you need a little bit more time with crayons and coloring books before we move you up to Microsoft Office.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:47 PM
LaDingleberry might be the biggest nutjob to every take a dump via keyboard clicks in the history of the internet.


This is the kind of shithead that has 5 other shitheads duct taping cell phones to bags of nails and ball bearings in the back room.



Oh the "W Intellectuals" strike again!!!!!!!

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:47 PM
LaDingleberry might be the biggest nutjob to every take a dump via keyboard clicks in the history of the internet.

Possibly. The only reason I'm not conceding the point is I've spent alot of time on Jet fans MB's.

He has some legitimate competition. I'll just leave it at that.

Jenson71
02-11-2011, 01:47 PM
I don't accept Israel's "word" and just that for beans. Israel is obsessed, religiously obsessed, with the re-conquest of the Promise Land, something Einstein and others warned us about. Our CIA had concluded that Israel lied at least in one of those, where Israel claimed it was attacked but was, in fact, the aggressor.

I tend to trust General Shelton, and the credibility of Tenet and Burglar, who have not issued denials, is right up there with your level of patriotism to the US = absolute ZERO...


I believe the US and the UN should see no difference between Saddam taking Kuwait and Israel expanding in any way outside of its 1948 border.

You, and the Iscariot silver in your pocket, think that some are "Chosen" and some aren't...

You have a way with references that is completely mesmerizing.

DJ's left nut
02-11-2011, 01:48 PM
"The annals of history are filled with rulers being overthrown by supposedly benevolent factions that plunge the country into darker times."


LOL!!


Like the US, apparently, in 1776...


If you prefer dictatorship or just want to spend your life killing Muslims and Islamic types who had nothing to do with 911, why don't you GFT out of this country and move to Israel, and sign up. That would match NOISE with ACTION, instead of just noise and cowering under the white sheet...

Dude - you are completely nuts. You're a rhetoric spouting hatchet man. Had I realized this before I responded to you, I wouldn't have wasted the time.

Go back to yelling at passing motorists, I haven't the inclination to waste any more effort on you.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:50 PM
That isn't a photo. That is perhaps the most grotesque attempt at posting a link I've ever seen.

And, what about it?



Google has a zillion different photos for "saddam rumsfeld."

Donger
02-11-2011, 01:51 PM
I don't accept Israel's "word" and just that for beans. Israel is obsessed, religiously obsessed, with the re-conquest of the Promise Land, something Einstein and others warned us about. Our CIA had concluded that Israel lied at least in one of those, where Israel claimed it was attacked but was, in fact, the aggressor.

I tend to trust General Shelton, and the credibility of Tenet and Burglar, who have not issued denials, is right up there with your level of patriotism to the US = absolute ZERO...


I believe the US and the UN should see no difference between Saddam taking Kuwait and Israel expanding in any way outside of its 1948 border.

You, and the Iscariot silver in your pocket, think that some are "Chosen" and some aren't...

Can you provide some evidence that supports your assertion that anyone other than Egypt and her allies state that Israel was the aggressor in 1967?

As to the rest of your post, it is irrelevant to 1967 and 1973.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:51 PM
Dude - you are completely nuts. You're a rhetoric spouting hatchet man. Had I realized this before I responded to you, I wouldn't have wasted the time.

Go back to yelling at passing motorists, I haven't the inclination to waste any more effort on you.



That's yet another sub human way TOO CHICKEN to stand, debate, and get outed again as a SUB HUMAN...

Donger
02-11-2011, 01:51 PM
Google has a zillion different photos for "saddam rumsfeld."

And?

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:52 PM
This is the kind of shithead that has 5 other shitheads duct taping cell phones to bags of nails and ball bearings in the back room.

Just venturing a guess here, that back room smells like a rotten asshole.

Donger
02-11-2011, 01:52 PM
That's yet another sub human way TOO CHICKEN to stand, debate, and get outed again as a SUB HUMAN...

Are you part Jew or not?

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:54 PM
This is how you do it folks. Just withdraw your consent from the govt. Shades of Ghandi. If our states and individuals did that here....Washington DC would have to stay out of our business and stick to their own.

Can you imagine how this would have gone down in Egypt if the people were armed?

blaise
02-11-2011, 01:54 PM
Dude - you are completely nuts. You're a rhetoric spouting hatchet man. Had I realized this before I responded to you, I wouldn't have wasted the time.

Go back to yelling at passing motorists, I haven't the inclination to waste any more effort on you.

This is mild compared to what he was doing when he was TFG.

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:55 PM
Can you imagine how this would have gone down in Egypt if the people were armed?

Food for thought.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:56 PM
and the donger gets BUSTED...


htt ps://w ww.cia.go v/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol49no1/html_files/arab_israeli_war_1.html


about half way down under "war!"



"War!

Helms was awakened at 3:00 in the morning on 5 June by a call from the CIA Operations Center. The Foreign Broadcast Information Service had picked up reports that Israel had launched its attack. (OCI soon concluded that the Israelis— contrary to their claims—had fired first.) "

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:56 PM
Food for thought.

Isn't it. I was thinking that while watching march around that tank with those lights streaming behind them.

chiefsnorth
02-11-2011, 01:56 PM
Whomever lead this troll here needs to get the bar of soap in a sock treatment.

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:56 PM
That's yet another sub human way TOO CHICKEN to stand, debate, and get outed again as a SUB HUMAN...

ROFL

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:57 PM
Whomever lead this troll here needs to get the bar of soap in a sock treatment.

DaFace must go public with LaDiahrea's rep.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:58 PM
So, now, let's start this conversation again, about why Israel and Saddam and Hitler are the only three modern day territory takers, that all three claimed they were attacked first, and ALL THREE LIED...

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 01:58 PM
Whomever lead this troll here needs to get the bar of soap in a sock treatment.

Says a troll. :spock:

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 01:58 PM
and the donger gets BUSTED...


htt ps://w ww.cia.go v/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol49no1/html_files/arab_israeli_war_1.html


about half way down under "war!"



"War! Zionist SUB HUMAN Israel had launched its attack. (OCI soon concluded that the Israelis— contrary to their claims—had fired first[/U][/B].) "


That settles it Donger, you lost the argument.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:58 PM
Whomever lead this troll here needs to get the bar of soap in a sock treatment.


You must have a PhD in Murdochrectumology...

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 01:59 PM
That settles it Donger, you lost the argument.



That's the CIA, the CIA's site, the CIA's own words...

chiefsnorth
02-11-2011, 02:01 PM
Says a troll. :spock:

Shouldn't you be making peanut butter sandwiches, or whatever it is bored housewives do all day...?

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 02:01 PM
Geez give it a rest LaDairis or take it somewhere else

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 02:01 PM
That's the CIA, the CIA's site, the CIA's own words...

That's right. And you can't dispute that.

DONGER IS A ZIONIST SUB-HUMAN!

How can I join your movement?

