BBC BLOGS - Mark Mardell's America
IN ASSOCIATION WITH
« Previous | Main | Next »

Slowing down the revolution

Mark Mardell | 15:04 UK time, Sunday, 30 January 2011

The Obama administration is edging towards accepting, if not openly endorsing, an end to Mubarak's rule.


Hillary Clinton

"We want to see an orderly transition so that no-one fills a void, that there not be a void, that there be a well thought out plan that will bring about a democratic participatory government," said Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

She took the highly unusual step of offering herself for all the Sunday morning TV interview shows, which are eagerly watched by Washington policy makers and pundits. Mrs Clinton was repeatedly asked to back, or oppose Mubarak. She side-stepped every opportunity to do either.

The strong impression is that the administration would like him to go and for a new moderate partner to emerge. But they don't want chaos and a power vacuum. Perhaps above all they don't want to give the impression that they are up to their elbows in engineering a change.


They are not denying that the wheels of change are revolving but they want to slow the speed of that revolution. The secretary of state said the question for those on the street was "how we get from where we are to where they want to be", that it would "take time, it's unlikely to be done overnight without grave consequences".

She pointed out there were presidential elections scheduled for September and that they had to be "free and fair and credible" in order that there could be "a peaceful orderly transition to democracy".

My impression is that the Obama administration is working for the change they want through the Egyptian army. After all they give them $1.3bn a year. Mrs Clinton went out of her way to stress the army was well respected, was now instrumental in keeping order without attacking protesters and had a delicate line to walk - and Washington was "encouraging a very careful response".

Some will regard this as Obama pussyfooting. It also reflects the very real difficulty of being a leader of the world whose self-set mission is to restore the USA's global reputation, who doesn't want to look like he's throwing his weight around, yet wants to be on the right side of history without damaging America's national interest. It is a difficult cocktail to mix.

Supporters of George W Bush argue he got it right, by strongly backing the democracy movement, and Obama has got it tragically wrong, by being less idealistic and wrong headedly pragmatic.

This isn't the view of several Republican candidates. John Bolton argues this is an opportunity for the Muslim Brotherhood to take over, and that they may be behind the demonstrations. Others are even stronger, and less nuanced, and urge the president to back Mubarak. They are taking a gamble. If chaos ensues they may be hailed as clear-sighted. But if there is a peaceful transition to a friendly regime they will have crushed any foreign policy credentials they have.

But the momentum is not with the opposition here, but on the streets of Egypt. They may not give President Obama the time and space he wants for orderly change, but lines between the Pentagon and military HQ in Egypt will be buzzing with advice.

Comments

or register to comment.

  • 1. At 3:41pm on 30 Jan 2011, Chryses wrote:

    Good luck, Mr. President!

    Complain about this comment

  • 2. At 4:01pm on 30 Jan 2011, Curt Carpenter wrote:

    "but lines between the Pentagon and military HQ in Egypt will be buzzing with advice."

    If that's the case, I hope the President and the State Department will put a stop to it. Claims against U.S. meddling will surface soon enough without some damned fool general deciding he has the brief to take charge of American foreign policy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 3. At 4:12pm on 30 Jan 2011, LucyJ wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 4. At 4:24pm on 30 Jan 2011, tarig wrote:

    Does the USA and rest of the world powers do not desire a change in Sudan and Egypt

    Sky News mentionedfew minutes ago that, after a meeting with Mubarak and military advisors, the Defence Minister were sawn entering the National Broad Casting building.
    Many expect that eventually the army would take over and indicates that Mubarak era has come to an end.
    Hillary Clinton appeared on sky news few minutes ago. She sounded ironic while saying that, the American administration has been advising the Egyptian authority for years to review the way they rule the country. She as well stressed that USA administration is calling for a fair and just election.
    Recent days USA administration were sending contradicting and confusing messages regarding the political developments in Egypt. In a speech Obama declares that Husni Mubarak is an important ally. These remarks angers and upset the Egyptian Young Democrats leading the revolution in Egypt.
    Hillary Clinton as well while supporting the Mubarak regime she heard saying that it is about time that the Egyptian authority should implement an urgent and effective changes or they might face a seize of the 1.3 Billion American military aid.
    Many reporters mention that the credibility of Obama administration is running very low among Egyptians and demonstrators in other Arab countries.

    To the South boarder of Egypt, It seems that the Tunisian and Egyptian demonstration have inspired the Sudanese who launched demonstrations in major Sudanese cities, like the Capital Khartoum, Madani and Al Obeied in the Westet of Sudan. Many Sudanese activists and political figures are upset by the international news ignoring the Sudanese up rise, which many understand as a sign that the USA and rest of the world power do not desire a change in Sudan
    http://www.hiwaar.com/
    The Social Net Works Sites like Twitter and the Facebook have been showing activists reporting demonstrations sweeping major Sudanese cities and people being injured, killed and arrested in the Major Sudanese cities
    http://www.hiwaar.org/

    Complain about this comment

  • 5. At 4:33pm on 30 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    Lucy might find the ideas of Edward Said interesting.It`s ashame about Egypt...it`s known some very good times...if you google "Egypt in the 20th century" you can get a good run down.

    Complain about this comment

  • 6. At 5:40pm on 30 Jan 2011, Amouri wrote:

    Well at least we know who is ruling Egypt.... the US administration.

    Complain about this comment

  • 7. At 5:45pm on 30 Jan 2011, C Smith wrote:

    Washington should watch and wait.
    For nearly 30 years American governments have denied the Egyptian people their right to democracy by bolstering their own man (Mubarak) and funding his military, because it suited their political purposes. What did they care about human rights abuses, torture and hungry/jobless people? Nothing. All they cared about was getting their way over Israel and having a foot in the Arab door.

    If democratic elections are eventually held, the US must be prepared to work with the new government, whoever they are. They will be the people's choice. They might be secular or they might be Islamist. The time has gone when the US can dictate what governments countries can have.
    America's time is over. They should keep their fingers out of the pie. Let the Egyptians decide, just like we do here and just like the Americans do in their country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 8. At 5:55pm on 30 Jan 2011, Abdul Idris wrote:

    How cliche, your Islamophobia is irrelevant to the true aspirations of the people of the Middle East. The Muslim Brotherhood includes a cross-section of Egyptian society and their members are AVERAGE folks! They and the rest of the larger Egyptian society are entitled to any democratic system that fits their needs. This is about them, not America or Israel. Yes, that is the only reason the West fears freedom. Oh wait, they hate our freedom???

    Complain about this comment

  • 9. At 6:01pm on 30 Jan 2011, _marko wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 10. At 6:26pm on 30 Jan 2011, Zowad wrote:

    US government should support democracy in Egypt or in any other country. The fear that democracy may bring fundementalism/terrorism in power - in my opinion - is baseless. True democracy will always bring in responsible people in power.

    Complain about this comment

  • 11. At 6:28pm on 30 Jan 2011, C Smith wrote:

    OH yes, watch the onion, (previous post) funniest thing I've seen in ages.

    "Al Qaeda Populating U.S. With Peaceful 'Decoy Muslims'"

    No doubt the chief "Decoy Muslim" is Obama himself.
    The really sad thing is that some Americans actually believe it! You don't know whether to laugh or cry.

    Complain about this comment

  • 12. At 7:07pm on 30 Jan 2011, JM wrote:

    Tomorrow will be the decider.

    He will try once more to get these demostrations under control with the police.

    Expect many causlties in the morning.

    BUT Muburak is finished!
    The USA and the west should stop haveing double standards and throw their weight behind the people of Egypt!
    If the Muslim Brotherhood win the elections then so bei it.ITS the will of the Egyptian people and NOT what we want...........

    Complain about this comment

  • 13. At 7:35pm on 30 Jan 2011, crash wrote:

    What they need is a good old waffling political hack,who tells every one there will be no hunger,every one will have a PHD(you can do this if you dumb down college enough the USA is almost there),every body gets free health care (ask the people of the UK how free it is),all you got to do is talk and it is so.Then they will be like the west.

    Complain about this comment

  • 14. At 7:39pm on 30 Jan 2011, Pete Charles wrote:

    The US should keep out of other people's business. For how long have they supported this dictatorship whilst it served them and not the people of Egypt? It was the same with Iran from 1953 to 1979 until the Iranians rose up and overthrew the American puppet. SAVAK was brutal and practically invented by the CIA. I hope Egyptians will now have a better way of life without the negative US interference.

    Complain about this comment

  • 15. At 7:41pm on 30 Jan 2011, Blackromeo wrote:

    Obama´s Administration should not give Mubarak the covert or overt supports to suppressed the yearns of the Egyptians.The US Administration should respect the will and aspirations of the Egyptians.
    All over the years,the Western Leaders has demonized the Muslim Brotherhood.They secretely and overtly hobnobbed and supported Mubarak´s Autoritarian Rule all in the name of makeshift Stability and to provide a bulwark for the lsreal´s Government.The Western Leaders are hypocritic.
    There are Liberals,Conservatives and Socialists in the Muslim Brotherhood Movement.The Future of Egyptians lie in the hands of the Egyptians and all the Elements that make up the Egyptians Society including the Muslim Brotherhood.We all should learn to accept that including our so-called Western Leaders and the Media overrated Windbags.

    Complain about this comment

  • 16. At 7:54pm on 30 Jan 2011, starFloridian wrote:

    In light of what is happening in Egypt our annual largesse to that country, in addition to the billions we give to nations all over the world, many of whom hate the U.S., should make the idea of totally ending foreign aid an attractive one to members of Congress looking desperately for ways to cut the budget and reduce the national debt. Given the dismal record of our government's bookkeepers who are supposed to track just where tha money goes, cutting off this flow of taxpayers' money to the many corrupt governments who receive it with grasping hands seems to me to be a no-brainer. After all, to paraphrase the late Everett Dirksen, "A billion here and a billion there, and pretty soon we are talking about serious money."

    Complain about this comment

  • 17. At 8:02pm on 30 Jan 2011, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #8
    Abdul Idris wrote:
    How cliche, your Islamophobia is irrelevant to the true aspirations of the people of the Middle East. The Muslim Brotherhood includes a cross-section of Egyptian society and their members are AVERAGE folks! They and the rest of the larger Egyptian society are entitled to any democratic system that fits their needs. This is about them, not America or Israel. Yes, that is the only reason the West fears freedom. Oh wait, they hate our freedom???

    ___________

    Except when groups like the moslem brotherhood gain power they impose a theocratic dicatorship where the people have less rights and woman are chattle.

    Prime example:

    Iran

    Complain about this comment

  • 18. At 8:09pm on 30 Jan 2011, james murphy wrote:

    Fanaticism feeds on uncertainty and social chaos:one by one the domino states of the Arab Middle-East will fall under Islamic Fundamentalist hegemony.

    Complain about this comment

  • 19. At 8:41pm on 30 Jan 2011, you must be right wrote:

    At 6:26pm on 30 Jan 2011, Zowad wrote:

    US government should support democracy in Egypt or in any other country. The fear that democracy may bring fundementalism/terrorism in power - in my opinion - is baseless. True democracy will always bring in responsible people in power.
    -----------
    I agree that the US should support democracy, though a light touch regarding Egypt would be wise at this time. However, reprehensible regimes can take power through democracy. Hitler did in Germany. The Islamic (their term, not mine) constitution of Iran is anti-democratic and came in through popular vote. So it is reasonable for the US and others to be concerned.

    Regarding supporting democracy in other countries, I suspect that the US may be storing up future trouble in Afghanistan by keeping Karzai in power. Supporting a corrupt regime didn’t help in South Vietnam either.

    In all these examples, ignoring one danger to deal with another was or is perilous. At least the US seems to be considering more than one perspective now – a very welcome change.

    Complain about this comment

  • 20. At 8:53pm on 30 Jan 2011, BorthwicksNose wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 21. At 8:54pm on 30 Jan 2011, elba beolchi wrote:

    Again, and again, and again, the dishonesintervention (serving to their own interest) of USA , helping the regimen , with the billions and billions of USA citizens, that only brought missery to the egiptians. have collapsed. Hope justice prevail, hope a new era for the egiptians will commence and alesson for the USA and its interference interfering the sovereign of other countries.

    Complain about this comment

  • 22. At 9:07pm on 30 Jan 2011, Chris wrote:

    The unfortunate thing about this entire issue is the fact that President Hosni Mubarak is a Western, moderate leader. The trouble with replacing a moderate is that you always get an extremist. And, we are not seeing pro-Western protests in the streets, we are seeing pro Islam, pro extremist protests right now all over the Middle East. Today Tunisia imported Rashid al-Gahannushi – an Islamic radical. My question is who is Egypt going to import, and who is going to take control? How much pull is the U.S. going to lose because of this? And, when is the U.S. going to cut funding to a régime who may become hostile?

    Complain about this comment

  • 23. At 9:07pm on 30 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    16 starfloridian...our government in the UK cut our public services but increase our contribution to your wars and foreign aid.....yet our Private Eye magazine suggests that a lot of this "foreign aid" goes to provide bribes and sweeteners and oil the wheels of what sounds a bit like organised crime and corruption.


    As for your CIA it`s running of torture chambers and its support for brutal regimes really makes your claim to be a civilised nation quite precarious.


    Yes I understand that our countries face terrorism....but to what degree has our behaviour brought it down upon our own heads?


    We are spending a fortune propping up a global financial system of markets and moneylending and currency speculation that has cynically RUINED us and got us into imposible levels of indebtedness.

    And what are we borrowing all this money for?

    Quite simply to get a lot financier crooks out of trouble of their OWN making...and to pay for wars that are quite obviously more for the benefit of Wall Street than ourselves!!

    Complain about this comment

  • 24. At 9:07pm on 30 Jan 2011, you must be right wrote:

    17. At 8:02pm on 30 Jan 2011, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #8
    Abdul Idris wrote:
    How cliche, your Islamophobia is irrelevant to the true aspirations of the people of the Middle East. The Muslim Brotherhood includes a cross-section of Egyptian society and their members are AVERAGE folks! They and the rest of the larger Egyptian society are entitled to any democratic system that fits their needs. This is about them, not America or Israel. Yes, that is the only reason the West fears freedom. Oh wait, they hate our freedom???

    ___________

    Except when groups like the moslem brotherhood gain power they impose a theocratic dicatorship where the people have less rights and woman are chattle.

    Prime example:

    Iran
    ___________

    I think you’re right, MK.

    It is no phobia to recognise that women and religious minorities suffer under certain regimes which claim their foundation to be Islam. And yes, this has been the case with other forms of dictatorship too.

    Regarding Egypt now, let’s hope they have a far more successful regime swap than Russia did in 1917. But let’s not assume setbacks are impossible, or that no Egyptian could possibly want to hijack and overturn the current push for democracy. Support them with your eyes open.

    Complain about this comment

  • 25. At 9:27pm on 30 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    17 MK Here in England I have a little schoolbook telling English children of how a child lives in Persia/Iran.

    It was written in England about 1910 and it explains that when a little boy is born his father will be overjoyed but if it`s a girl the father will be upset and not even want to see her.

    It goes on to say that at about nine years of age she will have to prepare to be married...and she will get married about ten years of age.

    Now let`s remember that little English girls reading the book knew they would not have the vote and that there was little likelihood of anything for them but hard work and childbearing and next to no financial independence.

    In a little village near me there`s a photograph of the children in their final year of school around the same time.

    Of about thirty kids only six of the boys survived the First World War and the girls had to do all the men`s jobs during the war then slip back into their own role when the few men got back.

    Be careful of going on about people`s "rights" in other countries unlike our own...it`s simply insensitive to time honoured traditions.

    And beforewe talk of being liberated just consider how in our Sodom and Gomorrah our girls behave like prostitutes and our boys like thugs.

    Whathave we to spread to the world by way of culture?

    Complain about this comment

  • 26. At 9:28pm on 30 Jan 2011, Robertson98 wrote:

    It seems strange to me that Mr Mardell, an experienced journalist, would give credit to the argument that Bush supported the democracy movement without even questioning it. When did the Bush administration (or any American administration for that matter) ever support the democracy movement? The Egyptian case is enlightening. During his first term in office Bush forced Mubarak into holding elections as a means to moving towards a more democratic future. However, when the Muslim Brotherhood polled extremely well (the elections were likely fixed by Mubarak in attempt to dissuade the Americans from any similar action in the future) the whole idea was scrapped. A classic lesson in American democracy promotion- we support democracy as long as our man wins. If not then Mubarak is fine, or Saleh in Yemen is fine, or even Saddam (for many years) in Iraq is fine. The White House has no concern about the Egyptian people's fundamental rights, only in it's own 'national interests'.

