Mubarak Steps Down

[Jenson71]

'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/wo...t.html?_r=1&hp

[chiefsnorth]

Originally Posted by dirk digler

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]

Originally Posted by alnorth

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]

Originally Posted by LaDairis

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 **** it up.

[The Mad Crapper]

This is the conversation we'll be having in about 5-10 years about the United States.

[LaDairis]

Originally Posted by patteeu

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]

Originally Posted by LaDairis;7424343" democracy."

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

[LaDairis]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

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]

Nice to see TGF (or whatever its name was) is still a little Israel-obsessed.

[BucEyedPea]

Originally Posted by chiefsnorth

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]

Originally Posted by Donger

Nice to see TGF (or whatever its name was) is still a little Israel-obsessed.

So isn't chiefsnorth.

[LaDairis]

Originally Posted by The Mad Crapper

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]

Originally Posted by Donger

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

FYP

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by LaDairis

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 ****ing 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 ****wit.

[LaDairis]

Originally Posted by BucEyedPea

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]

FTR Iraq was technically a democracy. It had elections. It was socialist too. Like Israel is.