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:03 PM
and the donger gets BUSTED...


htt ps://w ww.cia.go v/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/csi-publications/csi-studies/studies/vol49no1/html_files/arab_israeli_war_1.html


about half way down under "war!"



"War!

Helms was awakened at 3:00 in the morning on 5 June by a call from the CIA Operations Center. The Foreign Broadcast Information Service had picked up reports that Israel had launched its attack. (OCI soon concluded that the Israelis— contrary to their claims—had fired first.) "

WTF does that have to do with anyone other than Egypt and her allies thinking that Israel was the aggressor in 1967?

FAX
02-11-2011, 02:07 PM
ROFL

I didn't think it was possible. But this place has actually gotten worse. This thread fairly reeks of madness.

FAX

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 02:07 PM
Donger - what evidence do you have that that CIA believes ISrael started the shooting in 1967 and lied about it

LaDairis - produces the CIA link to the CIA's own report stating just that

Donger - apparently wants us to believe the CIA is one of Egypt's allies conspiring against Israel, so that Israel can take Gaza...

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 02:08 PM
ROFL

I didn't think it was possible. But this place has actually gotten worse. This thread fairly reeks of madness.

FAX


Combine the past 20 posts of Iowanian and Mad Crapper and surely this is Kansas intellectualism at its finest...

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:09 PM
Donger - what evidence do you have that that CIA believes ISrael started the shooting in 1967 and lied about it

LaDairis - produces the CIA link to the CIA's own report stating just that

Donger - apparently wants us to believe the CIA is one of Egypt's allies conspiring against Israel, so that Israel can take Gaza...

Here's what I asked you:

"Can you provide some evidence that supports your assertion that anyone other than Egypt and her allies state that Israel was the aggressor in 1967?"

Your CIA link doesn't do that, FYI.

The Mad Crapper
02-11-2011, 02:09 PM
The facts are all right here

htt ps://w ww.cia.go v/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/zionist-publications/csi-studies/subhuman/vol49no1/html_files/arab_israeli_war_1.html

DJ's left nut
02-11-2011, 02:09 PM
This is mild compared to what he was doing when he was TFG.

That's why I need to either stay in here more often or never come in at all. I make the occasional journey over to DC and I completely miss the dupes and the real raging lunatics during my vacations.

Had I only known...

BucEyedPea
02-11-2011, 02:10 PM
I have 2 questions for you Donger:

Is your concern about Egypt because it's a blow to the Empire? Does it bring back shades of India and your former lost Empire?

Iowanian
02-11-2011, 02:11 PM
LaDingleberry could win a contest to lick a booger off of a fast food restaurant window against a starving St Bernard.

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:11 PM
The facts are all right here

htt ps://w ww.cia.go v/library/center-for-the-study-of-intelligence/zionist-publications/csi-studies/subhuman/vol49no1/html_files/arab_israeli_war_1.html

LMAO

LaDairus, do you add the extraneous spaces in the links that you post?

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:12 PM
I have 2 questions for you Donger:

Is your concern about Egypt because it's a blow to the Empire? Does it bring back shades of India and your former lost Empire?

No.

No.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 02:12 PM
LMAO

LaDairus, do you add the extraneous spaces in the links that you post?



As a new poster, I am not allowed to link, so that's the only way I can "link" is by disabling the CP blocker by putting spacing between that which the CP blocker is looking for, things like www and .com

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:13 PM
I know the thread has derailed, but I feel I must share what's on my heart in a couple sentences.

Iran's failure to overthrow their autocrats was a moral victory that put down an emotional deposit that Tunisia, Egypt, and soon other countries have started to cash. This is the progress liberalism in particular has been pining for, for ages.

This progress will bring more of the Middle East with it, it totally will. The only question will be when. It's possible that the entire region could democratize in a lifetime.

At that point, the world will continue to get so much smaller, peace will surely expand, freedom will reign, and justice will continue to attract the arc of history as it moves forward.

Peace be with Egypt.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:13 PM
That is dumb analogy.

It is their country, their home, their lives and livelihood and it is their decision not yours.

As long as their elections are fair we shouldn't have a problem with it.

You would think any American would understand considering we had to run off a tyrannical government in order to gain freedom.

Your sympathy is stronger with people half a world away who generally consider you a disgraceful infidel instead of with someone in your own country who makes it possible for you and millions of other Americans to get healthcare when you need it. There's something screwed up about that.

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:15 PM
As a new poster, I am not allowed to link, so that's the only way I can "link" is by disabling the CP blocker by putting spacing between that which the CP blocker is looking for, things like www and .com

Really? I wasn't aware that it prevents one from just posting a URL.

Anyway, so is your Jew blood on your mother or father's side? Both?

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:17 PM
I know the thread has derailed, but I feel I must share what's on my heart in a couple sentences.

Iran's failure to overthrow their autocrats was a moral victory that put down an emotional deposit that Tunisia, Egypt, and soon other countries have started to cash. This is the progress liberalism in particular has been pining for, for ages.

This progress will bring more of the Middle East with it, it totally will. The only question will be when. It's possible that the entire region could democratize in a lifetime.

At that point, the world will continue to get so much smaller, peace will surely expand, freedom will reign, and justice will continue to attract the arc of history as it moves forward.

Peace be with Egypt.

You are attempting to link what happened in Iran with this/these? Why or how?

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:20 PM
You are attempting to link what happened in Iran with this/these? Why or how?

Many in Egypt have done it themselves.

Everything that happens in the Middle East has ramifications everywhere else.

The Iranian people put on an impressive pro-democratic display that provided the region an anti-autocratic energy that Tunisia finally turned into results. From their swift success, Egypt followed.

We're seeing protests in Yemen (huge deal). Syria. Jordan, I believe. Iran is still at it.

This isn't just happening to happen, it's a part of a very deliberate wave that will eventually set the Middle East free.

Iowanian
02-11-2011, 02:21 PM
Radicals becoming in charge in Yemen is a GREAT idea.


direckshun, don't be modest. These rallies aren't happening because of the half hearted attempt in Iran...It's because you were GREEN texting for Iran.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 02:21 PM
Really? I wasn't aware that it prevents one from just posting a URL.

Anyway, so is your Jew blood on your mother or father's side? Both?



Clearly, you aren't going to accept documentation as evidence, you make claims that get destroyed as false, and then you change the subject to my parents...


Kansas Intellectual - noun - oxymoron...