    Complain about this comment

  • 27. At 9:34pm on 30 Jan 2011, polite and kind wrote:

    John Bolton's opinion?

    Wait the same john bolton ,,Nah Can't be. Seriously you are printing the word of a complete shill and a fool.
    I can't remain polite over including his words of vile and hate.

    Complain about this comment

  • 28. At 9:55pm on 30 Jan 2011, Chryses wrote:

    Robertson98, (#26. At 9:28pm on 30 Jan 2011)
    ”... When did the Bush administration (or any American administration for that matter) ever support the democracy movement? ...”
    If you are interested in learning, read the Washington Post Editorial of Oct 29, 2010.
    Google “Obama's task on Egyptian democracy” - the piece should be at the top of the search list.

    Complain about this comment

  • 29. At 9:57pm on 30 Jan 2011, drflahault wrote:

    The Obama Administration should listen to the Egyptian
    Nation - speaking up.
    Hesitation, or "slowing down" the revolutionary process
    may cost lives but can not prevent Mubarak's failure.
    Change can only occur without Mubarak in the picture.
    "Global Interest of America" should not be forced on a
    nation who demands democray.
    Afraid of the unknown? Certainly. The later the White
    House decides on Mubarak's departure, the more damage
    they cause to the so called "Global Interest of America".

    Complain about this comment

  • 30. At 9:59pm on 30 Jan 2011, Chryses wrote:

    BorthwicksNose, (#20. At 8:53pm on 30 Jan 2011)
    ”... John Bolton is a war criminal who should be behind bars ...”
    That is an interesting claim. Do you have any evidence to substantiate it?

    Complain about this comment

  • 31. At 10:00pm on 30 Jan 2011, MagicKirin wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 32. At 10:04pm on 30 Jan 2011, RoyaltyinTheChampionship wrote:

    Let the people of Egypt decide who runs Egypt. Anything other than this is a betrayal of freedom. We reap what we sow in foreign policy and to say the people of Iraq had a right to not live under authoritarian rule and torture whilst denying the people of Egypt the same freedoms is nothing short of hypocracy. The will of Egyptians is more important than the money from arms contracts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 33. At 10:16pm on 30 Jan 2011, Jay wrote:

    Probably time has come for US to accept the reality that it is not in a position to impose regime change as and when it wants. It can also be argued that US should not support any dictatorial regimes (whatever side they might be- for or against us) anywhere in the world to keep its foreign policy balanced. Many may not like "Islamic brotherhood", but that is none of our business to dictate who should rule any other sovereign country like Egypt.

    Complain about this comment

  • 34. At 10:20pm on 30 Jan 2011, Robertson98 wrote:

    In response to Chryses 9.55pm- you will find that this sort of mild criticism is common of American Governments towards corrupt and oppressive regimes which it supports. If Obama was serious about encouraging democracy in Egypt then he has the power to make himself heard. Why not suspend the massive amounts of military aid the US gives annually to Egypt? The answer to that is surely that the aid is crucial to the stability of the regime which he and his predecessors have vigorously supported. Do you honestly think that if the US government demanded that Mubarak hold free and fair elections he would be in a position to refuse? They have propped his dictatorship up for the last 30 years since Sadat made peace with Israel because it is crucial to their Middle East ambitions. If they were serious about democracy in Egypt then the first step would be to demand that Mubarak goes. Nobody but a fool could fail to see the irony in politely asking a man who has tortured, killed and plundered for the last three decades to make peacemeal reforms for the benefit of his victims

    Complain about this comment

  • 35. At 11:02pm on 30 Jan 2011, Tinkersdamn wrote:

    It seems the Obama administration may deserve some credit for encouraging Egypt not to engage in violence against its people 'to maintain order' over these last few days. If Egypt can establish democracy, we need, largely, to get out of the way- they must own their own revolution. If they succeed, they will still face - for at least the short term - the harsh economic conditions which have contributed to their cause for uprising.

    Complain about this comment

  • 36. At 11:06pm on 30 Jan 2011, JClarkson wrote:

    #34

    "Why not suspend the massive amounts of military aid the US gives annually to Egypt?"

    Because it is not in US's interest to have a militarily weak Egypt.

    Complain about this comment

  • 37. At 11:11pm on 30 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    So who runs the USA...and in whose interests. Obviously all that money spent on Egypt could be used to stop industry fleeing America and Chinese business buying American industry.

    Who sets the priorities in our UK and US spending? Sure as heck ain`t folk like me!

    If it`s not an impertinent question ...how does our government`s spending benefit the voters and the general public in our countries....because if this was a who-dun-it murder mystery I would think there was something very fishy going on in our "democracies"!

    Complain about this comment

  • 38. At 11:15pm on 30 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    36...Now do tell us what you mean by the "US" in this context because I think you mean the rich people behind Wall Street who talk a good democracy but deliver something else if it isn`t profitable enough.
    How about having the courage to unwrap yourself from the Stars and Stripes and declare your real motivation?

    Complain about this comment

  • 39. At 11:18pm on 30 Jan 2011, JClarkson wrote:

    #26

    "When did the Bush administration (or any American administration for that matter) ever support the democracy movement?"

    http://www.eurasiacritic.com/articles/promoting-democracy-egypt

    Third paragraph on.


    And


    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7191679.stm


    Complain about this comment

  • 40. At 11:24pm on 30 Jan 2011, Denthrax wrote:

    Its Ironic to see how America's blessing decides how other countries' people are ruled. Long live Democracy (only in America, of course)!

    Complain about this comment

  • 41. At 11:24pm on 30 Jan 2011, Chryses wrote:

    Robertson98, (#34. At 10:20pm on 30 Jan 2011)
    "... If Obama was serious about encouraging democracy in Egypt then he has the power to make himself heard ..."
    It follows that you advocate intervention into the Egyptian political process until the result satisfies American interests.

    Complain about this comment

  • 42. At 11:25pm on 30 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    A friend in need is a friend indeed ?

    http://terrorism.about.com/gi/o.htm?zi=1/XJ&zTi=1&sdn=terrorism&cdn=newsissues&tm=69&f=00&tt=2&bt=0&bts=0&zu=http%3A//news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6544149.stm

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/leaked-cables-police-brutality-daily-occurrence-egyptian-prisons/

    I believe this is why we are LOVED --and not believed ?

    Complain about this comment

  • 43. At 11:29pm on 30 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 44. At 11:30pm on 30 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 45. At 11:34pm on 30 Jan 2011, Robertson98 wrote:

    Chryses 11.24pm- not at all. I advocate no involvement whatsoever in the Egyptian political process. The fact remains however that if Obama wished to do so he would be able to

    Complain about this comment

  • 46. At 11:36pm on 30 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    #36 JMay

    "Because it is not in US's interest to have a militarily weak Egypt."

    I believe you mean a militarily weak Egyptian dictatorship -- a minor detail ?

    Complain about this comment

  • 47. At 11:49pm on 30 Jan 2011, Chryses wrote:

    Robertson98, (#45. At 11:34pm on 30 Jan 2011)
    ”... I advocate no involvement whatsoever in the Egyptian political process ...”
    So if President Mubarak suppresses the Cairo democracy protests you would urge President Obama to not intervene, correct?

    Complain about this comment

  • 48. At 11:50pm on 30 Jan 2011, Kent wrote:

    People can't let any opportunity to bash the US go by.

    Fun facts:

    - Almost every single member of the European Union has provided financial or material support to the state of Egypt during Mubarak's rule. Many other countries have as well including Canada, Australia, Japan etc...

    - Despite the support Egypt has received from pretty much every developed country on the planet, the United States is literally the only country condemned for it in the media, including in all the countries who also support Egypt's government, demonstrating the pure insanity and hypocrisy inherent in anti-Americanism.

    - No matter what the US does in this situation, the US will be criticized, and that criticism will become the focal point of all western coverage of the events in Egypt. The US alone is criticized for the support given to Egypt, no matter how vitally important it was to the nation itself and not just Mubarak. The US alone will be criticized for any inaction on its part to force Mubarak out of power, no matter how many other countries who have supported Egypt stand firm in their hands-off approach. On the precise opposite side of that, the US alone will be criticized for meddling in the event the US uses its power to force Mubarak out of power. There is nothing the US can conceivably do that will not draw condemnation, people have already made up their minds that they will blame the US for everything that goes wrong. Why? Because anti-Americanism is insane and hypocritical. Many of the commentators on the situation in Egypt, as evidenced by these comments, only involve themselves in the discourse inasmuch as it allows them to do their typical diversion of blame for all of the world's faults, focusing their scorn and derision on the US to help them cope with whatever failings their own country has.

    Anti-Americanism is pretty much a mental disorder.

    Complain about this comment

  • 49. At 11:53pm on 30 Jan 2011, V Siva wrote:

    It is shame on the US while boasting democratic values, human rights, freedom, it was supporting one of the worst regiems in the Middle east for three decades.

    Political prisoners, torture and murder were practiced by the Mubarak regime while denying human rights and freedom of speech.

    The Western regimes are biased on popular people protests and demonstrations while condoning state terrorism.

    Complain about this comment

  • 50. At 11:54pm on 30 Jan 2011, you must be right wrote:

    25. At 9:27pm on 30 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:
    17 MK Here in England I have a little schoolbook telling English children of how a child lives in Persia/Iran.
    ...
    It goes on to say that at about nine years of age she will have to prepare to be married...and she will get married about ten years of age.

    Now let`s remember that little English girls reading the book knew they would not have the vote and that there was little likelihood of anything for them but hard work and childbearing and next to no financial independence.

    ...
    Be careful of going on about people`s "rights" in other countries unlike our own...it`s simply insensitive to time honoured traditions.

    ...
    ____________

    There certainly are problems in the UK. But in terms of ‘time honoured traditions’, the tradition of girls being married at age 10 goes back over 1,000 years in some quarters, and is still practised [UNICEF Photo of the Year 2007 http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/247739]. In Afghanistan, the current regime passed a law allowing a husband to starve his wife to death if she refuses to have conjugal relations with him. This also has roots going back centuries.

    We in the west should not pretend our societies are or ever have been perfect. But let’s get a sense of proportion here. We do not let 10 year old girls get married, and neither should we. It is wrong.

    Complain about this comment

  • 51. At 11:55pm on 30 Jan 2011, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #20 and 31

    So according to HYS rules a conservative can be called a War Criminal but a liberal who was on the Hate Flotilla can not

    Complain about this comment

  • 52. At 11:57pm on 30 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    Don´t worry.

    If plan A fails, we still have plans B,C,D and E-- to uphold our Egyptian interests and the Status Quo !

    We always do.

    Complain about this comment

  • 53. At 11:57pm on 30 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    USA doesn't have culture, except for therapy

    Complain about this comment

  • 54. At 00:00am on 31 Jan 2011, Chryses wrote:

    Kent, (#48. At 11:50pm on 30 Jan 2011)
    ... Anti-Americanism is pretty much a mental disorder.”
    But a very convenient mental disorder. It enables the sufferer to avoid thinking hard about difficult problems.

    Complain about this comment

  • 55. At 00:06am on 31 Jan 2011, V Siva wrote:

    The world is witnessing another popular uprising to bring Egypt back to democracy from a dictator supported by the Western Nations.

    Similar situations will arise due to the mockery Foreign policies of the US and the Western nations and countries will end up having extremist regimes like the regime in Iran.

    Now Egypt and Tunisia will end up with regimes with hardcore Islamic values. Hezbollah backed leader takes over Lebanon as the Prime Minister.

    In Sri lanka, these so called Western nations have not done anything to prevent or bring accountability on the alleged state terrorism, human rights abuses and war crimes. The UN is in shambles and India while boasting as the largest democracy on earth alleged to have committed war crimes against Tamils.

    When people are more and more knowledgeable ...

    a. India will be broken into smaller states

    b. hardcore nationalistsic regimes will assume power due to the mockery and double standard foreign policies of the Western nations

    c. Puppet regimes that are supported by the West will be replaced by the peoples' popular uprising

    Mubarak days are numbered!

    Complain about this comment

  • 56. At 00:07am on 31 Jan 2011, Robertson98 wrote:

    Chryses 11.49pm- regardless of what Mubarak does the US should not be intervening in the Egyptian political process. They should be cutting off all assistance to the regime (they should have done it years ago given the nature of the dictatorship) and I can only suggest that if Mubarak responds to the protests with more violence then that would provide even more cause for them to do so. That is interfering and would be welcome, but it certainly isn't interfering in the Egyptian political process which is another matter entirely.

    Complain about this comment

  • 57. At 00:15am on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    #48 Kent

    "- Despite the support Egypt has received from pretty much every developed country on the planet, the United States is literally the only country condemned for it in the media, including in all the countries who also support Egypt's government, demonstrating the pure insanity and hypocrisy inherent in anti-Americanism."

    --- That is because only America has the power to remove Mubarak and decide how far the ´Democracy´can go !

    "Anti-Americanism is pretty much a mental disorder."

    Yea! --Middle and South America is insane ?

    Complain about this comment

  • 58. At 00:21am on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    #51 Magickirin

    "So according to HYS rules a conservative can be called a War Criminal but a liberal who was on the Hate Flotilla can not"

    I thought they loved the Palestinians ?

    You meant LOVE flotilla ?

    Complain about this comment

  • 59. At 00:23am on 31 Jan 2011, V Siva wrote:

    The US, the Western nations and India while boasting democracy, supported undemocratic and ruthless regimes that contributed to the destabilisation of third world and Arab nations.

    This double standard policies have created unprecedented level of human sufferings in many countries for their own benefit.

    What happened in Iran will happen in Egypt as well due to the Western mockery!

    Complain about this comment

  • 60. At 00:23am on 31 Jan 2011, JClarkson wrote:

    #46

    "I believe you mean a militarily weak Egyptian dictatorship -- a minor detail ?"

    It makes no difference what type of government it is, as long as it is US friendly and it is well armed.

    Complain about this comment

  • 61. At 00:23am on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 62. At 00:24am on 31 Jan 2011, you must be right wrote:

    48. At 11:50pm on 30 Jan 2011, Kent wrote:
    People can't let any opportunity to bash the US go by.
    ...
    ____________
    Personally, there’s much I would criticise about the USA. However, as in the West generally, the people can criticize their government and even insult their head of state without fear. The people of Egypt are winning a taste of that. Long may it last.

    Maybe it’s like party politics: some people choose a party they identify with, then make every excuse for its faults, criticizing even the good things the opposition come up with.

    I’m actually surprised that only the US has come in for criticism. Can’t anyone find an argument that it’s all Israel’s fault? People, you’re not trying hard enough.

    Complain about this comment

  • 63. At 00:24am on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    Dem cut - cut - cut 'gainst 'em one another;

    Oh, dem teach to love one another. Man, go!

    Complain about this comment

  • 64. At 00:28am on 31 Jan 2011, Chryses wrote:

    Robertson98, (#56. At 00:07am on 31 Jan 2011)
    ”... regardless of what Mubarak does the US should not be intervening in the Egyptian political process ...”
    Therefore, nothing a government does to its citizens could warrant American intervention. Just wanted to be sure I understand where you stood on the issue.

    Complain about this comment

  • 65. At 00:29am on 31 Jan 2011, hizento wrote:

    A democratic muslim country are inherently oppose to USA and hostile to Israel. This has been the case in Iraq, Arghanistan, Iran, Syria, Palestine. Most undemocratic muslim dictatorships are sponsored by the Americans.

    Complain about this comment

  • 66. At 00:37am on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    48 Kent ...Anti Americanism isn`t a mental disorder but it is a bit of a lazy man`s sport...because there`s a huge difference between what America claims to represent and what it does represent in fact.

    Is it unique? Certainly not! Britain has done it for centuries and is still claiming "not to do torture" when it`s practically run by the CIA!
    So let`s stop shooting at easy targets...we shall soon run out of ammo!

