and Cairo ignites

Aside from the obvious national self interest of ours to keep the Muslim Brotherhood from imposing Sarhia Law; how do the extremists on here fall out?

Should we support Mubarak as he strategically contains the Islamo-republic expansion or do we clamor for a democratic vote which may well bring about an Islamic Theocracy?

Furthermore this is not an Arabic state, these are Egyptians - the same rules do not apply.

As far as the Islamic Brotherhood goes, I'm not all that worried. Any group that thinks they can become popular by bombing the populace has some serious mental and spiritual deficiencies to try to compensate for. Look what happened when PNAC tried it.

Last edited by Tall Paul (2011-01-28 22:03:38)

I think the US should grab the moral high ground, if for nothing more than to have some credibility with whatever government shakes out of this mess, and mess it will be.  We don't need another Iran.

The ramifications go beyond an Islamic government.  We've had 2 hot wars in that desert since '67, and nearby oil is at risk.

To be honest, I'm an isolationist; I've always felt the America's inheritant strength was gained by avoiding involvement.  But what isolationist truly means is now up in the air - do we accept all refugee's believing it will increase our overall strength - or does that fact that half of the worlds population want's to join our ranks and the cold hard reality that we cannot absorb 3 billion poor people dampen that belief?

It appears that the Muffin Man does require payment after all, and us Amerikan's need to either put up or shut up.

Last edited by Emmeran (2011-01-28 22:09:59)

opsec wrote:

You're an isolationist as long as we're over there and they're not over here.

That's where you are selectively forgetful; I disparaged Bush for putting our boys in harms way without cause and I won't pause to deride your silly ass for the same sentiment.  Troll someone with a failing memory bitch-eyes, mine works just fine.

Emmeran wrote:

opsec wrote:

You're an isolationist as long as we're over there and they're not over here.

That's where you are selectively forgetful; I disparaged Bush for putting our boys in harms way without cause and I won't pause to deride your silly ass for the same sentiment.  Troll someone with a failing memory bitch-eyes, mine works just fine.

I wasn't trying to troll you, nor was it meant to paint you a warmonger.   "Isolationist" is normally used to describe foreign policy, and your Glenn Beckingscribing it into an immigration issue causes a bit of cognitive dissonance.

Edit: Extra "n" on the Glen.

Last edited by opsec (2011-01-29 00:08:14)

opsec wrote:

Emmeran wrote:

opsec wrote:

You're an isolationist as long as we're over there and they're not over here.

That's where you are selectively forgetful; I disparaged Bush for putting our boys in harms way without cause and I won't pause to deride your silly ass for the same sentiment.  Troll someone with a failing memory bitch-eyes, mine works just fine.

I wasn't trying to troll you, nor was it meant to paint you a warmonger.   "Isolationist" is normally used to describe foreign policy, and your Glen Beckingscribing it into an immigration issue causes a bit of cognitive dissonance.

That's the problem with language today.  It's become so muddled, defined, then redefined that we are no longer able to properly express an idea without confusion.  I think a revamping of the English language is in order, at this point it's become Orwellian, and the slave are attacking one another over it.

Tall Paul wrote:

Newt Gingrich and Rodger Ailes are the two assholes who started the modern use of such disinformation.

Oh yes, they rediscovered the ancient form using semiotics to lie to and control the populace.   This technique had long been lost to politicians, but they somehow came in possession of an ancient scroll from fabled Nixon era....

pppfffftt.

choad wrote:

George Orr wrote:

I'm not well-versed in the history of 20th-Century Egypt, but I have the impression that Mubarak is another Marcos/Shah/Saddam, a despot our country has helped keep in power because he's "friendly" to our interests.

Close enough. The US occupation of Iraq in 2003 was fundamentally a replay of the Britain's 1956 regime change misadventure in Egypt. Dunno where you'd find it but you get a chance, watch the BBC documentary, "The Other Side of Suez".

Pretty much on the mark.  The US never learns from others mistakes, nor their own.

Dmtdust wrote:

choad wrote:

George Orr wrote:

I'm not well-versed in the history of 20th-Century Egypt, but I have the impression that Mubarak is another Marcos/Shah/Saddam, a despot our country has helped keep in power because he's "friendly" to our interests.

Close enough. The US occupation of Iraq in 2003 was fundamentally a replay of the Britain's 1956 regime change misadventure in Egypt. Dunno where you'd find it but you get a chance, watch the BBC documentary, "The Other Side of Suez".

Pretty much on the mark.  The US never learns from others mistakes, nor their own.

No!!  This time it will be different though because we'll bring them democracy!  If it doesn't work it'll be because they're ignorant to how much we're trying to help them!  Dropping a shitload of munitions on population centers always helps bring people freedom!

Tall Paul wrote:

It's a bit more than that, politics has always bred liars. What's happening now is an attack on information itself. By overwhelming the various media with a barrage of the good, the bad and the batshit crazy they're hoping to not only drown out legitimate news but to attack the very idea that 'The News' itself has any value at all. Now investigation and publishing (in the convenient form of Wikileaks) have been branded by some as criminal.

I don't disagree with your healthy cynicism, but I disagree this is something new.  I'd also question your phrasing of the problem given that Fox "News" is swallowed whole by so much of the US demographic.