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:21 PM
"anti-Western socialism" = being against fresh new Israeli land grabs


Truth be told, Iran was an "organic" democracy." Initially, in the overthrow of the brutal and corrupt Shah, the Iranian people found leadership in a radical, but a radical less into killing than "expelling the impure," which is why our hostages were returned alive, as opposed to AQ's hostages, which usually get decapitated. Now, when Saddam invaded, the Iranians eventually fought hard and won, and pushed Saddam out, and did not do the "Israeli thing," take territory, even though Iran really was attacked by Rummy's buddy at the time = Saddam. Now, after Saddam was neutered by Desert Storm, Iran started to moderate, and its authentic and organic "islamic (Shia) democracy" produced Rafsanjani, about as moderate and pro-western an Iranian as the Iranian people could elect. The US had a "national interest" in helping Raf stay in power, but W was not interested in US national interest. W was interested in sukking up to Zionism, and the "axis of evil" was trotted out with our troops still "allied" with TNA in Afghan with the mission not yet accomplished. W betrayed Raf. Then W invaded Iraq, and planned to invade Iran to, something "pat" would be 100% too.

Then someone told the SUB HUMAN TRAITOR that invading Iran from Iraq would be to start a war against Iran ... and 60% of Iraq....


Yes, indeed, the US installed at the point of a gun "demockeracy" in Iraq took toothless Saddam and Raf and replaced them with these two...


h ttp://ww w.cn n.co m/2008/WORLD/meast/06/08/iraq.iran/


TEHRAN, Iran (CNN) -- Iraq's Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki on Sunday tried to allay Iranian fears over a planned U.S.-Iraq security pact, saying his government would not allow Iraq to become a launching pad for an attack on its neighbor.
art.tehran.afp.gi.jpg

What the hell is wrong with you, LaDairis? It's like you have no capability of remaining on topic. Seriously, is this something you can take a pill for?

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:22 PM
Many in Egypt have done it themselves.

Everything that happens in the Middle East has ramifications everywhere else.

The Iranian people put on an impressive pro-democratic display that provided the region an anti-autocratic energy that Tunisia finally turned into results. From their swift success, Egypt followed.

We're seeing protests in Yemen (huge deal). Syria. Jordan, I believe. Iran is still at it.

This isn't just happening to happen, it's a part of a very deliberate wave that will eventually set the Middle East free.

I could have sworn that it all started in Tunisia when some dude set himself on fire in protest of some wrong done him (that had nothing to do with Iran).

Am I wrong?

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:23 PM
Clearly, you aren't going to accept documentation as evidence, you make claims that get destroyed as false, and then you change the subject to my parents...


Kansas Intellectual - noun - oxymoron...

I addressed this in 124.

go bowe
02-11-2011, 02:23 PM
hey crap, i'm thinking maybe you should make an exception to your new nice guy persona...

this guy makes pennchief and jaz look like gentle and thoughtful souls...

show him what real trolling is all about...

he's to crazy even for me...

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 02:24 PM
Radicals becoming in charge in Yemen is a GREAT idea.



You seem so eager to tell these people halfway around the globe how to live. What makes you so smart, so superior, so infinitely better qualified to tell others how to live halfway around the globe...


The "socialist" in BIBLE THUMPING SOCIALIST starts with the presumption of "knowing best" for each and every person you've never met in countries you've never been to...

now, can they add and multiply... oops badly phrased, cause our problem in the US is that they do multiply....

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:26 PM
So, DaFace, is this LaDairus person a dupe of TFG or not?

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 02:26 PM
"he's to crazy even for me..."



Or, more correctly phrased in the English language,

"I'm too dumb to debate him, too cowardly to try, so I want him booted off here before I start to cry..."

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:26 PM
direckshun, don't be modest. These rallies aren't happening because of the half hearted attempt in Iran...It's because you were GREEN texting for Iran.

I did my part to raise awareness. The text, the avatars, they are menial reminders but they rose awareness, however minute. On this board, there isn't much more that I could do.

It's no coincidence that the Iran revolution was at its strongest when international media attention was on their plight, and then was crushed a day after Michael Jackson died. It really is that simple sometimes.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:28 PM
I could have sworn that it all started in Tunisia when some dude set himself on fire in protest of some wrong done him (that had nothing to do with Iran).

Am I wrong?

I would say it never "all started" anywhere. The Middle East is a swarming collection of constantly evolving events and conditions. It's impossible to point to any one cause of any movement in the region.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:28 PM
Whomever lead this troll here needs to get the bar of soap in a sock treatment.

Chiefs' OL Darryl Harris led him here.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:29 PM
Says a troll. :spock:

Be honest, honey. You've been pumping LaDairis with positive rep since he arrived, haven't you? The anti-Israel connection is too strong for you to resist.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 02:29 PM
Pat, bringing Harris, a player I admire, into this topic is wrong.

Harris is not debating here. He should be left out of the discussion entirely.

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:30 PM
I would say it never "all started" anywhere. The Middle East is a swarming collection of constantly evolving events and conditions. It's impossible to point to any one cause of any movement in the region.

But you acknowledge that Tunisia protest (with Egypt following) started with the self-immolation of the dude, right? If so, what evidence do you have that he was motivated in the slightest by what happen in Iran?

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 02:30 PM
Your sympathy is stronger with people half a world away who generally consider you a disgraceful infidel instead of with someone in your own country who makes it possible for you and millions of other Americans to get healthcare when you need it. There's something screwed up about that.

There is a huge difference between supporting people's right to freedom by ousting a corrupt and brutal dictator in their own country and supporting some insurance company.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 02:31 PM
Be honest, honey. You've been pumping LaDairis with positive rep since he arrived, haven't you? The anti-Israel connection is too strong for you to resist.



Don't want to lie to the US to manipulate the US into using the US military to wipe out all of Israel's enemies =

ANTI-ISRAEL


You are either going to be for using the US military to wipe out Israel's enemies, or ...

1. you won't get re-elected
2. Rupert Murdoch won't like you
3. we'll call you a "liberal..."

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:33 PM
But you acknowledge that Tunisia protest (with Egypt following) started with the self-immolation of the dude, right? If so, what evidence do you have that he was motivated in the slightest by what happen in Iran?

I would say the boots on the ground protest started with that event, yes. But the guy who sacrificed himself did so in the face of the intense everyday frustration that everybody had felt in Tunisia.

The opening kickoff was going to come with or without the whistle, is what I'm saying. It just so happens that event was an amazing spark for the movement to ground itself in.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 02:33 PM
But you acknowledge that Tunisia protest (with Egypt following) started with the self-immolation of the dude, right? If so, what evidence do you have that he was motivated in the slightest by what happen in Iran?

IMHO Iran was the blueprint..

bowener
02-11-2011, 02:33 PM
You don't want to let healthcare insurers decide for themselves how to run their own businesses, but you're first at the ramparts to defend foreigners' right to choose an anti-American path. Brilliant.

ROFL

go bowe
02-11-2011, 02:33 PM
Just venturing a guess here, that back room smells like a rotten asshole.and just how exactly would you know what a rotten asshole smells like?

bowener
02-11-2011, 02:34 PM
:spock:

Hitler was fairly elected, dirk.
:spock:

And so was Raegan, donger.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:35 PM
I know the thread has derailed, but I feel I must share what's on my heart in a couple sentences.