    America`s prime problem is that it`s the engine room and empire builder for global capitalism ....which effectively now runs the world through the financial markets.

    For historical/racial/religious reasons global capitalists and their media have a deep sentimental interest in supporting a Zionist regime in Israel...and this skews US policy far more than most Americans probably understand.It also seems also to affect British foreign policy too.

    The big difficulty is that the ever more powerful Islamic world cannot be said to support Israel ....far from it...so the west has had to
    support puppet regimes all over the Middle East that leave Israel alone.

    But anyone with a heart can see that the lives of another six million innocent Jews are on the line again!Not to mention the scandal of the squalour "enjoyed" by Palestinians!So something has to "give" before the region explodes.

    Maybe if the west is more honest and open about its dealings democracy can really take hold for Arabs and Jews....and the semite people`s can at long last embrace each other and build a prosperous Middle East.(And there is lots of space in the Middle East for everyone if the dogmatists will not insist on a return to old boundaries.)

    And possibly it`s time those who make billions from global capitalism came together and built a really high quality Palestinian state without encroaching on Israel ...while the socialists and liberals in Israel get off their backsides and make active supportive peace with Palestinians?

    Complain about this comment

  • 67. At 00:39am on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    #60 JMay

    MARCUS LIVES !

    --praise be to God and the ´Right to Bear OUR Arms´?

    Complain about this comment

  • 68. At 00:49am on 31 Jan 2011, you must be right wrote:

    55. At 00:06am on 31 Jan 2011, V Siva wrote:
    The world is witnessing another popular uprising to bring Egypt back to democracy from a dictator supported by the Western Nations.

    Similar situations will arise due to the mockery Foreign policies of the US and the Western nations and countries will end up having extremist regimes like the regime in Iran.

    Now Egypt and Tunisia will end up with regimes with hardcore Islamic values. Hezbollah backed leader takes over Lebanon as the Prime Minister.

    ...
    ________________
    So Hezbollah is America’s fault? Please, use your reason.

    And just how long has Egypt had since Nasser took power? And all the bad since then is the West’s fault??

    Where I would say the USA has contributed to the protests in Tunisia, Egypt and elsewhere, is in the Federal Reserve flooding the financial markets with money, much of which has been ‘invested’ in commodities, including food, so raising prices. Food prices have been part of the trigger in the uprisings. So I think the USA has played an unintended role there. But let's not blame them for giving Egypt money, or trying to broker agreement between hostile nations (I am not asserting that you said that in your post, V Siva).

    Complain about this comment

  • 69. At 00:50am on 31 Jan 2011, V Siva wrote:

    The US, the Western nations and India while boasting democracy, supported undemocratic and ruthless regimes that contributed to the destabilisation of many third world and Arab nations. Ordinary people were at the receiving end with unspeakble sufferings.

    This double standard policies have created unprecedented level of human sufferings in many countries as it benefitted the powerful nations.

    Egypt is one of them! Many more leaders like Mubarak have to go to bring the world to sanity!

    Complain about this comment

  • 70. At 00:52am on 31 Jan 2011, Obama wrote:

    I support all of the scheme I decided. And I hope our world become an increasingly peace and harmony.

    Complain about this comment

  • 71. At 01:05am on 31 Jan 2011, Chryses wrote:

    hizento, (#65. At 00:29am on 31 Jan 2011)
    ”A democratic muslim country are inherently oppose to USA and hostile to Israel ...”
    Do you say that because the country is Democratic or because the country is Muslim?

    Complain about this comment

  • 72. At 01:12am on 31 Jan 2011, Basic Reform wrote:

    #22 Chris:
    "The unfortunate thing about this entire issue is the fact that President Hosni Mubarak is a Western, moderate leader."
    ----
    Mubarak may well be pro-western but a moderate he most certainly is not; unless you include the words "strongman", "authoritarian" and "dictator" in your definition of moderate. I wonder how "pro-western" he would be if he didn't receive so much money in foreing aid and tourist receipts.

    Complain about this comment

  • 73. At 01:41am on 31 Jan 2011, Basic Reform wrote:

    #19. you must be right:
    "However, reprehensible regimes can take power through democracy. Hitler did in Germany."
    ----
    Why do people always bring up Hitler's election as a reason to deny democracy to oppressed nations? After Hitler's release from prison in 1924, it took the Nazis seven elections and almost nine years before Hitler became chancellor. Even then he needed the support of other parties to pass the laws that made him a dictator.

    Complain about this comment

  • 74. At 01:43am on 31 Jan 2011, Remo wrote:

    If the govt. that develops out of this strife has any association with religion, be it Muslim or Christian, it will fail sooner than later. Religion has no business in nation building or governance anywhere on earth. Even if it were valid, which it is not, it would still have no bearing on how a society is managed. If a person's irrational beliefs are valid in formation of a government then there should be some govenments based on fear of open spaces, or of bridges over water, or even buttons! Irrationality, religious or otherwise, has no place in government. I wish them luck especially with the hegemonous USA breathing down their necks.

    Complain about this comment

  • 75. At 01:52am on 31 Jan 2011, Chryses wrote:

    Remo, (#74. At 01:43am on 31 Jan 2011)
    ”... Religion has no business in nation building or governance anywhere on earth ...”
    Why should anyone believe that claim?

    Complain about this comment

  • 76. At 01:55am on 31 Jan 2011, phindrup wrote:

    All this talk about the 'West' supporting democracy! Ask the Palestinians of Gaza who voted for Hamas in a free and fair election!
    Egyptians ought to vote for a government that will put Egyptian interests first, Arab states interests second, and everything else far, far below.
    Should they do that, neither the US nor Israel will like the outcome, but the pressure would then be on Israel to negotiate the return of Palestinians in good faith, or face the reality that Israel is merely a blip in the pages of history.
    This offers a great chance for the Middle East to be left in peace to rebuild their societies after long years of interference by the West.

    Complain about this comment

  • 77. At 02:44am on 31 Jan 2011, Fool wrote:

    Whoever it is that takes over, KEEP FOREIGN BANKS OUT! Don't accept foreign "aid"! It should be an interim government that prepares for an election within a few months to a year. Elections should then be monitored by independent organizations.

    www.johnperkins.org

    Complain about this comment

  • 78. At 03:18am on 31 Jan 2011, dennisvanovermars wrote:

    " People can't let any opportunity to bash the US go by.

    Fun facts:

    - Almost every single member of the European Union has provided financial or material support to the state of Egypt during Mubarak's rule. Many other countries have as well including Canada, Australia, Japan etc...

    - Despite the support Egypt has received from pretty much every developed country on the planet, the United States is literally the only country condemned for it in the media, including in all the countries who also support Egypt's government, demonstrating the pure insanity and hypocrisy inherent in anti-Americanism.

    - No matter what the US does in this situation, the US will be criticized, and that criticism will become the focal point of all western coverage of the events in Egypt. The US alone is criticized for the support given to Egypt, no matter how vitally important it was to the nation itself and not just Mubarak. The US alone will be criticized for any inaction on its part to force Mubarak out of power, no matter how many other countries who have supported Egypt stand firm in their hands-off approach. On the precise opposite side of that, the US alone will be criticized for meddling in the event the US uses its power to force Mubarak out of power. There is nothing the US can conceivably do that will not draw condemnation, people have already made up their minds that they will blame the US for everything that goes wrong. Why? Because anti-Americanism is insane and hypocritical. Many of the commentators on the situation in Egypt, as evidenced by these comments, only involve themselves in the discourse inasmuch as it allows them to do their typical diversion of blame for all of the world's faults, focusing their scorn and derision on the US to help them cope with whatever failings their own country has.

    Anti-Americanism is pretty much a mental disorder."


    The U.S gives 1.5 Billion dollars to Egypt every year. As an American, I can tell you that America deserves just about all the criticism it can get in this situation.

    Complain about this comment

  • 79. At 03:44am on 31 Jan 2011, tuulen wrote:


    From the article by MM:
    "'We want to see an orderly transition so that no one fills a void, that there not be a void, that there be a well thought out plan that will bring about a democratic participatory government,' said the secretary of State Hillary Clinton."

    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

    Apparently the US is fully anticipating a change of regime in Egypt, yet indications are that the US has not fanned the flames of the upcoming election, neither to promote any particular party or person, nor to disparage any.

    Witness the looting in Egyptian cities which has been rife, yet the violence there apparently has nothing to do with politics, but is only the theft of commercial goods. The Egyptian military apparently now serves as a de facto national police, its having maintained a national visibility, but so far the military has not interceded by means of force, as apparently the theft of commercial goods does not trigger military response.

    Complain about this comment

  • 80. At 04:46am on 31 Jan 2011, hamdy wrote:

    people on the street are not muslim brothers they are Facebook Young Univeristy student christian and muslim all together.

    Complain about this comment

  • 81. At 05:21am on 31 Jan 2011, you must be right wrote:

    #19. you must be right:
    "However, reprehensible regimes can take power through democracy. Hitler did in Germany."
    ----
    Why do people always bring up Hitler's election as a reason to deny democracy to oppressed nations? After Hitler's release from prison in 1924, it took the Nazis seven elections and almost nine years before Hitler became chancellor. Even then he needed the support of other parties to pass the laws that made him a dictator.
    ____
    I brought Hitler up because it is history. It’s great to have the extra detail from you, though it in no way negates my point. I also mentioned Iran, Vietnam and Afghanistan, which you nicely failed to quote.

    I started my post 19 with 'I agree that the US should support democracy...'. How can you say I want to ‘deny democracy’ to anyone?

    So, why did you quote me out of context? Why did you accuse me of something when I expressly said the opposite?

    Complain about this comment

  • 82. At 05:29am on 31 Jan 2011, toto1973 wrote:

    Egypt has been a buffer zone for the security and stability of Israel for 30 years. The US and Mubarak’s regime scarified the inspiration of the Egyptian people for that purpose.

    Complain about this comment

  • 83. At 05:30am on 31 Jan 2011, you must be right wrote:

    In 81 I missed the attribution. Should have been:

    73. At 01:41am on 31 Jan 2011, Basic Reform wrote:

    [about my post 19, etc.]


    Sorry about that.

    Complain about this comment

  • 84. At 06:20am on 31 Jan 2011, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    phindrup: "All this talk about the 'West' supporting democracy! Ask the Palestinians of Gaza who voted for Hamas in a free and fair election!"

    Phindrup, democracy is not a time deal and the winners of said elections don't normally massacre the opposition party members in the street and in their headquarters. If you need a reminder, go find newspapers from June of 2007.

    Kent: "No matter what the US does in this situation, the US will be criticized, and that criticism will become the focal point of all western coverage of the events in Egypt."

    Honestly, I've come to expect such coverage; it's a shame, but all one can do is point it out and try to steer the debate in the right direction. In this case, what America does is far less important than what the Egyptians may accomplish by this rebellion. This blog is about America, so naturally Mark has made this entry about America's reaction.

    Basic Reform: "Why do people always bring up Hitler's election as a reason to deny democracy to oppressed nations?"

    Because his rise to power in the 1930s is a warning to all of us, as is the rise of theocracies like Iran.

    V Siva: "The US, the Western nations and India while boasting democracy, supported undemocratic and ruthless regimes that contributed to the destabilisation of third world and Arab nations. This double standard policies have created unprecedented level of human sufferings in many countries for their own benefit."

    V Siva, the US had no choice but to interact with authoritative regimes and monarchs in the middle-east because until very recently the only real democratic nations in the region were Turkey and Israel. The US has a complex relationship with Egypt going back 30 years; we're not about to throw it away by recklessly intervening.

    Asking Mubarak to make certain timely concessions to the people of Egypt in exchange for continued US aid to Egypt is a far more sensible policy for the US than pulling the entire rug out from underneath him. You may think it ridiculous, but Egyptians must convince Americans that they need not fear revolution in Egypt. If the Egyptians manage to topple Mubarak and create a real democratic republic similar to Turkey's, I am confident that Americans will welcome the change and congratulate Egyptians on joining the club of democratic nations.

    Complain about this comment

  • 85. At 06:23am on 31 Jan 2011, you must be right wrote:

    # 74, Remo wrote:

    If the govt. that develops out of this strife has any association with religion, be it Muslim or Christian, it will fail sooner than later. Religion has no business in nation building or governance anywhere on earth. Even if it were valid, which it is not, it would still have no bearing on how a society is managed. If a person's irrational beliefs are valid in formation of a government then there should be some govenments based on fear of open spaces, or of bridges over water, or even buttons! Irrationality, religious or otherwise, has no place in government. I wish them luck especially with the hegemonous USA breathing down their necks.
    ____________________________________

    Now, who was it that secured freedom of speech and religion in England? Or the supremacy of the people over the monarch? In large part it was Bible-reading Christians, from the Reformation onwards. So, on occasion, governance has been improved by the involvement of religious people. Though I do agree there are real and serious dangers when governments are deeply intolerant of some or all religions.

    By the way, you’re not advocating governance based on fear of religion, are you? :)

    Complain about this comment

  • 86. At 06:34am on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    Since more than one poster claimed that prior to current unrests, Egypt was a safe place to visit by foreign tourists...

    Just a few 'episodes' from not so distant past:



    1. Oct. 5 1985 -an Egyptian policeman machines a group of Israeli tourists killing 3 adults and 4 young children on the dunes of Ras Burqa.


    2. On Feb. 4th 1990 a bus of Israeli tourists attacked - 9 Israelis killed, 16 wounded.


    3. Nov. 17, 1997 - Luxor massacre: 62 tourists slaghtered, including 36 Swiss, 10 Japanese, 6 Britons, 4 Germans and two Colombians.
    [beheadings and disembowellings being a part of the massacre.]


    4. Oct. 7, 2004 Sinai bombings of tourist hotels and camp sites at Taba and Ras al-Shital: 34 tourists killed, 171 wounded.


    5. July 23, 2005: a series of bombing attacks at tourist resort of Sharm el-Sheikh: 88 killed, over 150 wounded.


    6. April 24, 2006 three bombings at Dahab tourist resort:
    at least 23 killed, 80 wounded.

    ["How soon they forget!"]

    Complain about this comment

  • 87. At 07:12am on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:

    85. At 06:23am on 31 Jan 2011, you must be right wrote:
    By the way, you’re not advocating governance based on fear of religion, are you? :)
    ___________________________________________________________
    We already have 2 shining examples of governance based on the fear of religion: USSR and PRC; both with outstanding human rights records. Of course, we are down to only one, but I'm sure somebody like Chaves will get tired of the clergy pointing out his faults and China won't be alone anymore. I would rather Egypt choose for itself an Islamic Theocracy than a godless Technacracy like the USSR. I live in an Islamic dictatorship, right now and we are free to worship in open Churches. The local military members I work with even wish me Merry Christmas every December. So there is some hope for all believers in a Theocracy, but no hope in a godless government that fears the power of God.


    Complain about this comment

  • 88. At 07:50am on 31 Jan 2011, Hyder wrote:

    United States of America has only one friend and that is United States of America. It does not care about the plight of the Egyptian people or Egypt but look at every event in the perspective of US interests.

    Yes a void is being created and US is subtly raising the bogey of Islamists filling it which does not suit US interests, the Egyptian people do not matter weather they want it or not.

    Complain about this comment

  • 89. At 07:50am on 31 Jan 2011, BienvenueEnLouisiana wrote:

    Edit to #84: "democracy is not a time deal" was intended to read...
    "democracy is not a one time deal".


    Complain about this comment

  • 90. At 08:13am on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:

    88. At 07:50am on 31 Jan 2011, Hyder wrote:
    United States of America has only one friend and that is United States of America. It does not care about the plight of the Egyptian people or Egypt but look at every event in the perspective of US interests.
    __________________________________________________________________

    You are correct on 2 points although I would state them differently:

    1. The only country the US can depend on 100% of the time is the US, regardless of the amount paid out in bribes.

    2. Of course, US foreign policy is all about self interest; so is every other nations’. The problem is our domestic energy policy is totally schizo, being a constant compromise between the enviro-Nazis (Godwin’s law already being invoked, I’ll use my favorite term for the tree huggers that care more about the spotted owl and a few caribou then the security of their country) and the oil tycoons that make more money shipping oil around the globe playing the futures market then by actually wanting to go out and drill for the stuff.