I have reasons for not getting into the "debate", but IMO Wikileaks is the best thing that has happened to the fourth estate since Murrow.  Loose lips may sink ships, but closed minds cause genocides.

fnord wrote:

opsec wrote:

fnord wrote:

If invaded, Israel will launch all of its nukes, including the ones aimed at Europe.  It's known they intend to take out Europe (and possibly get in a few strikes at us from their submarines) if it looks like they're about to go under.

I'm sure your sources are impeccable. Moving on.

Ignoring the fact that Israel is a rouge terrorist state prone to psychotic actions isn’t option for world leaders.

The above article was written by Palestinian Information Center Staff source

Edited to cite source.

Last edited by opsec (2011-01-29 02:18:40)

opsec wrote:

I don't disagree with your healthy cynicism, but I disagree this is something new.  I'd also question your phrasing of the problem given that Fox "News" is swallowed whole by so much of the US demographic.

I would say that the scale of it is new, although the scale of available information has also increased; so fair enough. As for Fux News being swallowed, I have to keep reminding myself that half the population has a below average IQ.

fnord wrote:

From Wikipedia:
In a September 2003 interview in Elsevier (Dutch weekly) on Israel and the dangers it faces from Iran, the Palestinians and world opinion van Creveld stated: We possess several hundred atomic warheads and rockets and can launch them at targets in all directions, perhaps even at Rome. Most European capitals are targets for our air force…. We have the capability to take the world down with us. And I can assure you that that will happen before Israel goes under.[4]

I like Wikipedia, but I don't use it as an argument from authority

He has a bachelor’s degree in applied science (with an emphasis on environmental biology) was awarded by the Queensland Institute of Technology in Australia. He also holds a diploma of education from the University of Queensland (a graduate qualification necessary for Ham to begin his initial career as a science teacher in the public schools in Australia). He has been awarded two honorary doctorates: a Doctor of Divinity (1997) from Temple Baptist College in Cincinnati, Ohio and a Doctor of Literature (2004) from Liberty University in Lynchburg, Virginia.

As a young Earth creationist, Ham believes that the entire universe was created about 6,000 years ago and that Noah's flood occurred about 4,500 years ago. He believes that this explains how a small number of animals carried on Noah's ark could produce the biological diversity observed on Earth. Ham also believes that dinosaurs co-existed with modern humans. He supports this view primarily with biblical scripture and makes the claim that he uses the same evidence that scientists use.

Also, Jesus rode Dinosaurs and the Israelis are stupid enough to invite nuclear retaliation.  OK, to be fair Ken only believes the first thing.

Dirckman wrote:

Jesus Christ, but I'm drunk....................

Amen.

Dmtdust wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/01/29/egypt.middle.east.reaction/index.html?iref=NS1

Come on... back on subject!

CNN?!  Pfeh.

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

Or, if you're paranoid about Homeland Security monitoring your surfing habits:
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2011/01/29/egypt.html
or
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/

George Orr wrote:

Dmtdust wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/01/29/egypt.middle.east.reaction/index.html?iref=NS1

Come on... back on subject!

CNN?!  Pfeh.

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

Or, if you're paranoid about Homeland Security monitoring your surfing habits:
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2011/01/29/egypt.html
or
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/

Al Jazeera's coverage has been great; I haven't bothered with CNN. The NY Times has been pretty good, as well. Haaretz is worth checking out, as well.

fnord wrote:

Ignoring the fact that Israel is a rouge terrorist state prone to psychotic actions isn’t option for world leaders.

Oh, no!  Have they gone rouge?

Why can't this play itself out regardless of the media?

Taint wrote:

Ideally, at any rate.

Perhaps I am minimizing the situation.  I am never happy with over reaction.
Hey Arkansas

Dirckman wrote:

I've actually seen Ken Ham in person.  I visited the Creation Museum a few years back and got a few chuckles in the process.  It was pretty sad except for the theater experience which had vibrating chairs and a mist of water to emulate the biblical flood.  The fucking place is full of Mennonites and when Ken Ham walked through the lobby they surrounded him like a bunch of groupies.  He is one ugly motherfucker, his skin is much worse than how it looks in the pictures.  Jesus Christ, but I'm drunk....................

Well that could be a good gig for a fugly guy stuck in the heartland. Where the groupies hot? And which are more attractive the Mennonite or the Amish girls?

George Orr wrote:

Egypt Shuts Down al-Jazeera Operations

Thanks for re-centering the topic.  Now it's a question of the devil you know and devil you don't; I'm betting America chooses the former, the Islamic Brotherhood is not a friend of Mr. & Mrs. Suburbia.

Of course, decades of American meddling may have polluted the place beyond redemption....

Read Robert Fisk's excellent The Great War for Civilisation: The Conquest of the Middle East to see that, although the US and other western governments have played their parts in the Middle East, the Arab world has had a long-term natural inclination towards "strongmen" as leaders of government. Perhaps the West has encouraged that to avoid pesky democracies, but the Arab populations have to take their own share of responsibility too.

Good to see any population railing against dictatorships; and the Ayotollah in Iran must surely see how hollow his claims are given the recent unrest among his own youth popualtion.

choad wrote:

Gray wrote:

the Arab world has had a long-term natural inclination towards "strongmen" as leaders of government.

I'm exaggerating, a little, but the fuck would anyone ever expect of a population with only one book?

Resource rich, under educated citizenry, obscene returns on investment and as easily describing Central America as it does the Philippines.

Our own general public, force fed a steady diet of box scores and sports reporting masquerading as politics, ain't much better.