Iran's failure to overthrow their autocrats was a moral victory that put down an emotional deposit that Tunisia, Egypt, and soon other countries have started to cash. This is the progress liberalism in particular has been pining for, for ages.

This progress will bring more of the Middle East with it, it totally will. The only question will be when. It's possible that the entire region could democratize in a lifetime.

At that point, the world will continue to get so much smaller, peace will surely expand, freedom will reign, and justice will continue to attract the arc of history as it moves forward.

Peace be with Egypt.

When are you going to give due credit to GWBush and the neocons for departing from the decades-long stability-at-all-costs Middle East model?

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:36 PM
I would say the boots on the ground protest started with that event, yes. But the guy who sacrificed himself did so in the face of the intense everyday frustration that everybody had felt in Tunisia.

The opening kickoff was going to come with or without the whistle, is what I'm saying. It just so happens that event was an amazing spark for the movement to ground itself in.

So, what happened in Iran had nothing to do with what we saw in Tunisia and are seeing in Egypt.

I understand you wanting them to be linked, but wanting something to be accurate isn't the same as fact.

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:37 PM
:spock:

And so was Raegan, donger.

LMAO

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:39 PM
Pat, bringing Harris, a player I admire, into this topic is wrong.

Harris is not debating here. He should be left out of the discussion entirely.

Is he not the reason you showed up at ChiefsPlanet to begin with? I'm not suggesting that he endorses you, but there's no more reason to leave Harris out of a discussion of what brought you here than there is to leave Hosni Mubarak out of a discussion of what's going on in Egypt.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 02:39 PM
So, what happened in Iran had nothing to do with what we saw in Tunisia and are seeing in Egypt.

I understand you wanting them to be linked, but wanting something to be accurate isn't the same as fact.

You don't think people in Egypt watched what happened in Iran and learned from it?

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:40 PM
When are you going to give due credit to GWBush and the neocons for departing from the decades-long stability-at-all-costs Middle East model?

I give Bush immense credit for embracing a philosophy that supported democratizing the Middle East. I think that philosophy does come out and does pay dividends, even in the face of what I consider to be disasterous policy blunders and poisonous decisions that make the process more difficult than it needs to be.

No President before Bush paid stronger lip service or, however faulty, actual service, to liberating the Middle East than he did. Any credit to Americans for helping this process must be partially distributed to Bush.

But it wasn't his head in the way or a policeman's bullet. It wasn't his chest underneathe a camel hoof. And it wasn't his fight.

The hardest work was done, and the largest amount of the credit belongs, to the Egyptian people who have done superb work minimalizing personal harm & property, and maintaining their principles through the end.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:40 PM
There is a huge difference between supporting people's right to freedom by ousting a corrupt and brutal dictator in their own country and supporting some insurance company.

Right, one is an anti-American change in the global political alignment and the other is just a guy doing his job to help Americans. It's a shame you side with the former.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:41 PM
ROFL

Did I spell it wrong?

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:41 PM
You don't think people in Egypt watched what happened in Iran and learned from it?

They probably did, but if Iran was the reason they decided to revolt, why did they wait so long?

Also, what do you think they learned from Iran and what did they do differently as a result?

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:42 PM
So, what happened in Iran had nothing to do with what we saw in Tunisia and are seeing in Egypt.

I don't understand why this is a big deal to you?

But it doesn't matter. Iran didn't start anything either -- it was a populous "color" revolution in the vein of many before it. Just as Tunisia was, and Egypt was, and Yemen and the like are and continue to be.

To say that these events all happen in a vacuum without affecting one another, especially as they all reference one another during their demonstrations, is foolhardy.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:43 PM
They probably did, but if Iran was the reason they decided to revolt, why did they wait so long?

Good lord you are a dumbass sometimes.

I don't say this lightly, because this is such a wonderful day. But you consistently say really silly things when it comes to foreign policy.

go bowe
02-11-2011, 02:43 PM
"he's to crazy even for me..."



Or, more correctly phrased in the English language,

"I'm too dumb to debate him, too cowardly to try, so I want him booted off here before I start to cry..."you make my ears hurt...

i don't want you booted off, i just want the mad crapper to show you our heartfelt hospitality...

bowener
02-11-2011, 02:44 PM
LMAO
LMAO

Exactly what I thought you would "say." You, sir, do not disappoint.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:44 PM
I give Bush immense credit for embracing a philosophy that supported democratizing the Middle East. I think that philosophy does come out and does pay dividends, even in the face of what I consider to be disasterous policy blunders and poisonous decisions that make the process more difficult than it needs to be.

No President before Bush paid stronger lip service or, however faulty, actual service, to liberating the Middle East than he did. Any credit to Americans for helping this process must be partially distributed to Bush.

But it wasn't his head in the way or a policeman's bullet. It wasn't his chest underneathe a camel hoof. And it wasn't his fight.

The hardest work was done, and the largest amount of the credit belongs, to the Egyptian people who have done superb work minimalizing personal harm & property, and maintaining their principles through the end.

Let's face it. Any success on the part of freedom in the Middle East owes a great deal of credit to the American liberation of Iraq for getting the ball rolling.

Saul Good
02-11-2011, 02:44 PM
Combine the past 20 posts of Iowanian and Mad Crapper and surely this is Kansas intellectualism at its finest...

What does "Kansas intellectualism" have to do with a conversation between someone from New Jersey and someone from Iowa on a message board for a sports team in Missouri?

I don't know the answer, but I'll wager that it involves the Jews.

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:44 PM
I don't understand why this is a big deal to you?

But it doesn't matter. Iran didn't start anything either -- it was a populous "color" revolution in the vein of many before it. Just as Tunisia was, and Egypt was, and Yemen and the like are and continue to be.

To say that these events all happen in a vacuum without affecting one another, especially as they all reference one another during their demonstrations, is foolhardy.

Because you wrote this: "Iran's failure to overthrow their autocrats was a moral victory that put down an emotional deposit that Tunisia, Egypt, and soon other countries have started to cash."

Again, I don't see any evidence that what has happened in Iran had any bearing on what happened in Tunisia and Egypt.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 02:45 PM
Right, one is an anti-American change in the global political alignment and the other is just a guy doing his job to help Americans. It's a shame you side with the former.

How do you know it is going to be anti-American? Do you have a crystal ball?

All I support is for the Egyptian people to decide their own fate just like we did. What is wrong with that?

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:48 PM
Let's face it. Any success on the part of freedom in the Middle East owes a great deal of credit to the American liberation of Iraq for getting the ball rolling.

Mmm... Not sure I'd go that far.

Although it certainly had an effect. Democracy and self-governance is such a powerful force that even in the face of overwhelming violence, Iraqis turned out in phenomenal numbers to vote, in an exercise of power that had to have made others who lack that self-determination long for it.

You're doing your argument a disservice when you say "any" success. That's too simplistic for me to agree with.

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:48 PM
Good lord you are a dumbass sometimes.

I don't say this lightly, because this is such a wonderful day. But you consistently say really silly things when it comes to foreign policy.