    I wish the Egyptian uprising was something that we as Americans could view through the lens of ideals, but thanks to the oil-tycoons and the tree-huggers, we are vested in the ME.


    Complain about this comment

  • 91. At 08:34am on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    I have been thinking about my arrogance this morning and wondering whether we are missing a trick here in the West.

    Why do we keep banging on about democracy being so wonderful?
    Do we really live in democracies ourselves?

    Is it possible that all these other countries have no practical choice but to operate as what we arrogantly call "brutal repressive regimes"?

    What would happen if they weren`t brutal and repressive?

    Would all the people who want to sieze power start boxing by the Queensbury rules and act in democratic good faith....merely trying to persuade their fellow citizens with the use of sweet reason and nothing else?

    Islamists don`t believe in democracy... but that`s not just because it`s a western idea.

    As Oldloader alludes it`s something much deeper than that...it`s that many traditional conservative societies know by intuition that rule by God is far better than what they get if they let "democracy" take hold.

    In large parts of the world....(and I include China and Russia but am really thinking of the Middle East) the ordinary folk sense that democracy really means is that the same old families and tribes and their elites will just carry on running the show using corruption and amassing fortunes and doing ABSOLUTELY NOTHING for their own poor people......which is what still happens in Britain and the USA!

    Complain about this comment

  • 92. At 08:40am on 31 Jan 2011, backshoe wrote:

    The same people running Egypt are the same people running the US...Wall Street..Obama and Clinton are their puppets...They are stalling for time to figure out how to protect their assets and/or how to get their assets out before the new regime comes in. American capitalist of today don't like taking risk, they want a sure thing, hence support of dictators around the world..damn the US Constitution, that piece of paper is considered by the Wall Street tycoon as a hindrance to their interests...freedom and liberty for the elites is what they meant to say in the American Constitution, but it doesn't have that certain ring to it...

    Complain about this comment

  • 93. At 09:03am on 31 Jan 2011, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #73
    , Basic Reform wrote:
    #19. you must be right:
    "However, reprehensible regimes can take power through democracy. Hitler did in Germany."
    ----
    Why do people always bring up Hitler's election as a reason to deny democracy to oppressed nations? After Hitler's release from prison in 1924,
    ____________

    People bring up Hilter in regard to Hamas for 2 reqason.

    They have the same genocidialintolerance as the Nazis.

    and they murder those that disagree with them politicaly

    Complain about this comment

  • 94. At 09:22am on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 95. At 09:26am on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    93 MK ..I know your heart is in the right place but many Islamist organisations are ALL that oppressed people have to resist a very powerful Zionist regime that is no stranger to using underhand techniques and brutality itself.

    It`s a bit like our situation in Northern Ireland.Many Catholics felt that democracy just handed them a bum deal all the time and the "troubles" began. BOTH sides then were almost obliged to start fighting dirty and the results made very grim reading....but what were the alternatives for folk on the street?

    The Zionists have a powerful grip on our media ..and I read one commentator referring to "GAZOIDS"....and the irony was that I am sure the Nazis had similar names for the inhabitants of the Warsaw and other ghettos.

    Being evil is what we humans do when we lose hope of having our grievances heard!

    Complain about this comment

  • 96. At 10:05am on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:

    95. At 09:26am on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:
    Being evil is what we humans do when we lose hope of having our grievances heard!
    ____________________________________________________________

    I would say that being evil is what we humans are without God. Actually, that is what the Bible says in Romans 3:23, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;…” And for the religious among us (regardless of which religion) we have Isaiah 64:6 (New International Version, ©2011), “All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away.”
    The 9/11 hijackers were wealthy, pampered college students; they were only desperate to kill “infidels.”

    Complain about this comment

  • 97. At 10:22am on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    96 You make a good point Oldie....and I notice that quite often it`s the monied "pampered" types who become revolutionaries.

    Take Osam Bin Laden for an example. I imagine he could have spent a very agreeable wealthy pampered life like the rest of his family.Or Castro could have been a wealthy Cuban physician.

    Sometimes money and an easy time aren`t enough for people.Sometimes they feel the pain that Jesus felt...and the urge to right wrongs.

    But when they tackle the rich and powerful they soon learn that if they don`t fight dirty they get brutaly silenced or turned into tools of the rich.

    Complain about this comment

  • 98. At 11:14am on 31 Jan 2011, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #95
    worcesterjim wrote:
    93 MK ..I know your heart is in the right place but many Islamist organisations are ALL that oppressed people have to resist a very powerful Zionist regime that is no stranger to using underhand techniques and brutality itself.

    It`s a bit like our situation in Northern Ireland.Many Catholics felt that democracy just handed them a bum deal all the time and the "troubles" began. BOTH sides then were almost obliged to start fighting dirty and the results made very grim reading....but what were the alternatives for folk on the street?

    The Zionists have a powerful grip on our media ..and I read one commentator referring to "GAZOIDS"....and the irony was that I am sure the Nazis had similar names for the inhabitants of the Warsaw and other ghettos.

    Being evil is what we humans do when we lose hope of having our grievances heard!

    _______

    I can't know what your heart or mind feels or thinks.

    but you seem to go under the assumption that Israel doesn't want peace.

    The facts say otherwise.

    Let me ask you what guarantees can be given to Israel from a group that wants its destruction?

    I've yet to see anyt ilsamist group that preaches tolerance.

    Israel treats moslems in Israel better than most Arab countries treat moslem sects not in power.

    I don't think even strident IRA members want Londoin not to exist, you can't says that about Hams, Hezbollah or the Moslem brotherhood in regard to Israel.

    The Palestinians have not proven they want peace. And bluntly Israel survivial is more important than a Palestinian third homeland.

    Complain about this comment

  • 99. At 11:42am on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    MK Forgive me for giving the impression that I imagine the Israelis don`t want peace...I know they do...but I have been trying to walk the line of seeing BOTH sides of this subject...not one or the other....and boy is it hard!

    Everyone and his dog will say they want peace.... but if you press them what you will find is that they want peace on their OWN TERMS...and if you press a little more you will find that they are fearful that if they don`t get EXACTLY what they want something awful will happen and they will lose out big time.

    That`s how Hamas and the Zionists think...they both got very tired of being Mr Nice Guy .....because BOTH of them saw that Jesus was wrong about the meek inheriting the Earth...that`s for shmucks!

    And let`s imagine we were Palestinian Islamists....are we going to wander around our cess pit of a neighbourhood telling everyone that Israel is a great idea? Be serious!How long would we last?

    That`s the sort of thing Jesus did ..and I have often thought that if I was a Jewsish money changer I would have nailed him to a cross myself!!

    Let`s get real...this is a wicked dangerous world!

    Complain about this comment

  • 100. At 11:46am on 31 Jan 2011, JClarkson wrote:

    #97


    "But when they tackle the rich and powerful they soon learn that if they don`t fight dirty they get brutaly silenced or turned into tools of the rich."

    Hate the rich, your hatred makes them stronger, your tears are their champagne, your protestations are the sweetest music to their ears. You claim that you are wronged, they tell you to eat more cake.


    Delicious cake.


    Meanwhile, the planet keeps revolving and everyone is one day older and closer to death.

    Complain about this comment

  • 101. At 11:49am on 31 Jan 2011, Greg Warner wrote:

    The foreign policy of the USA today in regards to the current situation in Egypt, and perhaps even across the Maghreb and Middle East reminds me of a 16th Century Japanese, almost Zenlike wisdom.
    Asked the question, "If a particularly fabled song bird will not sing, the three most powerful men of 16th Century Japan responded thus...
    Nobunaga's strategy was "Kill it".
    Hideyoshi's strategy was " Make it want to sing".
    Ieyasu's strategy was "Wait".
    Ieyasu became Shogun and his descendants ruled for 250 years.
    The problem with the USA's foreign policy time and time again is that they do not heed the advice "Fools rush in where Angels fear to tread".
    Being human, we also have the counterpoint "He who hesitates is lost".
    I for one hope the USA does not "rush in" on this one.
    Let's just "wait" to see how it plays out.







    Complain about this comment

  • 102. At 11:50am on 31 Jan 2011, davidbrent wrote:

    I stopped reading the comments after entry #19 - one of the quickest demonstrations of Godwin's Law I've seen for a while. Very poor effort.

    As for Egypt, no doubt changes will occur, the people will be happy for a while and then in a few years time, when they still have all the same problems, they'll maybe wonder why they bothered.

    Complain about this comment

  • 103. At 11:51am on 31 Jan 2011, JusticeForAll wrote:

    Israel unleash state terrorism, human rights abuses and continue with illegal occupation in the 21st Century.

    The US and Western nations have continued to support Egypt as the leaders are puppets and side with Israel although Israel terrorize Palestinians. Thanks to WikiLeaks that brought many secrets to surface.

    Sri Lankan Rajapakse regime has committed War Crimes, UN has failed to prevent or bring accountability, the US was aware of war crimes and Obama's inaction will be in history books that Tamils were massacred in Sri Lanka under the first black US President Obama.

    Mubarak has been in power for over 31 years and can anyone believe that he can bring a change, bring democracy, human rights, freedom of speech while Mubarak detaining many political prisoners in jails, many more tortured and murdered.

    World is changing and the people power will make drastic changes in politics. But the mistakes of the powerful nations are only help to create radical and hardcore leaders that not for the civilized world. The Western nations must learn from their Iranian experience.

    Complain about this comment

  • 104. At 11:59am on 31 Jan 2011, JusticeForAll wrote:

    It may be too late for the Western leaders to advice on comprehensive process of political reform. Egyptians may view the Western advice with care as they have been experiencing crulty for over 30 years.

    The wounds that ordinary people have suffered at the hands of Mubarak's Western supported regime for over three decades is unprecedented crimes against humanity.

    Shame on those who support the regimes of Mubarak, Ben Ali, Mahinda Rajapakse and similar regimes.

    Complain about this comment

  • 105. At 12:14pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    OK Siva..you run Egypt...and let`s see how long you last without millions of dollars of security around you.

    If you survive more than a few hours it will probably be because your security forces get brutal with all the "opposition" Sivas who think they can do a better job....but don`t fancy waiting until you rig an elction to prove them wrong !

    Complain about this comment

  • 106. At 12:28pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    "We already have 2 shining examples of governance based on the fear of religion: USSR and PRC; both with outstanding human rights records"






    Oldloadr, I beg to differ, since Marxism-Leninism IS a religion ["an opium for masses"], as a set of believes which have no rational basis and are not falsifiable, and which has its own schism, and to boot, has had its on (rather effective) inquisition.

    Complain about this comment

  • 107. At 12:59pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 108. At 1:00pm on 31 Jan 2011, JusticeForAll wrote:

    That's fine "Worcesterjim".

    You don't impose your idologies on the Egyptians. Egyptians are cleaver and they will decide what is good for them.

    Many nations and minorities are in a mess due to Colonial rulers including the British. Eelam Tamils had their own Tamil Kingdom and now under the chavunistic Sinhala regime, Tamils are undergoing severe sufferings since independence from the British over 60 years ago.

    Tamil Nadu Tamils too participated in the Indian freedom struggle against the British rule but the North Indians got freedom and the Tamil Nadu Tamils did not get freedom.

    Western mockery in supporting pupprt Shah of Iran that led to Iranian revolution and an Islamic hardcore regime in Iran.

    The world is more dangerous place today due to greediness and power hungry Western politicians.

    Can anyone belive that North Vietnam was bombed and vetually destroyed by the US in the pretext that Vietnam is going to be a communist regime supporting China. But today Vietnam is thriving hard to overcome poverty and achieve prosperity.

    Western supported Suharto of Indonesia was in power for 32 years and helped others rob the wealth of the nation.

    India is occupying Kashmir, terrorizing its people and the International organizations including the UN and Western nations are not doing anything to prevent human rights violations, bring accountability, end of state terrorism and war crimes.

    The world has become more dangerous due to evil minded states and politicians.


    Complain about this comment

  • 109. At 1:09pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 110. At 1:15pm on 31 Jan 2011, BluesBerry wrote:

    Yes, the United States can (unfortunately) slow down the revolution, but doesn't that in itself, indicate which side they are really on?
    Hilary Clinton may be sending signals that the United States would like Mubarek to go and for a new moderate partner to emerge; but why wasn't the United States at least skeptical about the appointment of VP Omar Sulieman. Is Omar the "moderate" of which the US sopeaks?
    The question Hilary want the people on the street to ask themselves: "How we get from where we are to where they want to be?" I found it ironic that as Hilary was suggesting this question, ElBaradei was speaking to the Eyptian People.
    Your impression, my impression is that the Obama administration is working for the change THEY WANT through the Egyptian military to which the send $1.3B/year. Mrs Clinton went out of her way to stress the army was well respected, was now instrumental in keeping order without attacking protesters, which is likely because most of the military is part of the people and support what is happening.
    Forget the USA's global reputation; it lies in tatters. The US is too frail onto itself to throw its weight around.
    As for John Bolton's contention that this is an opportunity for the Muslim Brotherhood to take over, and that they may be behind the demonstrations = SCARE TACTIC, used to work, doesn't work any more.
    Omar Suleiman has been Egypt’s Intelligence Chief for nearly two decades, is one of the most powerful intelligence directors in the world, and has also been described as “the fixer in the shadows” Since 2009, there has been speculation in Western circles that he may succeed Hosni Mubarak as Egyptian President. So, do you think this is what the Eyptian people want?
    Suleiman has a calm nature, and is considered among the most enigmatic figures in the Middle East. He is closely involved in the regions most controversial issues, because of his expertise in solving difficult problems, especially the Palestinian situation. He surely did a good job on that!
    Sulieman's affiliation with intelligence services began in the mid-1980s, when he was appointed Commander of Military Intelligence, going on to become the Head of the Egyptian General Intelligence Directorate in 1993. General Suleiman’s public appearances as Egypt’s Intelligence Chief began in 2000, when he was deployed on a series of foreign tours between Gaza, Ramallah, Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, as the Egyptian mediator for the Palestinian issue. (What mediation? Sulieman's intervention went a long way towards resolution, right?) He has also led several other mediation attempts between Hamas and Fatah, and is considered responsible for administering Egypt’s efforts regarding the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. (I wouldn't boast about that if I was Sulieman.)
    He is a perceived expert on defeating violent Islamist extremism; the Muslim Brotherhood is going to love this guy?
    AND BY THE WAY: WHAT IS HAPPENING IN EGYPT IS NOT AN ISLAMIC UPRISING!

    Complain about this comment

  • 111. At 1:23pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    ldloadr "The 9/11 hijackers were wealthy, pampered college students; they were only desperate to kill “infidels.






    Another myth persistently promulgated in BBC fora is that al-Qaida has been created with CIA money to fight 'invaders" in Afghanistan.


    Al-Qaida has been created largely with Usama ibn Laden's private money (he's a billioner's sonny) to topple Saudi House in Saudi Arabia.

    With which he lost favour.

    And no amount of BS is going to change that well documented fact.


    Complain about this comment

  • 112. At 1:39pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 113. At 1:40pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 114. At 1:51pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 115. At 1:59pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    108 V Siva I apologise for must have seemed like a cheap shot....I meant to point up the difficulty of ruling a country once one`s soap box is stowed away and the competing pressures surround a novice ruler.

    110...Yes it`s time that our biased media was forced to confront with us our meddling and mayhem and murderous behaviour in pursuit of oil.....but what next?

    Point to a nation that we dreadful imperialist fascist British left that is really any better now than when we left it?