Says the gal who gives her support in colored font and flowery words about the Middle East?

I'm fully aware that "hope and change" are enough for people like you and I'm glad that it makes you feel better, but you don't have ANY evidence that what happened in Iran had any bearing on Tunisia and Egypt.

If Iran was the catalyst, why did the Egyptians wait until now to revolt?

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:49 PM
Again, I don't see any evidence that what has happened in Iran had any bearing on what happened in Tunisia and Egypt.

First of all, I don't care.

Second of all, enjoy that reality where events in closely knit parts of the world occur in an insular vacuum.

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:50 PM
How do you know it is going to be anti-American? Do you have a crystal ball?

All I support is for the Egyptian people to decide their own fate just like we did. What is wrong with that?

You've already been told that, dirk. That's why I'm not wetting myself with joy over these developments until it is played out.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:51 PM
Says the gal who gives her support in colored font and flowery words about the Middle East?

My reasoning for that is simple: one of the most important things we as a people can do to help democracy bloom is to simply pay attention when people fight for it.

It is so simple. Requires a minute amount of effort. Anybody can do it.

And that simple effort can help mountains move.

My apologies if you don't like the way I write. I guess.

If Iran was the catalyst, why did the Egyptians wait until now to revolt?

Because it did. Every grassroots movement is different. Some are overnight, others congeal over time. This one was a slowburn.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:53 PM
How do you know it is going to be anti-American? Do you have a crystal ball?

All I support is for the Egyptian people to decide their own fate just like we did. What is wrong with that?

No, we were talking about the hypothetical where they choose an anti-American form of government. You supported it as their right. Don't run from it now.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:55 PM
No, we were talking about the hypothetical where they choose an anti-American form of government. You supported it as their right. Don't run from it now.

I completely support it as their right.

I would pressure them for reform, but I'm not going to tell them how to run their own country.

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:55 PM
My reasoning for that is simple: one of the most important things we as a people can do to help democracy bloom is to simply pay attention when people fight for it.

It is so simple. Requires a minute amount of effort. Anybody can do it.

And that simple effort can help mountains move.

My apologies if you don't like the way I write. I guess.

I don't disagree with the sentiment, just the apparent weight you put on it.

Because it did. Every grassroots movement is different. Some are overnight, others congeal over time. This one was a slowburn.

No, you don't know that what happened in Iran had anything to do with Egypt or Tunisia. It may have, however, but unlike you, I'm not going to state such a thing as fact without some evidence.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:55 PM
Mmm... Not sure I'd go that far.

Although it certainly had an effect. Democracy and self-governance is such a powerful force that even in the face of overwhelming violence, Iraqis turned out in phenomenal numbers to vote, in an exercise of power that had to have made others who lack that self-determination long for it.

You're doing your argument a disservice when you say "any" success. That's too simplistic for me to agree with.

It's the seminal event at the headwater of this river of demonstrations for freedom.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 02:56 PM
I completely support it as their right.

I would pressure them for reform, but I'm not going to tell them how to run their own country.

You're going to have to share the dunce cap with dirk because I only brought one. ;)

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:56 PM
I don't disagree with the sentiment, just the apparent weight you put on it.

Explain.

No, you don't know that what happened in Iran had anything to do with Egypt or Tunisia. It may have, however, but unlike you, I'm not going to state such a thing as fact without some evidence.

That's irrelevent.

You asked why it took so long. I explained why. These things can and do take time. Revolutions that begin on the start of a dime are the extremely rare exception.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:57 PM
It's the seminal event at the headwater of this river of demonstrations for freedom.

I feel like I just won patteeu bingo.

Saul Good
02-11-2011, 02:57 PM
I would liken Iraq and Iran to gunpowder being poured in the area. The Tunisian vendor was the spark. If it hadn't been him, it would have been someone/something else.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:57 PM
You're going to have to share the dunce cap with dirk because I only brought one. ;)

LMAO

Populations tend to moderate when they are democratized.

blaise
02-11-2011, 02:58 PM
I'm glad that posting in different colored font means people contributed to this happening, no matter how minute an effect it had. Because that then means anyone that's ever posted insults toward other people here is partly responsible for the tone of negative and dangerous rhetoric they've been complaining about when it comes from politicians like Sharron Angle.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:58 PM
I would liken Iraq and Iran to gunpowder being poured in the area. The Tunisian vendor was the spark. If it hadn't been him, it would have been someone/something else.

I would say that's completely fair.

mlyonsd
02-11-2011, 02:58 PM
How do you know it is going to be anti-American? Do you have a crystal ball?

All I support is for the Egyptian people to decide their own fate just like we did. What is wrong with that?What if the fate they decide also decides the peace treaties with Israel are null and void? You ok with that?

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:58 PM
I'm glad that posting in different colored font means people contributed to this happening, no matter how minute an effect it had. Because that then means anyone that's ever posted insults toward other people here is partly responsible for the tone of negative and dangerous rhetoric they've been complaining about when it comes from politicians like Sharron Angle.

LMAO

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 02:59 PM
What if the fate they decide also decides the peace treaties with Israel are null and void? You ok with that?

I wouldn't be okay with that. I also see no reason why that would occur.

Egypt doesn't want war with Israel. They've tried that and they were kinda bad at it.

Donger
02-11-2011, 02:59 PM
Explain.

You having green font on a football forum does nothing for the Palestinians. It just makes you feel good about yourself.

That's irrelevent.

You asked why it took so long. I explained why. These things can and do take time. Revolutions that begin on the start of a dime are the extremely rare exception.

No, it really isn't irrelevant.

The catalyst for Egypt having their revolt now was the dude having a self-BBQ. Would you agree with that?

blaise
02-11-2011, 03:00 PM
LMAO

"When I post insults it doesn't have any affect on the negative tone of political discourse."

"When I post in green font I create revolutions."

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 03:01 PM
You having green font on a football forum does nothing for the Palestinians. It just makes you feel good about yourself.

LMAO I wasn't sporting green font for the Palestinians.

No, it really isn't irrelevant.

The catalyst for Egypt having their revolt now was the dude having a self-BBQ. Would you agree with that?

You're changing the subject.

You're asking why the revolt didn't take place overnight, rather than over time.

Most revolts occur over time, not overnight.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 03:01 PM
No, we were talking about the hypothetical where they choose an anti-American form of government. You supported it as their right. Don't run from it now.

I support their right to choose do you?

It seems to me you only support their right to choose if they do what you want.

Saul Good
02-11-2011, 03:01 PM
I completely support it as their right.

I would pressure them for reform, but I'm not going to tell them how to run their own country.

What is your standard on when you don't want to meddle in the affairs of others? Is it strictly a democracy/non-democracy thing.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 03:02 PM
"When I post insults it doesn't have any affect on the negative tone of political discourse."

"When I post in green font I create revolutions."

:)

mlyonsd
02-11-2011, 03:02 PM
I wouldn't be okay with that. I also see no reason why that would occur.

Egypt doesn't want war with Israel. They've tried that and they were kinda bad at it.

Not trying to be Debbie Downer here.....just pointing out the obvious that a lot of cards need to play out before we can decide if this truly is a skip thru the daisy field day.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 03:02 PM
What is your standard on when you don't want to meddle in the affairs of others? Is it strictly a democracy/non-democracy thing.

Excellent question.

Give me an hour for work. I'll be back with thoughts. I have a feeling I may have to consider my thoughts on that anyway...

Donger
02-11-2011, 03:04 PM
LMAO I wasn't sporting green font for the Palestinians.

That shows you how much weight it has, eh? I'm sure an Arab speaker would pay more attention to your support, however.

You're changing the subject.

You're asking why the revolt didn't take place overnight, rather than over time.

Most revolts occur over time, not overnight.

No I'm not. Here's my first post to you:

"I could have sworn that it all started in Tunisia when some dude set himself on fire in protest of some wrong done him (that had nothing to do with Iran).

Am I wrong?"

So, was Tunisia the spark for Egypt or not?

|Zach|
02-11-2011, 03:05 PM
This is the conversation we'll be having in about 5-10 years about the United States.

lol.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 03:07 PM
What if the fate they decide also decides the peace treaties with Israel are null and void? You ok with that?

Of course not. That is not what I am saying. All I am saying is I support their right to pick who leads their country. That is what the people of Egypt want.

FAX
02-11-2011, 03:09 PM
I think this whole deal was fomented internally (within Egypt) by Israeli, US, and European provocateurs for the sole purpose of initiating war between the two countries. The idea, of course, is that the conflict will spread throughout the Middle East providing Israel with justification and opportunity to eliminate the nuclear threat posed by Iran.

FAX

patteeu
02-11-2011, 03:12 PM
I support their right to choose do you?

It seems to me you only support their right to choose if they do what you want.

Right. If they choose something I don't want, like to join in league with al Qaeda in an effort to destroy the US, I don't support that and I'd be in favor of using whatever force is necessary to change their minds.

Otter
02-11-2011, 03:14 PM
I'll get all giddy and slap happy about this when I can determine it's the beginning of democracy as opposed to secular clans and civil war that BumFuckBarry will feel obligated to ride in on his 10-speed and dorky helmet to fix with a couple billion dollars he doesn't have in the first place.

Remember how taking down Saddam would release the democracy loving butterfly in those Iraqi caterpillars?

FAX
02-11-2011, 03:16 PM
I'll get all giddy and slap happy about this when I can determine it's the beginning of democracy as opposed to secular clans and civil war that Bum****Barry will feel obligated to ride in on his 10-speed and dorky helmet to fix with a couple billion dollars he doesn't have in the first place.

Remember how taking down Saddam would release the democracy loving butterfly in those Iraqi caterpillars?

There was also that Shaw dude.

FAX

Fritz88
02-11-2011, 03:18 PM
Let's face it. Any success on the part of freedom in the Middle East owes a great deal of credit to the American liberation of Iraq for getting the ball rolling.

Not a single Arab would agree to that. If that is right, then why didn't we people protest shortly after that?

The biggest credit is due to Mohammad Boazizi may God bless his soul, he is the one who started this rolling, albeit unintentionally. Attributing this to what the US did in Iraq is laughable. In fact, every Arab compares what happened in Egypt and Tunisia to Iraq in a negative way. They say, over 1 Million people died to "liberate" Iraq while only less than a 1000 and less than 60 days to liberate Egypt and Tunisia combined.

Otter
02-11-2011, 03:19 PM
There was also that Shaw dude.

FAX

Good point. Never let it be said that our government is smart enough to learn from history.

Afghanistan victory should be declared any minute. Any minute now....

Donger
02-11-2011, 03:21 PM
Not a single Arab would agree to that. If that is right, then why didn't we people protest shortly after that?

The biggest credit is due to Mohammad Boazizi may God bless his soul, he is the one who started this rolling, albeit unintentionally. Attributing this to what the US did in Iraq is laughable. In fact, every Arab compares what happened in Egypt and Tunisia to Iraq in a negative way. They say, over 1 Million people died to "liberate" Iraq while only less than a 1000 and less than 60 days to liberate Egypt and Tunisia combined.

"This one was a slowburn."

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 03:21 PM
Right. If they choose something I don't want, like to join in league with al Qaeda in an effort to destroy the US, I don't support that and I'd be in favor of using whatever force is necessary to change their minds.

It seems to me they wouldn't go through all of this to go from shitty dictator to another and along with it bring war and destruction.

I think they are smarter than that.

From my viewpoint the way I hear it from so of you is that you think they should have no choice and stick with Mubarak because they are stupid. I disagree with that.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 03:27 PM
Not a single Arab would agree to that. If that is right, then why didn't we people protest shortly after that?

The biggest credit is due to Mohammad Boazizi may God bless his soul, he is the one who started this rolling, albeit unintentionally. Attributing this to what the US did in Iraq is laughable. In fact, every Arab compares what happened in Egypt and Tunisia to Iraq in a negative way. They say, over 1 Million people died to "liberate" Iraq while only less than a 1000 and less than 60 days to liberate Egypt and Tunisia combined.

Perhaps you're just a timid and cautious people, somewhat like the dog I rescued from the local kennel that cowered every time I called it's name because of experiences it must have had with it's previous owner. Just a theory. :shrug: :p

Hypothetical: How would you feel if you knew that Iraqis were free and governed by a person elected in free and fair elections while your people were still subject to the brutal whims of a dictator? Would that be alright with you or would you think Egyptians deserve freedom every bit as much as Iraqis?

Personally, I think it's all for the best that Egyptians and other Arabs believe freedom was all their idea instead of an idea introduced to their region by the Great Satan.

Fritz88
02-11-2011, 03:29 PM
Get over yourself, Fritz88. No one here would begrudge the people of Egypt having a government that is genuinely based on individual freedom. But there's not a lot of that going on in the Arab and muslim world these days. It's perfectly reasonable to be skeptical and it's also perfectly reasonable to be concerned about what a contrary outcome would mean for our interests. F*** Egypt if it reverts to an alliance with anti-Western socialism or decides to side with anti-Western islamism.

Egyptians and Tunisians did not revolt because they wanted to destroy the west or harm you. They revolted because they could not feed their children. They revolted because a Policeman could randomly arrest you and jail you and you couldn't do shit about it because of Emergency rule. The people have no dignity and no self respect (main reason for revolt). That is why they revolted. Sadly, the west did not intervene to change the status quo for the Arabs. They elected to side with dictators and people like you were okay with it. As long as they serve your personal agenda. You don't mind Hosni sticking his foot down their throats. 360 Million Arabs probably feel the same way. I certainly do not hope for a radical government as I stated earlier. But people do hate that they lived for 30 years and the west stood still. There is a lot of resentment for the US in the Arab world. Don't act surprised, because you have earned it.