    Complain about this comment

  • 116. At 2:07pm on 31 Jan 2011, BluesBerry wrote:

    To which revolution do you refer?
    In listening to all the American pundits, including Hilary Clinton, it occurred to me to ask: What about the west itself.
    Overnight, deaths among Egypt’s people rose to 150 and 1000s were injured. The armed forces of the Mubarak regime are killing civilians and they are killing civilians with weapons "made in America", supplied by the US at the rate of $1.3B/year – for @ the last 30 years. During these @ 30 years, the Mubarak regime could not have imprisoned its own people, impoverished its own people, torture and killing them without the support of the United States of America.
    Millions of citizens have taken to the streets of Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen, Jordan, Algeria; there are reports of unrest in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere across the Middle East & North Africa. It seems that this is ONE revolution based on emlightenment. To me, it's clear that all these people want an overthrow of repressive regimes.
    It's also clear on which side the US government and other western powers stand.
    Disingenuous ‘support’ comes out of Western capitals; these same capitals appear to be on the side of the dictators to whom they can distate policy.
    Doesn't that mean that US and other Western governments are really against democracy? In your gut, does it not feel that revolution may soon be coming to a theatre near you?
    Will the US be the next site for a struggle for real democracy, where the political parties have real differences and it truly means something whether you vote Democrat or Republican?
    Do you feel, as I do, that the United States must always have an enemy - the Soviets, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq, the war on drugs, anything will do - just to keep public's attention away from its loss of rights at home?
    Will the people of the western powers also become enlightened? Will they see the reality of capitalism, the economic system that enriches the top 5% while leaving the bottom 95% to sweat and labour for pennies?
    I think it's a dangerous move for all western powers to take the distatorial side in these Mid-Rast, North African struggles because western people are more alert now, more cognisant now, of what a terribly huge role their own Government's have played in making the conditions that have caused these revolts "over there".
    Some of these are the same policies, the same anti-democracy, the same supression that is being foisted on western peoples.
    The struggle for true democracy is not being fought "over there". The struggle is already into the US & European streets.
    So, when we talk about slowing down the revolution, are we talking about "over there" in Tunisia, Algeria, Jordan, Yemen, etc. or are we really talking about slowing down the revolution in west?

    Complain about this comment

  • 117. At 2:09pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    @ V Siva

    I agree that the Singhalese Government have allegedly been responsible for breaches of human rights in the brutal crackdown of the Tamil Tigers, with many civilians killed and displaced.

    But weren't the Tamil tigers a Terrorist Org responsible for many deaths themselves and were the first to utilise tactics of suicide bombers. They were also sponsored by illegal proceeds of crime and pressured UK Tamils to contribute to their funds

    Complain about this comment

  • 118. At 2:19pm on 31 Jan 2011, escapedfromny wrote:

    26. At 9:28pm on 30 Jan 2011, Robertson98 wrote:

    . . . When did the Bush administration (or any American administration for that matter) ever support the democracy movement? . . . .

    Oh, let's see:

    West Germany
    France
    Italy
    Belgium
    Netherlands
    Greece
    Chile
    Argentina
    Iraq
    Turkey
    Philippines
    Japan
    South Korea
    Taiwan
    Kosovo
    Croatia
    Slovenia
    Hungary
    Moldova
    Poland
    The Czech Republic
    Slovakia
    East Germany
    Lithuania
    Belarus
    Ukraine
    Latvia
    Estonia
    India
    Pakistan
    Myanmar
    Thailand
    South Africa
    Tanzania

    Are there mistakes and failures? Sure, as with any human endeavor. (funny how Pinochet is considered a monster during his dictatorship while his contemporaries like Idi Amin and Hafeza al-Assad were regular attenders at UN conferences and pretty much ignored in spite of the masses they murdered. Chile is now a stable and prosperous nation, while Uganda and Syria are still relatively destitute.)

    And when was the last European leaders made their support of democracy known?

    Cuba?
    Venezuela?
    Georgia? (the one invaded by Russia recently - Aw, well, so invasions ARE ok? What are the ground rules that make invasions acceptable?)
    Yugoslavia (remember how no European nation did anything until the US got involved?)
    Rwanda?
    Cambodia?
    Iran?
    North Korea?

    Yes, Europeans talk a great game, and have failed to deliver in every case since when? The Franco-Prussian war? The Crimea? The Congress of Vienna?

    European leftists and liberals have continuously opposed any efforts to implement democracy when a dictatorship or oligarchy can keep things quiet, and not bother the people in power. Are there exceptions to this too? Sure, but they are rare and those that do show courage and stand up for PEOPLE's rights are often condemned but their fellow "liberals".

    Complain about this comment

  • 119. At 2:41pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    "funny how Pinochet is considered a monster during his dictatorship while his contemporaries like Idi Amin and Hafeza al-Assad were regular attenders at UN conferences and pretty much ignored in spite of the masses they murdered. Chile is now a stable and prosperous nation, while Uganda and Syria are still relatively destitute."






    I happen to know Chile very well first hand.

    And while many Chileans are still dvided as to a character of his reign in early years, hardly anybody diagrees that Pinochet prevented Chile from becoming other Cuba and that he left (when he left voluntarily) a country which is second to none in South Aamerica.

    And the most qualified cadidate for membership in NAFTA.

    [much more than Brazil, let alone Argentina]



    BTW. If anybody wants to see some photos from Chile (incl. Tierra del Fuego) there's a gallery of pics at panoramio by certain 'powermeerkat'.

    Complain about this comment

  • 120. At 2:56pm on 31 Jan 2011, you must be right wrote:

    102. At 11:50am on 31 Jan 2011, davidbrent wrote:
    I stopped reading the comments after entry #19 - one of the quickest demonstrations of Godwin's Law I've seen for a while. Very poor effort.

    As for Egypt, no doubt changes will occur, the people will be happy for a while and then in a few years time, when they still have all the same problems, they'll maybe wonder why they bothered.
    _____________

    Criticism without argument = no effort.

    Complain about this comment

  • 121. At 2:57pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    escapedfromny wrote:
    26. At 9:28pm on 30 Jan 2011, Robertson98 wrote:

    . . . When did the Bush administration (or any American administration for that matter) ever support the democracy movement? . . . .

    Oh, let's see:

    West Germany
    France
    Italy
    Belgium
    Netherlands
    Greece
    Chile
    Argentina
    Iraq
    Turkey
    Philippines
    Japan
    South Korea
    Taiwan
    Kosovo
    Croatia
    Slovenia
    Hungary
    Moldova
    Poland
    The Czech Republic
    Slovakia
    East Germany
    Lithuania
    Belarus
    Ukraine
    Latvia
    Estonia
    India
    Pakistan
    Myanmar
    Thailand
    South Africa
    Tanzania







    So much for 'Americans unable to find U.S. on a contour map of the world'

    Complain about this comment

  • 122. At 3:04pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    118. At 2:19pm on 31 Jan 2011, escapedfromny wrote:
    26. At 9:28pm on 30 Jan 2011, Robertson98 wrote:

    . . . When did the Bush administration (or any American administration for that matter) ever support the democracy movement? . . . .

    Oh, let's see:

    West Germany
    France
    Italy
    Belgium
    Netherlands
    Greece
    Chile
    Argentina
    Iraq
    Turkey
    Philippines
    Japan
    South Korea
    Taiwan
    Kosovo
    Croatia
    Slovenia
    Hungary
    Moldova
    Poland
    The Czech Republic
    Slovakia
    East Germany
    Lithuania
    Belarus
    Ukraine
    Latvia
    Estonia
    India
    Pakistan
    Myanmar
    Thailand
    South Africa
    Tanzania

    Are there mistakes and failures? Sure,


    Sorry Myanamar?

    By supporting democracy you mean muttering words.

    Hardly counts against arming murderous dictators. Lessee Mubarak, Ben Ali, Suharto etc etc.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    And when was the last European leaders made their support of democracy ?

    Er Ivory Coast - black but still a country.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Georgia? (the one invaded by Russia recently - Aw, well, so invasions ARE ok?


    Sorry what did the US do for Georgia after urging it to provoke Russia? That's right nothing.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    What are the ground rules that make invasions acceptable?)

    Good question. A basic knowledge of the country and a clear idea of what you want to do are good starts.

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Yes, Europeans talk a great game, and have failed to deliver in every case since when? The Franco-Prussian war? The Crimea? The Congress of Vienna?


    1919, 1939 Eastern Europe (including Russia) Pretty big record.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    European leftists and liberals have continuously opposed any efforts to implement democracy when a dictatorship or oligarchy can keep things quiet, and not bother the people in power. Are there exceptions to this too? Sure, but they are rare and those that do show courage and stand up for PEOPLE's rights are often condemned but their fellow "liberals".


    Paranoid political fantasies are no argument. It is a fact openly admitted that the murderous Musharaff, the hideous Mubarak, the Sadistic Saudis have all been called good allies of the US even as their security forces tortured and killed children etc.

    Who can forget Condi Rice being in Cairo in the last "election" and bleating about it not being fair, but still signing off on guns and torture equipment.



    Complain about this comment

  • 123. At 3:14pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    Some very good points being made here and no ...it`s not simple or straightforward... but can I suggest that Europe and the USA stop any more secret meddling and return to base in their own countries ...and tackle the task of introducing real meaningful democracy AT HOME!

    That will never happen while global capitalists and their markets continue to make monkeys of us and our politicians.

    So we have to confront all the global capitalists and moneylenders and currency speculators who have used us to fight their wars and make them rich using money that they have not given us but LENT US AT INTEREST!

    AND we can start the job of creating a fairer world by getting them to finance a new home for the Palestians of the same standard as that enjoyed by the Israelis.....or help the Israelis return to the safety of western world.

    Then the global capitalists can do a deal with us about severely reducing our indebtedness ...because a lot of it was caused by their jiggery-pokery on Wall Street in the last decade.

    And they can either accept regulation or face having their assets (our assets?)taken away from them and possibly go to prison.....like their associate Bernie Madoff!And if they argue the toss let`s remind them that they need us one heck of a lot more than we need them!

    Complain about this comment

  • 124. At 3:15pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    119. At 2:41pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:
    "funny how Pinochet is considered a monster during his dictatorship while his contemporaries like Idi Amin and Hafeza al-Assad were regular attenders at UN conferences and pretty much ignored in spite of the masses they murdered. Chile is now a stable and prosperous nation, while Uganda and Syria are still relatively destitute."


    I happen to know Chile very well first hand.

    And while many Chileans are still dvided as to a character of his reign in early years, hardly anybody diagrees that Pinochet prevented Chile from becoming other Cuba and that he left (when he left voluntarily) a country which is second to none in South Aamerica.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Oh I know a bit about Chile too and the families of the victims of his sadistic torturers tend to disagree with seeing Pinochet as a "hero".

    And is mass murder ever justified? Didn't Jo Stalin indistrialise the USSR so it could resist Nazi invasion?

    Did that justify the purges?

    Hitler was good because WWII ended the colonial empires?

    Read George Orwell (an author)about the blithering idiocy of this type of historical relativism.


    As for Pinochet leaving voluntarily - ho ho. He did make sure his cronies kept effective power and engineered himself a pardon and generous financial benefits..

    Brazil incidently has one of the largest economies in the world. Comparing it to Chile is farcical. Almost as stupid as comparing an Andean republic with massive natural resources to an island in the Caribbean.

    Complain about this comment

  • 125. At 3:17pm on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:

    108. At 1:00pm on 31 Jan 2011, V Siva wrote:
    You don't impose your idologies on the Egyptians. Egyptians are cleaver and they will decide what is good for them.

    Many nations and minorities are in a mess due to Colonial rulers including the British. Eelam Tamils had their own Tamil Kingdom and now under the chavunistic Sinhala regime, Tamils are undergoing severe sufferings since independence from the British over 60 years ago.
    __________________________________________________________________
    1. OK, I’m confused; are we not to impose our ideology? However, we Americans (and Brits, I believe) were chastised earlier on MM’s Egypt blogs for putting our national interests ahead of our ideology in supporting despotic regimes that did our bidding, instead of forcing them into democracy. However, now you want us to butt out of Egypt’s ideology. Not that anybody on this blog has any control over our country’s foreign policy, but if they did, what would you really want?
    2. Now personally, I would like a more military centric foreign policy where we gave out no foreign aid, but we bombed the crap out of any country that interfered with our national interests, but somehow, I don’t think you all would prefer my method any more than the status quo (although, I noticed no Muslims were complaining about American interference when we were bombing the crap out of the Serbs to protect the Bosnians who are mostly… Muslim. Now, you can whine about US interference (and I agree that our gov’t does interfere in the ME too much due to our schizo domestic energy policy), but all you all have to do is get your act together and become a world power, then you could have it your way and my gov’t would have to produce more energy domestically.


    Complain about this comment

  • 126. At 3:17pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    121. At 2:57pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:
    escapedfromny wrote:
    26. At 9:28pm on 30 Jan 2011, Robertson98 wrote:

    . . . When did the Bush administration (or any American administration for that matter) ever support the democracy movement? . . . .

    Oh, let's see:

    West Germany
    France
    Italy
    Belgium
    Netherlands
    Greece
    Chile
    Argentina
    Iraq
    Turkey
    Philippines
    Japan
    South Korea
    Taiwan
    Kosovo
    Croatia
    Slovenia
    Hungary
    Moldova
    Poland
    The Czech Republic
    Slovakia
    East Germany
    Lithuania
    Belarus
    Ukraine
    Latvia
    Estonia
    India
    Pakistan
    Myanmar
    Thailand
    South Africa
    Tanzania







    So much for 'Americans unable to find U.S. on a contour map of the world'
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------


    But proof if proof we needed that Americans have no idea of their own history.

    America supported democracy in India? By arming Pakistan and letting it have nuclear weapons?

    Democracy does not mean Coca Cola

    Complain about this comment

  • 127. At 3:21pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    117. At 2:09pm on 31 Jan 2011, Studio One wrote:
    @ V Siva

    I agree that the Singhalese Government have allegedly been responsible for breaches of human rights in the brutal crackdown of the Tamil Tigers, with many civilians killed and displaced.

    But weren't the Tamil tigers a Terrorist Org responsible for many deaths themselves and were the first to utilise tactics of suicide bombers. They were also sponsored by illegal proceeds of crime and pressured UK Tamils to contribute to their funds
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    All may be true, but that doesn't justify mass killing and displacement of civilians.

    And the Tamils did not rebel for the sake of it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 128. At 3:27pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:


    111. At 1:23pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:
    ldloadr "The 9/11 hijackers were wealthy, pampered college students; they were only desperate to kill “infidels.

    Another myth persistently promulgated in BBC fora is that al-Qaida has been created with CIA money to fight 'invaders" in Afghanistan.


    Al-Qaida has been created largely with Usama ibn Laden's private money (he's a billioner's sonny) to topple Saudi House in Saudi Arabia.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Yeh and that billionaire sonny jim got his money and stored his money through the US etc

    His money sonny was founded on good-ole petro dollars.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    With which he lost favour.

    And no amount of BS is going to change that well documented fact.


    Oh dear. You do know they made a Hollywood film about the CIA et al arming Al Quiada's good friends the Taliban (without whom 9/11 we are assured would not have taken place).

    It featured Tom Hanks as a drink sozzled right wing fanatic.

    So the US support for Al Quaida one way and another is open record, sorry for you

    Complain about this comment

  • 129. At 3:42pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    Too Much Muderation
    When the music hits
    Whether you feel no pain
    But all we is do exterminate babylon heart
    mind and it memorize the brain
    well this is not a shame
    it is not the same
    'cos the youth them changed

    Complain about this comment

  • 130. At 3:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 131. At 3:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    Egypt our ally ???

    At the UN, Egypt voted fewer times WITH the USA than CUBA, VIETNAM and ZIMBABWE !!!

    (Source NPR, DR Show)

    Complain about this comment

  • 132. At 3:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    125. At 3:17pm on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:
    108. At 1:00pm on 31 Jan 2011, V Siva wrote:
    You don't impose your idologies on the Egyptians. Egyptians are cleaver and they will decide what is good for them.

    Many nations and minorities are in a mess due to Colonial rulers including the British. Eelam Tamils had their own Tamil Kingdom and now under the chavunistic Sinhala regime, Tamils are undergoing severe sufferings since independence from the British over 60 years ago.
    __________________________________________________________________
    1. OK, I’m confused; are we not to impose our ideology? However, we Americans (and Brits, I believe) were chastised earlier on MM’s Egypt blogs for putting our national interests ahead of our ideology in supporting despotic regimes that did our bidding, instead of forcing them into democracy. However, now you want us to butt out of Egypt’s ideology. Not that anybody on this blog has any control over our country’s foreign policy, but if they did, what would you really want?


    Yes its like this try to follow.

    When a teacher tells you they would like you to encourage your children's learning, becasue you are important in their life, they do not mean stab them with cattle prods, deprive them of food etc.