Donger
02-11-2011, 03:29 PM
Egyptians and Tunisians did not revolt because they wanted to destroy the west or harm you. They revolted because they could not feed their children. They revolted because a Policeman could randomly arrest you and jail you and you couldn't do shit about it because of Emergency rule. The people have no dignity and no self respect (main reason for revolt). That is why they revolted. Sadly, the west did not intervene to change the status quo for the Arabs. They elected to side with dictators and people like you were okay with it. As long as they serve your personal agenda. You don't mind Hosni sticking his foot down their throats. 360 Million Arabs probably feel the same way. I certainly do not hope for a radical government as I stated earlier. But people do hate that they lived for 30 years and the west stood still. There is a lot of resentment for the US in the Arab world. Don't act surprised, because you have earned it.

No, they revolted because they got a down payment from Iran's protest.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 03:33 PM
It seems to me they wouldn't go through all of this to go from shitty dictator to another and along with it bring war and destruction.

I think they are smarter than that.

From my viewpoint the way I hear it from so of you is that you think they should have no choice and stick with Mubarak because they are stupid. I disagree with that.

No, my personal opinion is that what's going on now gives everyone the best possible chance of a good outcome ("good" from my pov, of course). Mubarak leaving takes some steam out of the protests, but the military is still running things so there's a chance that a reasonable transition to a pro-Western democracy is possible (but certainly not guaranteed). A decent into immediate chaos would have been horrible.

I think there's a very real danger of an Islamist or a socialist populism taking hold though because I suspect the economic conditions are going to suck for the foreseeable future.

Donger
02-11-2011, 03:34 PM
Yes! LMAO

"The people of Egypt have spoken. Their voices have been heard and Egypt will never be the same," the president said. "By stepping down, President Mubarak responded to the Egyptian people's hunger for change, but this is not the end of Egypt's transition. It's the beginning."

Donger
02-11-2011, 03:36 PM
No, my personal opinion is that what's going on now gives everyone the best possible chance of a good outcome ("good" from my pov, of course). Mubarak leaving takes some steam out of the protests, but the military is still running things so there's a chance that a reasonable transition to a pro-Western democracy is possible (but certainly not guaranteed). A decent into immediate chaos would have been horrible.

I think there's a very real danger of an Islamist or a socialist populism taking hold though because I suspect the economic conditions are going to suck for the foreseeable future.

Maybe Obama can convince Mubarak to spread some of his estimated $40 to $80 billion of personal wealth around to ease the pain?

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 03:37 PM
"As long as they serve your personal agenda. You don't mind Hosni sticking his foot down their throats."



Some of us, Fritz, do notice that, and try to out it to stop any more of it. Too many times very petty goals like "getting elected" cause such outcomes around the world. The more truth, the better. Hosni wasn't that different than Shah or Saddam, two terrible people the US initially fell for because of convenience.

Donger
02-11-2011, 03:39 PM
"As long as they serve your personal agenda. You don't mind Hosni sticking his foot down their throats."



Some of us, Fritz, do notice that, and try to out it to stop any more of it. Too many times very petty goals like "getting elected" cause such outcomes around the world. The more truth, the better. Hosni wasn't that different than Shah or Saddam, two terrible people the US initially fell for because of convenience.

That's actually accurate. Well done.

Just like with Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam, "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" takes place with good frequency in the ME.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 03:39 PM
Egyptians and Tunisians did not revolt because they wanted to destroy the west or harm you. They revolted because they could not feed their children. They revolted because a Policeman could randomly arrest you and jail you and you couldn't do shit about it because of Emergency rule. The people have no dignity and no self respect (main reason for revolt). That is why they revolted. Sadly, the west did not intervene to change the status quo for the Arabs. They elected to side with dictators and people like you were okay with it. As long as they serve your personal agenda. You don't mind Hosni sticking his foot down their throats. 360 Million Arabs probably feel the same way. I certainly do not hope for a radical government as I stated earlier. But people do hate that they lived for 30 years and the west stood still. There is a lot of resentment for the US in the Arab world. Don't act surprised, because you have earned it.

Perhaps you didn't notice that I was on the side of GWBush and the neocons when they tried to change the script on that "stability-at-all-costs" foreign policy and instead encourage political liberalization (the good kind) of Arab society. Don't lump me in with the people who wanted to maintain the status quo. But at the same time, stop blaming the US and the west for your own dictators. We didn't force them on you.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 03:40 PM
No, my personal opinion is that what's going on now gives everyone the best possible chance of a good outcome ("good" from my pov, of course). Mubarak leaving takes some steam out of the protests, but the military is still running things so there's a chance that a reasonable transition to a pro-Western democracy is possible (but certainly not guaranteed). A decent into immediate chaos would have been horrible.

I think there's a very real danger of an Islamist or a socialist populism taking hold though because I suspect the economic conditions are going to suck for the foreseeable future.

Fair enough and I agree with most of your assessment. As with probably any ME country the thought of an Islamist populism taking hold is fairly high even in Iraq once we leave.

vailpass
02-11-2011, 03:40 PM
Egyptians and Tunisians did not revolt because they wanted to destroy the west or harm you. They revolted because they could not feed their children. They revolted because a Policeman could randomly arrest you and jail you and you couldn't do shit about it because of Emergency rule. The people have no dignity and no self respect (main reason for revolt). That is why they revolted. Sadly, the west did not intervene to change the status quo for the Arabs. They elected to side with dictators and people like you were okay with it. As long as they serve your personal agenda. You don't mind Hosni sticking his foot down their throats. 360 Million Arabs probably feel the same way. I certainly do not hope for a radical government as I stated earlier. But people do hate that they lived for 30 years and the west stood still. There is a lot of resentment for the US in the Arab world. Don't act surprised, because you have earned it.

Fuck that. Another third world whiner expecting the US to do something for you and strapping a bomb to your belly when you feel slighted. Warts on the ass of the world.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 03:40 PM
"As long as they serve your personal agenda. You don't mind Hosni sticking his foot down their throats."



Some of us, Fritz, do notice that, and try to out it to stop any more of it. Too many times very petty goals like "getting elected" cause such outcomes around the world. The more truth, the better. Hosni wasn't that different than Shah or Saddam, two terrible people the US initially fell for because of convenience.

Mubarak, the Shah, and Saddam. One of these "allies" is not like the others.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 03:41 PM
Not what Rummy thought after meeting Saddam in person in the 1980s...

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 03:41 PM
Maybe Obama can convince Mubarak to spread some of his estimated $40 to $80 billion of personal wealth around to ease the pain?

Probably should since he got that money from the US.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 03:42 PM
Fair enough and I agree with most of your assessment. As with probably any ME country the thought of an Islamist populism taking hold is fairly high even in Iraq once we leave.

I agree. The islamist danger is obvious, but I think people overlook the socialist populism danger because it will be described with soothing words like "secular" and "democratic".

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 03:43 PM
**** that. Another third world whiner expecting the US to do something for you and strapping a bomb to your belly when you feel slighted. Warts on the ass of the world.



Earning it with absolute ignorance... and pride of the ignorance.

Donger
02-11-2011, 03:44 PM
Probably should since he got that money from the US.

Are you sure about that?

Fritz88
02-11-2011, 03:44 PM
**** that. Another third world whiner expecting the US to do something for you and strapping a bomb to your belly when you feel slighted. Warts on the ass of the world.

Full of bigotry. Expected.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 03:45 PM
Not what Rummy thought after meeting Saddam in person in the 1980s...

It's what everyone with a brain, including Rummy, thought. Saddam was a Soviet client that we aided on a limited basis purely out of convenience during the relatively brief period when he was in danger of losing his war against our enemies in Iran. Mubarak and the Shah were both in the US sphere of influence and longtime allies of the US.

Donger
02-11-2011, 03:45 PM
Not what Rummy thought after meeting Saddam in person in the 1980s...

What?

mlyonsd
02-11-2011, 03:46 PM
What?Lead paint.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 03:48 PM
Are you sure about that?

Well we have been giving Egypt billions of dollars every year. You don't think he stole some of that?

Donger
02-11-2011, 03:49 PM
Well we have been giving Egypt billions of dollars every year. You don't think he stole some of that?

I read that he acquired most of his wealth from defense contracts when he was still an air force general. I could be wrong, but I don't believe that we were spending much money in Egypt then.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 03:50 PM
It's what everyone with a brain, including Rummy, thought. Saddam was a Soviet client that we aided on a limited basis purely out of convenience during the relatively brief period when he was in danger of losing his war against our enemies in Iran. Mubarak and the Shah were both in the US sphere of influence and longtime allies of the US.



It will eventually come out what Rummy filed after the visit. Rummy personally hated Saddam, perhaps because he was WRONG about Saddam... and eventually we will see that, just as we now see the CIA report about who starting shooting first in 67...

Fritz88
02-11-2011, 03:52 PM
But at the same time, stop blaming the US and the west for your own dictators. We didn't force them on you.

Ironic. You are okay with the US policing the world but still refuse to acknowledge that he US helped in keeping people like Hosni, AL Saud, Ben Ali etc in power.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 03:54 PM
Not trying to be Debbie Downer here.....just pointing out the obvious that a lot of cards need to play out before we can decide if this truly is a skip thru the daisy field day.

tr00

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 03:55 PM
Ironic. You are okay with the US policing the world but still refuse to acknowledge that he US helped in keeping people like Hosni, AL Saud, Ben Ali etc in power.



He is because he is Israeli.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 03:56 PM
That shows you how much weight it has, eh? I'm sure an Arab speaker would pay more attention to your support, however.

Nah, it just means you're not very bright when it comes to this subject. Iran and Palestine are completely different countries and have completely different plights. I'm sure pretty much every other person on this board could tell the difference.

It's alright. I don't know the first thing about science, really. The difference between us is that I don't have any illusions about that.

No I'm not. Here's my first post to you:

"I could have sworn that it all started in Tunisia when some dude set himself on fire in protest of some wrong done him (that had nothing to do with Iran).

Am I wrong?"

So, was Tunisia the spark for Egypt or not?

Why would Tunisia be the spark for Egypt? I want to see your reasoning here.

patteeu
02-11-2011, 03:59 PM
It will eventually come out what Rummy filed after the visit. Rummy personally hated Saddam, perhaps because he was WRONG about Saddam... and eventually we will see that, just as we now see the CIA report about who starting shooting first in 67...

No one cares about your "discovery" that Israel fired first in the Six Day War (1967). That was already common knowledge and has been for 40+ years. The essential information that you're missing (or choosing to ignore) is that Egypt had been massing troops in the Sinai and closed the straits on the east side of the Sinai to Israeli shipping (despite having plenty of warning that Israel would consider such a closure an act of war) in May of that year. Israel, knowing that it's existence was at stake, decided that their best chance of surviving another conflict with the Arab powers was to strike pre-emptively instead of waiting for Egypt and it's allies to choose the time and place of the conflict. Egypt instigated the Six Day War, but Israel dictated it's outcome.

dirk digler
02-11-2011, 03:59 PM
I read that he acquired most of his wealth from defense contracts when he was still an air force general. I could be wrong, but I don't believe that we were spending much money in Egypt then.

We have been giving Egypt almost $2 billion dollars a year since 1979. I don't believe for a second he didn't take some for himself

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 03:59 PM
Maybe Obama can convince Mubarak to spread some of his estimated $40 to $80 billion of personal wealth around to ease the pain?

Actually, about $40 billion of his wealth should go back into the state treasury.

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 04:00 PM
I agree. The islamist danger is obvious, but I think people overlook the socialist populism danger because it will be described with soothing words like "secular" and "democratic".

Okay Glenn Beck. :p

Direckshun
02-11-2011, 04:02 PM
stop blaming the US and the west for your own dictators. We didn't force them on you.

"We" didn't force all of them on "you." :p

We also didn't do a lot to help. Those tear gas canisters were made in the USA.

LaDairis
02-11-2011, 04:02 PM
Okay Glenn Beck. :p


He is really part of that which is the master of Beck, the FIXED cause of Zionism, which Beck bows to before ever getting a single second of airtime on FIXED...

I actually didn't think there was or could be a Zionist Libertarian, and now, after watching Beck, I'm sure I was right. Beck is a fraud of a libertarian, a sell out just like every other FIXED talking head...

Donger
02-11-2011, 04:03 PM
Nah, it just means you're not very bright when it comes to this subject. Iran and Palestine are completely different countries and have completely different plights. I'm sure pretty much every other person on this board could tell the difference.

It's alright. I don't know the first thing about science, really. The difference between us is that I don't have any illusions about that.

I'm not really sure what you are getting at. Heck, even I know that Palestine isn't a country.

LMAO

But, please keep trying to make they point that I know nothing about world affairs.

Why would Tunisia be the spark for Egypt? I want to see your reasoning here.

The timing soon after the successful Tunisian revolt.

blaise
02-11-2011, 04:03 PM
He is really part of that which is the master of Beck, the FIXED cause of Zionism, which Beck bows to before ever getting a single second of airtime on FIXED...

I actually didn't think there was or could be a Zionist Libertarian, and now, after watching Beck, I'm sure I was right. Beck is a fraud of a libertarian, a sell out just like every other FIXED talking head...

Don't you have another, much kookier message board to hang out at? Like antizionists.com or something?

patteeu
02-11-2011, 04:04 PM
Okay Glenn Beck. :p

You know, I don't ever watch Glenn Beck's TV show and I rarely hear his radio program, but actually I did hear him talking about this yesterday on the radio. I assure you that I was concerned about this before hearing him though.