    In other words do domething, but the right thing.

    ANd the right thing in this case is to support the cries of the Egyptian people for freedom and do not give Mr Mubarak any more money for torture camps.

    Carpet bombing Cairo's hospitals and schools would be the wrong thing to do.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------



    2. Now personally, I would like a more military centric foreign policy where we gave out no foreign aid, but we bombed the crap out of any country that interfered with our national interests, but somehow, I don’t think you all would prefer my method any more than the status quo .

    And after the US was reduced to a snmoking heap after having attacked four nuclear powers the shattered survivors would not be fans either.

    (although, I noticed no Muslims were complaining about American interference when we were bombing the crap out of the Serbs to protect the Bosnians who are mostly… Muslim. Now, you can whine about US interference (and I agree that our gov’t does interfere in the ME too much due to our schizo domestic energy policy), but all you all have to do is get your act together and become a world power, then you could have it your way and my gov’t would have to produce more energy domestically.


    This is a bit confused. You seem to thiink the US interferes for the "hell of it" . It doesn't.

    Complain about this comment

  • 133. At 3:50pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    "Democracy does not mean Coca Cola"



    So have a Pepsi. Even a Twist one.

    Readily available from Adelaide to Brisbane before they went under water.

    [not Coca-Coa.]

    Complain about this comment

  • 134. At 3:53pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    In the 50's Tamils wanted equality in education and employment opportunities but the signghala gov incorrectly refused.

    In the 80's the Tamil Tigers killed 30 soldiers in a bus, and the singhalese flipped out and rioted killing and burning tamils and properties

    As a result the tigers got world wide sympathy support and funding. The singhala gov agreed to make concessions to them but they wanted half the country.

    The tigers killed several hundreds / thousands in terrorism and attacked villages slaying everybody, and bombed targets in Colombo several times, killed Rajiv Ghandi and Prenadahsa the Indian and Sri Lankan Prime Ministers / Presidents

    They were also funded by drugs exports and corruption even buying guns and weapons from Sri Lankan governments reps.

    In 2010 they built a makeshift plane and attacked targets when everyone was watching Sri Lanka play cricket

    In 2010 the Government's eventually killed the Tiger's leaders after 30 years civil war, which was ignored and forgotten by the West.

    The Tigers were Terrorists and criminal syndicates

    Complain about this comment

  • 135. At 3:55pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    131. At 3:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:
    Egypt our ally ???

    At the UN, Egypt voted fewer times WITH the USA than CUBA, VIETNAM and ZIMBABWE !!!

    (Source NPR, DR Show)
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    And Georgy, COndi, Hillary all called Mubraka a "good ally".

    Source - any news organisation

    Complain about this comment

  • 136. At 3:57pm on 31 Jan 2011, MagicKirin wrote:

    ref #123
    AND we can start the job of creating a fairer world by getting them to finance a new home for the Palestians of the same standard as that enjoyed by the Israelis.....or help the Israelis return to the safety of western world.

    Then the global capitalists can do a deal with us about severely reducing our indebtedness ...because a lot of it was caused by their jiggery-pokery on Wall Street in the last decade.

    And they can either accept regulation or face having their assets (our assets?)taken away from them and possibly go to prison.....like their associate Bernie Madoff!And if they argue the toss let`s remind them that they need us one heck of a lot more than we need them!

    __________

    The U.S does not owe the Palestinians anything, the world has coddled them far too long.

    It's time for the Arab world to make reperations to Israel for funding Palestinian terrorism.

    Israel , Egypt and legitimate nations should be our focus.

    Not thugs

    Complain about this comment

  • 137. At 3:58pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    Those seeing the world upside down are hardly in a position to ever make a sane comment about North America.

    Let alone these United States, about which they can only dream.

    [sour grapes]



    P.S. Try Bolivia, comrade. Or Nicaragua. Let alone Cuba :-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 138. At 4:01pm on 31 Jan 2011, hms_shannon wrote:

    118. At 2:19pm on 31 Jan 2011, escapedfromny wrote:

    And when was the last European leaders made their support of democracy known?
    -----------------------------------------
    When we gave democratic independence to the following,what they did with it is up to them.The USA had they waited would have its independence with out that war of 1776.Did the end justify the means,WHO CARES.With the United States some times one can`t win the last time the British French & Israel tried to sort out Egypt the Americans along with Russia came down on us like a ton of bricks,Suez crisis...

    British Empire included many of the colonies that as countries later formed the Commonwealth of Nations (British Commonwealth). The United Kingdom still includes England and most of the British Isles, but the Empire was effectively dissolved during the 20th century.

    Remaining British Dependent Territories

    The 14 sovereign possessions outside Britain were renamed as the "British Overseas Territories" in 2002. They are
    Anguilla
    British Antarctic Territory
    Bermuda
    British Indian Ocean Territory
    British Virgin Islands
    Cayman Islands
    Falkland Islands
    Gibraltar
    Montserrat
    St. Helena and Dependencies (Ascension Island and Tristan da Cunha)
    Turks and Caicos Islands
    Pitcairn Islands
    South Georgia and South Sandwich Islands
    the Sovereign Base Areas on Cyprus (Akrotiri and Dhekelia)




    Other Countries and territories of the British Empire (variously 1500-1997)

    Aden (Yemen)
    Afghanistan * protectorate 1839-1919
    Australia
    Bahamas
    Bahrain
    Barbados
    Basutoland (Lesotho)
    Bechuanaland (Botswana)
    British America (United States of America)
    British Cameroon (Cameroon)
    British Guyana (Guyana)
    British Honduras (Belize)
    British Somaliland (Somaliland)
    British Solomon Islands (Solomon Islands)
    Brunei
    Burma (Myanmar)
    Canada
    Ceylon (Sri Lanka)
    Cook Islands (New Zealand)
    Cyprus
    Egypt * protectorate 1882-1922
    Fiji
    Gambia
    Gilbert and Ellice Islands (Kiribati and Tuvalu)
    Gold Coast (Ghana)
    Grenada
    Transjordan
    Hong Kong
    India (India, Pakistan, Bangladesh)
    Iraq
    Ireland
    Jamaica
    Kenya
    Kuwait
    Malaya (West Malaysia)
    Maldive Islands
    Malta
    Mauritius
    Miskito (Mosquito) Coast (Nicaragua / Honduras)
    Newfoundland (Canada)
    New Hebrides (with France)(Vanuatu)
    New Zealand
    Nigeria
    North Borneo (Sabah, Malaysia)
    Nyasaland (Malawi)
    Oman
    Papua New Guinea
    Palestine (Israel)
    Qatar
    Rhodesia (Zimbabwe and Zambia)
    Sarawak (East Malaysia)
    St Kitts (St. Kitts and Nevis)
    St Lucia
    St Vincent
    Seychelles
    Sierra Leone
    Singapore
    South Africa
    Sudan
    Swaziland / Ngwane
    Tanganyika (Tanzania)
    Tonga
    Transjordan (Jordan)
    Trinidad (Trinidad and Tobago)
    Trucial Oman (United Arab Emirates)
    Uganda
    Western Samoa (Samoa)
    Zan


    Complain about this comment

  • 139. At 4:01pm on 31 Jan 2011, Scott0962 wrote:

    I think it's important to note that the offical reaction of the American government is not reflective of the American people in this case.

    President Obama is listening to the advice of the "experts" at the State Dept. and is no doubt being reminded that America should avoid the appearance of abandoning a friendly regime or risk promoting instability in the region and the need to allay the fears of allies in the region such as Saudi Arabia. That's the expected reaction of government policy types whose job is think about consequences not just in Egypt but around the region.

    For ordinary Americans the issue is much simpler: the people of Egypt want freedom from a repressive regime and that is something that which generates a lot of sympathy here. I think it is that attitude on the part of the American public that has prevented President Obama from giving the Mubarak regime the support that an ally would normally expect from us in a crisis.

    Complain about this comment

  • 140. At 4:02pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    The Tamils were bought in by British Colonialists from Southern India to perform the Administration of their Empire and work in their Tea Estates as the Singhalese refused to work for their enforced Masters (or Massa's)

    Complain about this comment

  • 141. At 4:06pm on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:

    131. At 3:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:
    Egypt our ally ???

    At the UN, Egypt voted fewer times WITH the USA than CUBA, VIETNAM and ZIMBABWE !!!
    ______________________________________

    Exactly why I said that all foreign aid, if we continue foreign aid at all, should be strictly on a toe-the-line quid pro quo basis. You only get to vote against us when we say so, otherwise, kiss your US dollars good-bye.

    Complain about this comment

  • 142. At 4:15pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    134. At 3:53pm on 31 Jan 2011, Studio One wrote:
    In the 50's Tamils wanted equality in education and employment opportunities but the signghala gov incorrectly refused.

    In the 80's the Tamil Tigers killed 30 soldiers in a bus, and the singhalese flipped out and rioted killing and burning tamils and properties

    As a result the tigers got world wide sympathy support and funding. The singhala gov agreed to make concessions to them but they wanted half the country.

    The tigers killed several hundreds / thousands in terrorism and attacked villages slaying everybody, and bombed targets in Colombo several times, killed Rajiv Ghandi and Prenadahsa the Indian and Sri Lankan Prime Ministers / Presidents

    They were also funded by drugs exports and corruption even buying guns and weapons from Sri Lankan governments reps.

    In 2010 they built a makeshift plane and attacked targets when everyone was watching Sri Lanka play cricket

    In 2010 the Government's eventually killed the Tiger's leaders after 30 years civil war, which was ignored and forgotten by the West.

    The Tigers were Terrorists and criminal syndicates
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------


    But the Singhalese army and poplace were hardly guilt free were they? They has denied the Tamils their rights for decades and some of their leaders remained very hardline.

    Idiotic remarks that the Tigers were criminals means nothing. SO were the Russian partisans, the American patriots etc. The government hated them, that is axiomatic.

    ANd if the Singhalese government was selling them guns that makes the Singhalese government criminal

    Complain about this comment

  • 143. At 4:15pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 144. At 4:17pm on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:

    132. At 3:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    This is a bit confused. You seem to think the US interferes for the "hell of it" . It doesn't.
    ______________________________________________

    Guess you missed this part from above:
    Now, you can whine about US interference (and I agree that our gov’t does interfere in the ME too much due to our schizo domestic energy policy)...

    Although, I spelled it out more completely in earlier posts, but the US involvement in the ME is all about the oil, even though we have more reserves, but there are certain factions in our country that benefit from keeping us dependant on foreign oil. That dependency keeps us involved in the ME. Even though, I support Israel’s right to exist, we could do that with an occasional port of call of the 6th Fleet. The reason we are still in Iraq is the oil. The only involvement that isn’t directly about the oil is Af’stan; it’s about no more 9/11s.

    As far as another “Nuclear Power” being able to do great harm to the US, if it’s not Russia or the UK, I wouldn’t bet on it. But it would take too long to explain the logistics here.

    Complain about this comment

  • 145. At 4:18pm on 31 Jan 2011, Scott0962 wrote:

    re. #126. At 3:17pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:
    "America supported democracy in India? By arming Pakistan and letting it have nuclear weapons?

    Democracy does not mean Coca Cola"
    --------------

    I think it would be obvious to anyone by now that a nation which wants to develop nuclear weapons can do so without the permission or the assistance of the U.S. Just ask the Russians, the Chinese, the North Koreans or wait a bit and ask the Iranians. We didn't "let" Pakistan have nuclear weapons, they did it on their own.

    If America and India haven't enjoyed close relations in the past it wasn't because we didn't support and respect democracy in India it was because India's leaders chose to forge ties with the Russians as a balance to India's troubled relations with it's neighbor China, that was what prompted the American alliance with Pakistan. In retrospect, both India and the U.S. would have been better served by closer ties, we have much more in common with eath other than with those we chose as allies of convenience.

    Complain about this comment

  • 146. At 4:20pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    136. At 3:57pm on 31 Jan 2011, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #123
    AND we can start the job of creating a fairer world by getting them to finance a new home for the Palestians of the same standard as that enjoyed by the Israelis.....or help the Israelis return to the safety of western world.

    Then the global capitalists can do a deal with us about severely reducing our indebtedness ...because a lot of it was caused by their jiggery-pokery on Wall Street in the last decade.

    And they can either accept regulation or face having their assets (our assets?)taken away from them and possibly go to prison.....like their associate Bernie Madoff!And if they argue the toss let`s remind them that they need us one heck of a lot more than we need them!

    __________

    The U.S does not owe the Palestinians anything, the world has coddled them far too long.

    It's time for the Arab world to make reperations to Israel for funding Palestinian terrorism.

    Israel , Egypt and legitimate nations should be our focus.

    Not thugs

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    As the 136. At 3:57pm on 31 Jan 2011, MagicKirin wrote:
    ref #123
    AND we can start the job of creating a fairer world by getting them to finance a new home for the Palestians of the same standard as that enjoyed by the Israelis.....or help the Israelis return to the safety of western world.

    Then the global capitalists can do a deal with us about severely reducing our indebtedness ...because a lot of it was caused by their jiggery-pokery on Wall Street in the last decade.

    And they can either accept regulation or face having their assets (our assets?)taken away from them and possibly go to prison.....like their associate Bernie Madoff!And if they argue the toss let`s remind them that they need us one heck of a lot more than we need them!

    __________

    The U.S does not owe the Palestinians anything, the world has coddled them far too long.

    It's time for the Arab world to make reperations to Israel for funding Palestinian terrorism.

    Israel , Egypt and legitimate nations should be our focus.

    Not thugs
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------

    Palestinian papers make clear the US owes Palestinians massive reparations and a national apology and Condi Rice should face international criominal charges over her scheme.

    Israel has been fully revealed as not wanting peace and being in the hands of fanatical extremists.

    Complain about this comment

  • 147. At 4:22pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    141. At 4:06pm on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:
    131. At 3:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:
    Egypt our ally ???

    At the UN, Egypt voted fewer times WITH the USA than CUBA, VIETNAM and ZIMBABWE !!!
    ______________________________________

    Exactly why I said that all foreign aid, if we continue foreign aid at all, should be strictly on a toe-the-line quid pro quo basis. You only get to vote against us when we say so, otherwise, kiss your US dollars good-bye.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hmmm have a bit of a think why this might not be a good idea.


    Complain about this comment

  • 148. At 4:26pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    139 Scot...the problem "your" politicians have is that your politics are corrupted by the need for presidents to have vast amounts of money to back their election campaigns.

    All around a president there will be "representatives" of those financiers to remind him that THEY decide American policy ....and that his election promises to the electorate don`t matter half as much as what THEY want done.

    Until that is addressed your president will be no more in charge of the USA than Mubarak is of Egypt today!

    Complain about this comment

  • 149. At 4:30pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    139. At 4:01pm on 31 Jan 2011, Scott0962 wrote:
    For ordinary Americans the issue is much simpler: the people of Egypt want freedom from a repressive regime and that is something that which generates a lot of sympathy here. I think it is that attitude on the part of the American public that has prevented President Obama from giving the Mubarak regime the support that an ally would normally expect from us in a crisis.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    No ally should expect to be helped to crush its own popukation

    Complain about this comment

  • 150. At 4:41pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    144. At 4:17pm on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:
    132. At 3:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    This is a bit confused. You seem to think the US interferes for the "hell of it" . It doesn't.
    ______________________________________________

    Guess you missed this part from above:
    Now, you can whine about US interference (and I agree that our gov’t does interfere in the ME too much due to our schizo domestic energy policy)...

    Although, I spelled it out more completely in earlier posts, but the US involvement in the ME is all about the oil, even though we have more reserves, but there are certain factions in our country that benefit from keeping us dependant on foreign oil. That dependency keeps us involved in the ME. Even though, I support Israel’s right to exist, we could do that with an occasional port of call of the 6th Fleet. The reason we are still in Iraq is the oil. The only involvement that isn’t directly about the oil is Af’stan; it’s about no more 9/11s.

    As far as another “Nuclear Power” being able to do great harm to the US, if it’s not Russia or the UK, I wouldn’t bet on it. But it would take too long to explain the logistics here.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Well I'm guessing that gambling on a thermonuclear war over some trivial incident would not exactly suit the US public. And US business would not exactly be overjoyed either since it needs overseas customers and resources.



    Complain about this comment

  • 151. At 4:44pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 152. At 4:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    145. At 4:18pm on 31 Jan 2011, Scott0962 wrote:
    re. #126. At 3:17pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:
    "America supported democracy in India? By arming Pakistan and letting it have nuclear weapons?

    Democracy does not mean Coca Cola"
    --------------

    I think it would be obvious to anyone by now that a nation which wants to develop nuclear weapons can do so without the permission or the assistance of the U.S. Just ask the Russians, the Chinese, the North Koreans or wait a bit and ask the Iranians. We didn't "let" Pakistan have nuclear weapons, they did it on their own."


    Hardly the Pakistan army has been on the US payrole for ages. This is openly admitted.

    You can argue about what is not known, but not with public information.


    No one can credibly say the US was in the dark when the very men organising the building were being paid in US dollars

    And we are constantly assured the US "knows" about Iran's intentions, yet we are expected to beleive it had no clue about Pakistan?

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If America and India haven't enjoyed close relations in the past it wasn't because we didn't support and respect democracy in India it was because India's leaders chose to forge ties with the Russians as a balance to India's troubled relations with it's neighbor China, that was what prompted the American alliance with Pakistan. In retrospect, both India and the U.S. would have been better served by closer ties, we have much more in common with eath other than with those we chose as allies of convenience.


    There is something in this except for the fact that the US was supposed to be an opponent of communist China too.

    And Pakistan, a religous/ethnic state like Israel, was a brutal military dictatorship, the US has done itself no favours by encouraging its generals.

    Complain about this comment

  • 153. At 4:52pm on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    #136 MagiKirin

    "The U.S does not owe the Palestinians anything, the world has coddled them far too long."

    Don´t you mean the Israelis ?????

    Complain about this comment

  • 154. At 4:55pm on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    It appears the Mubarak Party is planning a counter- demonstration.

    ---and wanting bloodshed !

    Even Communist East Germany (DDR) wasn´t that stupid !

    Complain about this comment

  • 155. At 4:56pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    @ Simon who has reached twenty one
    I'm not denying the Sri Lankan Government were not corrupt or hard line or free of guilt.

    But despite that the Tigers were a Terrorist Organization, forcibly recruiting children and girl soldiers, hiding in jungles, rampaging and attacking remote villages slaying hundreds and laid land mines all over the country.

    One time there were masses of explosives found in the top International school and as a result the Schools all across the island were forced to shut down for a year. As a result of the civil war the country failed to develop for 30 years. At the end of it all, the terrorism and war became a scam (drugs, weapons and funding) to make money for leaders on both sides (working in collusion).

    Complain about this comment

  • 156. At 4:56pm on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:

    148. At 4:26pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:
    139 Scot...the problem "your" politicians have is that your politics are corrupted by the need for presidents to have vast amounts of money to back their election campaigns.

    All around a president there will be "representatives" of those financiers to remind him that THEY decide American policy ....and that his election promises to the electorate don`t matter half as much as what THEY want done.

    Until that is addressed your president will be no more in charge of the USA than Mubarak is of Egypt today!
    _______________________________________________________
    Fortunately, it costs so much to run for POTUS that both parties have to accept donations from competing sources. Many large donors give freely to both parties. Are they buying influence? No, they are just buying a seat at the table no matter who wins. Now, there are some that go only one way, like the major Unions always donate to the Dems (whether their membership wants them to or not). The US chamber of commerce mostly goes for the GOP, but no guarantees; in the last election they donated to some Dems based on record. IMHO, the cost of running is so huge, now, and so much money is required, it loses most of its relevance as far as influencing the parties/candidates. I have donated my meager resources to presidential campaigns before, I expected no influence, I just didn’t want the other guy to win (I knew I didn’t like what that candidate stood for).

    Complain about this comment

  • 157. At 4:58pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    All Governments are corrupt, even the preachy western ones

    Trust no one son

    Complain about this comment

  • 158. At 5:02pm on 31 Jan 2011, Oldloadr wrote:

    150. At 4:41pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:
    Well I'm guessing that gambling on a thermonuclear war over some trivial incident would not exactly suit the US public. And US business would not exactly be overjoyed either since it needs overseas customers and resources.
    ___________________________________________

    Guess you are too young to remember the Cuban Missile Crisis (they made a movie called the Missile of October). JFK was more popular after going to the brink than he was before, especially since it appeared to the American public that the USSR had unilaterally backed down (we now know that JFK let Khrushchev have a bone for face saving purposes for his own political career, as well).

    Complain about this comment

  • 159. At 5:05pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    Apparently Velupillai Prabhakaran the leader of the Tamil Tigers got his inspiration and motivation from watching the Hollywood Rambo movie First Blood

    Complain about this comment

  • 160. At 5:10pm on 31 Jan 2011, polite and kind wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 161. At 5:10pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    The Tigers were founded by a one man show Prabhakaran who was in hiding for most of the conflict (probably sending faxes out).. and the moral of the story Ladies and Gentlemen is - in order to Kill and Defeat Terrorism you have to Kill their leaders dead before they can spread.

    Born November 26, 1954
    Velvettithurai, Sri Lanka
    Died Nanthikadal lagoon, Mullaitivu, Sri Lanka
    Cause Killed by gunfire [1]
    Alias(es) Thambi
    Motive Sri Lankan Tamil nationalism
    Charge(s) Crime against humanity[2], Militant use of children in Sri Lanka[3][4], terrorist, murder, organized crime and terrorism conspiracy
    Penalty Arrest warrant issued by Colombo High Court[5]
    Death warrant issued by Madras High Court, India
    Status Deceased
    Occupation Founder & Leader of the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) movement in Srilanka.
    Spouse Mathivathani Erambu
    Parents Father: Veraswami Thiruwengadam Velupillai
    Mother: Velupillai Parvathi Pillai[6]
    Children Charles Anthony
    Duwaraka
    Balachandran

    Complain about this comment

  • 162. At 5:14pm on 31 Jan 2011, polite and kind wrote:


    "Exactly why I said that all foreign aid, if we continue foreign aid at all, should be strictly on a toe-the-line quid pro quo basis. You only get to vote against us when we say so, otherwise, kiss your US dollars good-bye.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hmmm have a bit of a think why this might not be a good idea."

    would that be because when we do say no they already have what they need;)

    Saddam Hussain was supported by many states the French the UK and the USA and one day he took all he had been given and rolled into it's oil stealing neighbour. Man we didn't like that.

    Once Saudi Arabia has it's fighters what will we do if they decide to take their country back using their second amendment right.

    Complain about this comment

  • 163. At 5:15pm on 31 Jan 2011, polite and kind wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 164. At 5:23pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 165. At 5:23pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    156 Oldie...Why do you need such large amounts of money to run for president? The whole world knows why! We can see where the US administration`s priorities are...and what they don`t give a damn about.

    Way back when the GI`s finally arrived in England in `41 they had money and cigarettes and stockings to buy our girls with.....but they told us just how dirt poor they had been back in the USA before the war.

    You have money a plenty for your sacred cows.... it`s such a shame those cows aren`t back in the USA!

    Complain about this comment

  • 166. At 5:24pm on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    An interesting thought.

    A young Egyptian lady has just remarked (BBC) that she is soooo excited as she is witnessing 1968 and 1989 together !

    ---and we ´ancients´ had to wait 30 years !

    -- life is unjust.

    Complain about this comment

  • 167. At 5:33pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 168. At 5:41pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 169. At 5:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, Scott0962 wrote:

    re.#148. At 4:26pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:
    139 Scot...the problem "your" politicians have is that your politics are corrupted by the need for presidents to have vast amounts of money to back their election campaigns.

    All around a president there will be "representatives" of those financiers to remind him that THEY decide American policy ....and that his election promises to the electorate don`t matter half as much as what THEY want done.

    Until that is addressed your president will be no more in charge of the USA than Mubarak is of Egypt today!

    ------------

    We are well aware of the role of campaign money in our politics, thank you, but you exagerate it's role. Campaign contributions can give access to politicians and some degree of influence but they don't buy votes and without votes politicians don't keep their cozy jobs so there are limits to the amount of influence the money people can excercise over politics.

    By the way, show me a country where money doesn't influence politics and politicians.

    As for the president not being "in charge" of the USA, he never has been. Our presidents govern, they don't rule. If you don't understand the difference then you should read up on our system of government. Our founders didn't organize our government to be efficient, they organized it to minimize the possibility of it becoming a dictatorship. That's why Congress has to approve the money to run the executive branch and the Supreme Court can overturn any decision by Congress or the president if they exceed the authority granted by the people through the constitution. The president's position carries a good deal of prestige and influence but in terms of actual power he has surprisingly little control without the support and assent of the other two branches of government.

    Complain about this comment

  • 170. At 5:50pm on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    #161 Studio one

    As perhaps one of the few on the blog (non-Sri Lankan) who has visited Sri Lanka 3 times from the mid 70´s --- what are you talking about ?

    The British chose the Tamils over the Singhalese in the COLONY -- and after independence the Tamils suffered for it.

    Point your finger at the UK for the bloodbath !

    Complain about this comment

  • 171. At 5:50pm on 31 Jan 2011, polite and kind wrote:

    Studio One. Why is it so many are determined to ignore your example?
    I don't get it. You bring to the table an part of the world we have little comprehension of because there is not enough oil there;) sorry. I am with you that sometimes we support rebels without thinking Why. just because they rebel.
    The USA has it's own version of mindless rebellion going on these days.
    They seemed to have slowed since one of their "not me" numbers shot the wrong person but other than that I can not see them slowing down. Age is getting to some of them though.

    Complain about this comment

  • 172. At 6:00pm on 31 Jan 2011, Scott0962 wrote:

    re. #152. At 4:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:
    145. At 4:18pm on 31 Jan 2011, Scott0962 wrote:
    re. #126. At 3:17pm on 31 Jan 2011, Simon21 wrote:
    "America supported democracy in India? By arming Pakistan and letting it have nuclear weapons?

    Democracy does not mean Coca Cola"
    --------------

    I think it would be obvious to anyone by now that a nation which wants to develop nuclear weapons can do so without the permission or the assistance of the U.S. Just ask the Russians, the Chinese, the North Koreans or wait a bit and ask the Iranians. We didn't "let" Pakistan have nuclear weapons, they did it on their own."


    Hardly the Pakistan army has been on the US payrole for ages. This is openly admitted.

    You can argue about what is not known, but not with public information.


    No one can credibly say the US was in the dark when the very men organising the building were being paid in US dollars

    And we are constantly assured the US "knows" about Iran's intentions, yet we are expected to beleive it had no clue about Pakistan?

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    If America and India haven't enjoyed close relations in the past it wasn't because we didn't support and respect democracy in India it was because India's leaders chose to forge ties with the Russians as a balance to India's troubled relations with it's neighbor China, that was what prompted the American alliance with Pakistan. In retrospect, both India and the U.S. would have been better served by closer ties, we have much more in common with eath other than with those we chose as allies of convenience.


    There is something in this except for the fact that the US was supposed to be an opponent of communist China too.

    And Pakistan, a religous/ethnic state like Israel, was a brutal military dictatorship, the US has done itself no favours by encouraging its generals.
    ----------------

    Agreed although there was a time when the generals weren't in charge of Pakistan, once they took over the relationship was already established and was allowed to continue but as a matter of geo-political necessity, not because we were sympathetic to authoritarian military rule. It's a failing of many, if not most, governments that they tend to be more comfortable dealing with the devil they know rather than risk the uncertainty of change.

    I remember the first President Bush making his "chicken Kiev" speech telling the people of Ukraine not to rock the boat when the Soviet Union was on the verge of falling apart, it cost him my vote in the next election.

    Complain about this comment

  • 173. At 6:09pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 174. At 6:23pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    Gosh! Egypt has slipped out of the frame again.....but perhaps it`s as well that we start to examine the complete absence of real democracy back here before we talk airily about "freeing" other people.

    What troubles me is that there seem so few on "our" side wanting to free British and American people....and so many around here whose priorities clearly lie with taking huge amounts of our money and spending it on propping up some distinctly dodgy regimes and causes.

    In the end we all have to take sides...and I am with the British people in wanting to rein in this Wall Street empire and free my own people from a feudal capitalist system and the crippling burden of debt.

    That`s where I stand...what about you others?

    Complain about this comment

  • 175. At 6:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    Scott: I remember the first President Bush making his "chicken Kiev" speech telling the people of Ukraine not to rock the boat when the Soviet Union was on the verge of falling apart, it cost him my vote in the next election."




    and I remember what happened to the first PoS who called me a troll.

    [As Forrest Gump would say: s..t happen]

    Complain about this comment

  • 176. At 6:51pm on 31 Jan 2011, BluesBerry wrote:

    UNITED STATES' National Guard - peacekeeping role or revolution busting?
    The US Army said that the National Guard would maintain its presence in Sinai despite the potential collapse of President Hosni Mubarak's Government. Apparently (though it's news to me) the United States has @ 1,000 troops who serve in the Multinational Force: function - to monitor the peace treaty between Egypt & Israel.
    Statement from US Army: "If the situation in Egypt changes the MFO and ILARNG (Illinois Guard) is capable of taking appropriate measures to safeguard American troops."
    What's this all about? I didn't even know these American troops were there, did you?
    On Jan. 30, Egypt said it would close the Rafah border terminal along the Gaza Strip, the closure to be indefinite.
    On Jan. 28, the army said the Illinois Army National Guard's 2nd Battalion hasn't been affected by the unrest in Egypt, even though there were reports of gun battles between Bedouins & Egyptian security forces in Sinai.
    MFO admits that it has been hindered by disruption in commercial communications, particularly the Internet. Oh? Why should it be? Doesn't the army have its own system?
    Officials said the National Guard's 123rd Field Artillery was deployed to Sinai in May 2010. They said the unit was scheduled to leave Egypt in May of this year.
    So, let me get this straight: in the 29th year of peace between Egypt and Israel, a Multinational Forcer was set in place to monitor the peace.
    If it looks fishy and smells fishy, it may just be fishy.

    Complain about this comment

  • 177. At 6:57pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re provocateurs...

    Fo tdhe record:


    I've spent many years in the trash removal business but I'm still polite and kind.


    Until too much trash accumulates.


    Complain about this comment

  • 178. At 6:58pm on 31 Jan 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    Re: "Democracy does not mean Coca Cola"


    So have a Pepsi.

    Complain about this comment

  • 179. At 7:04pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    @ 170 Tamils were bought in to Ceylon by the Brits from Tamil Nadu in Southern India to work their plantations, (i.e. the old divide and rule strategy to conquer and rule at work once again - as employed the world over in the British Empire colonial system).

    Tamils had their own language and religion (Hinduism). The indigenous Sri Lankan's Singhalese were majority Budhist plus some villagers were turned Christian by the British, Dutch and Portuguese 'settlers'* i.e. Colonialists).

    The Singhalese resented the Tamils and wrongly discriminated against them in education and work and refused their original requests to be treated as equals. When they eventually consented to give them equal rights it was too late as the Tigers wanted the country to be divided in two, demanding strategic land in the North and East which was unfeasible and unworkable.

    ======================================================

    Complain about this comment

  • 180. At 7:05pm on 31 Jan 2011, U14752247 wrote:

    Sri Lanka is a strategic naval link between West Asia and South East Asia. The Singhalese community forms the majority of the population; Tamils, form the largest ethnic minority. Other communities include Moors, Burghers, Malays and the aboriginal Vedda people.

    (*) It's strange i.e. hypocritical how Europeans consider themselves 'Settlers' when they go to foreign lands such as Africa, Asia, Australia but black, browns and yellows are considered and called immigrants or foreigners even when they are born in Britain or come from the Commonwealth. I guess Immigration laws and restrictions were set up to get the dark skinned 'undesirable' folks out or their levels of numbers controlled.

    Complain about this comment

  • 181. At 7:43pm on 31 Jan 2011, Ad wrote:

    Help! Help! I've got a cat back from the vet, stacked some logs, had dinner, and tuned into this blog and it's all about Sri Lanka. Which planet is this?

    Latest news from Egypt (is this the right blog?!) is that the Army has said it will not take military action against the demonstrators. In which case the police will have to try to keep order and they are hated by the crowd. I think all that the USA and other nations can do for now is watch events carefully, do some very quiet diplomatic moves to persuade Mubarak to make democratic reforms quickly or get out, look after their citizens trying to leave Egypt, and hope the Brotherhood don't get the upper hand.

    Most Brits in Egypt are on the Red Sea at Sharm-el-Sheikh where they are more in danger of being eaten by sharks or contracting Pharaoh's Revenge than being overrun by demonstrators. I'm amazed to learn there are 30,000 Brits in Egypt - how do they find the time?

    Everyone, do try and keep reasonably on-topic please or I'm lost, I just don't have time to read all that blether every time I come online :O) but there is gold among the dross if only I had the time to read it!

    Complain about this comment

  • 182. At 9:07pm on 31 Jan 2011, d_m wrote:

    #165, worcesterjim:

    I see, it's all the fault of the buyer. The seller remains blameless. That's a convenient way to look at it.

    Complain about this comment

  • 183. At 9:19pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:

    181 Ad...forgive the digression..but how is Tibby? And less importantly do we have a member of the Muslim Brotherhood to put their point of view?

    Complain about this comment

  • 184. At 9:52pm on 31 Jan 2011, quietoaktree wrote:

    As far as I am aware the Egyptian Army (forces) have businesses, cheap housing and shopping etc. --all better off than the general population. Those perks are also at stake if Mubarak goes.

    Does anyone know if the police also have such perks ?

    The Army wishing to be on ANY ´winning´side may explain its behavior ?

    Complain about this comment

  • 185. At 10:14pm on 31 Jan 2011, Ad wrote:

    Jim,

    It's a wild cat, we have taken her to the vet to be sterilised after she had 4 wild kits. She's doing fine thanks.

    There is apparently a feeling among Egyptians that the Army is different from the police, 'They're our brothers' I heard one say on an interview. Perhaps the Army thinks Mubarak's days are over and they're waiting on the sidelines to see who comes next.

    Complain about this comment

  • 186. At 00:07am on 01 Feb 2011, LucyJ wrote:

    Ad wrote: I think all that the USA and other nations can do for now is watch events carefully, do some very quiet diplomatic moves to persuade Mubarak to make democratic reforms quickly or get out, look after their citizens trying to leave Egypt, and hope the Brotherhood don't get the upper hand.
    ----------------------
    Does it even really matter how many democratic reforms Mubarack does when much of the crowd is so against him? When people get to that point where they are so pumped up about something, its usually pretty hard to change their minds...

    When is Egypt's next election?

    I honestly don't know how he's holding on, but twill be wild tomorrow I am sure when they do the million people march towards the palace...

    The question is who are the Egyptian people?
    Are they mostly conservative or moderate?
    What do the Egyptian people stand for?

    Watching the Egyptian people in these trying times, I can't help but think how lucky we are in USA (I am not being superior, I'm just stating my appreciation), we have it really good and we shouldn't forget it!!!

    Although many need to be cautious tomorrow, its the biggest ice storm in USA in 50 years!!!

    No school, no work, yay!!! :)

    Bob Dylan asks in Blowin' in the wind...

    How many years can some people exist before they're allowed to be free?

    I just wonder how many of the protesters are moderates and protesting not having to do with religion???

    Complain about this comment

  • 187. At 00:11am on 01 Feb 2011, LucyJ wrote:

    Ad wrote: Perhaps the Army thinks Mubarak's days are over and they're waiting on the sidelines to see who comes next.
    -------
    If Egypt's military takes over, could Egypt turn into military dictatorship like Revolutionary Guard in Iran?

    I guess we're just lucky Egypt doesn't have nuclear weapons...cause' if they're breaking into the famous museums, including beheading mummies and whatnot, who knows what else is going on...

    And the fact that the news said over 500 women and girls disappeared during uprising makes me leery and feel much compassion for the females in Egypt...

    Complain about this comment

  • 188. At 00:11am on 01 Feb 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 189. At 00:14am on 01 Feb 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    180. At 7:05pm on 31 Jan 2011, Studio One wrote:
    Sri Lanka is a strategic naval link between West Asia and South East Asia. The Singhalese community forms the majority of the population; Tamils, form the largest ethnic minority. Other communities include Moors, Burghers, Malays and the aboriginal Vedda people.

    (*) It's strange i.e. hypocritical how Europeans consider themselves 'Settlers' when they go to foreign lands such as Africa, Asia, Australia but black, browns and yellows are considered and called immigrants or foreigners even when they are born in Britain or come from the Commonwealth. I guess Immigration laws and restrictions were set up to get the dark skinned 'undesirable' folks out or their levels of numbers controlled.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Got it in one mate, and not only just in Britain. Make the "mistake" of being born the wrong colour and see how easy it is to immigrate or travel.

    Complain about this comment

  • 190. At 00:16am on 01 Feb 2011, LucyJ wrote:

    Pmk wrote: [As Forrest Gump would say: s..t happen]
    ------

    My fave line is from the beginning: Life is like a box of chocolates you never know what you'll get! Lol...

    I love Forrest Gump...but I think its also cause' Tom Hanks is such a great actor and he made the movie what it was, although, overall the whole cast was very talented.

    I also love all the different ways to make shrimp that Bubba gives...

    Complain about this comment

  • 191. At 00:20am on 01 Feb 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    161. At 5:10pm on 31 Jan 2011, Studio One wrote:
    The Tigers were founded by a one man show Prabhakaran who was in hiding for most of the conflict (probably sending faxes out).. and the moral of the story Ladies and Gentlemen is - in order to Kill and Defeat Terrorism you have to Kill their leaders dead before they can spread.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Or you can try o remove the causes of grievance by legal means and prevent the injustice.

    The British spent 800 years killing the leaders of the catholic Irish. Didn't seem to stop the violence though

    Complain about this comment

  • 192. At 00:33am on 01 Feb 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    169. At 5:47pm on 31 Jan 2011, Scott0962 wrote:
    re.#148. At 4:26pm on 31 Jan 2011, worcesterjim wrote:
    139 Scot...the problem "your" politicians have is that your politics are corrupted by the need for presidents to have vast amounts of money to back their election campaigns.

    All around a president there will be "representatives" of those financiers to remind him that THEY decide American policy ....and that his election promises to the electorate don`t matter half as much as what THEY want done.

    Until that is addressed your president will be no more in charge of the USA than Mubarak is of Egypt today!

    ------------

    We are well aware of the role of campaign money in our politics, thank you, but you exagerate it's role. Campaign contributions can give access to politicians and some degree of influence but they don't buy votes and without votes politicians don't keep their cozy jobs so there are limits to the amount of influence the money people can excercise over politics.

    By the way, show me a country where money doesn't influence politics and politicians.

    As for the president not being "in charge" of the USA, he never has been. Our presidents govern, they don't rule. If you don't understand the difference then you should read up on our system of government. Our founders didn't organize our government to be efficient, they organized it to minimize the possibility of it becoming a dictatorship. That's why Congress has to approve the money to run the executive branch and the Supreme Court can overturn any decision by Congress or the president if they exceed the authority granted by the people through the constitution. The president's position carries a good deal of prestige and influence but in terms of actual power he has surprisingly little control without the support and assent of the other two branches of government.
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Not actually true. Andrew Jackson for one ignored the supreme court, Lincoln ruled like a dictator and numerous presidents have undertaken extensions of auhority.

    Sadly the supreme court is near a laughable institution as it is wrecked by the way it is comprised. Unlike the British law lords, the Supreme Court is a poliical body selcted by partisanship and "deals".

    Whether it holds anyone to account depends on the politics involved, not the justice.

    The constitution was intended to entrench a white, wealthy, male, ruling class and it has been very successfull in that.

    Look at the US government over the decades and now and see how rigid it is. Compare it to Australia (which has a farcical constitution, but a good supreme court system) where women rule many of the states and in fact the whole country. Or New Zealand or the Scandinavian states.

    And two of those are immigrants (one from Arizona, but you can't have everything)

    Complain about this comment

  • 193. At 00:35am on 01 Feb 2011, Simon21 wrote:

    186. At 00:07am on 01 Feb 2011, LucyJ wrote:
    Ad wrote: I think all that the USA and other nations can do for now is watch events carefully, do some very quiet diplomatic moves to persuade Mubarak to make democratic reforms quickly or get out, look after their citizens trying to leave Egypt, and hope the Brotherhood don't get the upper hand.
    ----------------------
    Does it even really matter how many democratic reforms Mubarack does when much of the crowd is so against him? When people get to that point where they are so pumped up about something, its usually pretty hard to change their minds...

    When is Egypt's next election?

    I honestly don't know how he's holding on, but twill be wild tomorrow I am sure when they do the million people march towards the palace...

    The question is who are the Egyptian people?
    Are they mostly conservative or moderate?
    What do the Egyptian people stand for?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------

    There are 80 million people in Egypt. What do you mean "what do they stand for?"

    What would 80 million Americans stand for? 80 million chinese.

    To which Egyptians are you referring?

    Complain about this comment

  • 194. At 00:46am on 01 Feb 2011, JusticeForAll wrote:

    140. At 4:02pm on 31 Jan 2011, Studio One wrote:

    Studio One needs some history lessons on Eelam and Sinhala Lanka.

    If you study Jurisprudence, you will know the difference of Tamils in Sri Lanka and Tamil Kingdom.

    The Last Kandyan King was not a Sinhala when the British controlled Kandy.

    Only the Up country Tamils were brought by the British to work in the Estates as they were hard working and disciplined than the Sinhala.

    Sinhala Chavunism, denial of human rights, freedom and equality to the Tamils and as a result of state terrorism and Sinhala hooliganism, the Tigers were born with the help of progresive Indian leaders including Mrs. Indira Gandhi and MGR. This is history and now the Tigers are no more.

    Sinhala chavunism, hooliganism, state terrirsm, human rights abuses, war crimes are continued against innocent Tamils and the so called International Community did not take any meaningful steps to prevent it or bring accountability.

    Progressive Sinhalese may start a popular uprising against the corrupt and criminal minded Sinhala in time to come. But now it is the duty of the International Community to investigate war crimes and human rights abuses and deliver justice to the victims - Sinhala, Tamils and Muslims.

    Complain about this comment

  • 195. At 01:02am on 01 Feb 2011, JusticeForAll wrote:

    117. At 2:09pm on 31 Jan 2011, Studio One wrote

    Studio One - It is the responsibility of the government in power to apply Rule of Law equally, protect the Citizens of the nations and ensure Separtion of Powers.

    Tigers were a product of State terrorism, Human rights abuses, denial of freedom and Sinhala hooliganism.

    Tigers were supported by progressive Indian leaders including Mrs. Indira Gandhi and MGR and it is wellknown to the world. The current Indian regime under Sonia Gandhi and Manmohan Singh has collaborated with the Rajapakse regime in defeating the Tigers and committing War Crimes against innocent Tamils. That's why globally Human rights organizations and Leaders are calling for War crimes and Human Rights Investiagtions in Sri Lanka to bring the criminals to justice and deliver justice to teh victims and their families.

    The Sri Lankan regime as alleged to have committed unspeakable crimes against Tamils, refusing to allow an independent war crimes and human rights investigation in Sri Lanka. british Channel 4 TV broadcasted several evidences of war crimes and those are at the hands of the UN now.

    In a recent development, there is a civil law suit filed against Mahinda Rajapakse in Texas, US. No one knows how the next Indian regime will react to Sri Lanka as there are ongoing protests, awareness amoung Tamil Nadu Tamils on the crimes committed against Tamils in Sri Lanka and demanding for justice, equality, freedom and democracy.

    Time will tell us and we can wait and see the accountability of the allege war criminals and their regime leaders.

    Complain about this comment

  • 196. At 01:04am on 01 Feb 2011, LucyJ wrote:

    Simon wrote: Look at the US government over the decades and now and see how rigid it is. Compare it to Australia (which has a farcical constitution, but a good supreme court system) where women rule many of the states and in fact the whole country.
    -----------
    So how many Aborigines are in office in Austraila?

    What's wrong with both men and women ruling?

    I want to vote for someone based on who they are, not their gender!
    ------------
    Simon wrote: The constitution was intended to entrench a white, wealthy, male, ruling class and it has been very successfull in that.
    -----------
    Where does it say that in the Constitution, Simon?
    -----------
    Simon wrote: There are 80 million people in Egypt. What do you mean "what do they stand for?"
    ------------
    I am asking what are the Egyptian people like on the inside?
    Who are they and what makes them who they are?

    I know its not hte smartest question, but I am trying to learn more about who the Egyptian people are, because I want to understand why they are protesting- is it simply a sour economy combined with corruption?

    (a lot of countries have that right now)
    ------------
    Simon wrote: What would 80 million Americans stand for? 80 million chinese.
    ------------
    Ouch...
    -------------
    Simon wrote: To which Egyptians are you referring?
    ---------
    The majority...is the majority moderate or conservative?
    Do the conservatives accept hte moderates?
    Is there a divide in protesters or are they all protesting in unison?

    Complain about this comment

  • 197. At 01:36am on 01 Feb 2011, JusticeForAll wrote:

    I cannot believe that in the 21st Century, incorrect and biased comments are written on a global blog. The same way Ben Ali, Mubarak, Mahinda Rajapakse, Manmohan Singh, Sonia Gandhi, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and other ruthless leaders have been telling their people.

    Shah or Iran, Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines and Suharto of Indonesia did the same thing and they were thrown out of their countries by popular uprising of their people.

    How long people are going to listen to this propaganda. Sooner or later the people are going to realize that they are at the receiving end and the so called leaders are actually deceiving them.

    Thanks to advanced technology, Social media that may bring peace and stability on earth as most of our leaders have failed to deliver fair justice, apply Rule of Law equally, equality, freedom, respect human rights and practice democracy.

    What is happening in Egypt will spread to other nations where leaders fail to work for the benefit of their people and country.

    Complain about this comment

  • 198. At 08:42am on 01 Feb 2011, powermeerkat wrote:

    "The U.S gives 1.5 Billion dollars to Egypt every year. As an American, I can tell you that America deserves just about all the criticism it can get in this situation."





    Considering that most of that money has been going to Egyptian army, and considering position that army has taken re massive protests against Mubarak and his regime U.S. must have been doing something right. :-)

    Complain about this comment

  • 199. At 10:54am on 01 Feb 2011, Ad wrote:

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.

  • 200. At 00:46am on 03 Feb 2011, Chryses wrote:

    powermeerkat, ("Obama's caution on Egypt is winning no friends" #285. At 12:07pm on 02 Feb 2011)
    "... Is stating that "many BBC journalists have moved to Al-Jazeera just to make more money" an accusation? Rather than merely an observation ? ..."
    In order for it to be an observation, the event would need to be substantiated. If you are if a position to substantiate your claim, please do. Until then it is merely another unsubstantiated claim.

    "... And do you have any info/data proving that what I've written is false? ..."
    You made the claim; you need to substantiate it. You have not yet done so.

    "... Besides, since when changing jobs to make more money somewhere else is something someone can or should be 'accused' of? ..."
    Can you substantiate you claim that any BBC journalists have moved to Al-Jazeera just to make more money?

    "... I've asked you several times to explain it to me ..."
    You made the claim; you need to substantiate it.

    "... So far - no answer. [I'm starting to wonder why] ..."
    So far, no substantiation. It is pretty obvious why.

    "... And at this point, considering your clear obsession with that minor off-topic subject - I am starting to believe that reasons my original statement has obviously mightily upset you might have nothing to do with logics ..."
    Which of my posts indicates to you that I am "obviously mightily upset?"

    "... And more with touchiness ..."
    Which of my posts indicates to you my "touchiness?"

    "... [not that I'm implying that your long time African/Mid Eastern experience has in any way influenced your biased position; not at all.] ..."
    Perhaps you consider those who are familiar with the subject material "biased," but I doubt that everyone will agree with you.

    "...Happy weather, and try to protect yourself from the heat in your area ..."
    That is not too difficult, at it is currently 4C here.

    "... For I wish you well."
    That's good to know.

    Complain about this comment

View these comments in RSS

BBC iD

Sign in

BBC navigation

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.