|
|
12-11-2012, 04:03 PM
We back them in the UN constantly and recently, we corral Egypt, and we underwrite Iron Dome and what do we get for it in return? Constant pissing and moaning about what a meanie our president is and a spit in the eye on settlements.Originally Posted by JB
12-11-2012, 05:56 PM
Most Egyptians know that Morsi has assumed dictatorial powers. The real issue is whether they care. The urban professional classes, religious minorities and pretty much anyone else who doesn't want to live under Sharia law are adamantly opposed to Morsi and the Brotherhood, but they are not the majority, and they will be overridden in the referendum on the constitution.
The Egyptian military is less concerned with protecting the nation than it is with protecting itself. Morsi's attacks on Mubarak, who was the Chief of Staff of the Air Force before Sadat appointed him to the vice presidency, is an attack on one of their own, and the generals see the vacating of his acquittal by Morsi, the replacement of the prosecutor and the command for a new trial as a preluede to an attack on them. The majority of them know only too well what will happen when Morsi has consolidated power and turns his attention to them, because they've seen the ongoing purges of secular officers in the Turkish military by the Ergodan government.
As for who you trust, who cares?
First, one has to ask why Iron Dome offends you. Would you prefer that Hamas and Hezbollah be able to rain rockets on Israel without the Israelis having any means of defense? Second, exactly what do you mean by "we corral Egypt?" Exactly what has the US done to reign in Morsi's Islamists? And since when is it a crime to build housing for your own people in your own capital? Or do you claim that Jerusalem is not the capital of Israel?
OTOH, what do we get in return for the aid that we give Egypt and the Palestinians? In the case of Egypt, we now have an Islamist regime that is about to impose a viciously undemocratic constitution on the country and a president who assumes dictatorial powers and threatens to tear up the peace treaty with Israel if the Israelis insist on defending themselves against terrorists. In the case of the Palestinians, the aid that we give them (which ends up in the pockets of the leadership of Fatah and Hamas) hasn't gotten them to abide by the settlements that they agreed to in Oslo. Fatah's charter still calls for the destruction of Israel, while Hamas' calls for the murder of all Jews in the world. Perhaps you think that we should negotiate a settlement with Hamas? One in which they accept the murder of, say, half the Jews in the world, in exchange for something more tangible, like more land? Oh, and we also get Hamas raining rockets on Israel and siting them among civilians in violation of the laws of land warfare, in order to raise their own civilian casualty rates for propaganda purposes. Perhaps it would be easier if Hamas simply killed its own people directly? No, wait, they already do that:
Cameras record Gaza's gruesome reality
A POPULAR pastime in Gaza is swapping gruesome footage of dead or dying victims of the Strip's incessant violence.
The images used to be almost exclusive legacies of clashes with Israeli forces but last year that changed. Now being far more keenly traded are snapshots of Palestinian fratricide, gruesome images taken by "militia-cams' that record scenes for posterity.
Spend any time near the emergency ward of Gaza's Shifa Hospital and security staff or ward workers will offer a look at their mobile phones, which they'll quickly switch to video mode to show images of victims of intra-Palestinian clashes being wheeled in agony from ambulances.
Sit in a town square for more than five minutes and you'll be quickly encircled by youths clamouring to outdo each other with images of death and mayhem.
A veritable library of the "intrafada" now exists in Gaza among militias and clans. Most were added during 2007, when the numbers of intra-Palestinian deaths jumped by 800 per cent - from 55 to 439 - almost all of the deaths in Gaza.
Last year was, by any measure, a revolutionary year in Palestinian politics. More than at any time in the previous two decades, the two most dominant political blocs were willing to bid for influence through the barrels of their Kalashnikovs.
Another factor that contributed to the violence, however, was a creeping radical Islamicisation - a small but growing number of youths in Gaza hitching themselves to an al-Qa'ida world view that pitches them against the rest of the Strip and renders, as fair game to be killed, anyone seen as acting "un-Islamicly'.
A spate of so-called honour-killings of women accounted for about 25 per cent of the body count - far higher than any of the years before.
Political tensions had steadily risen in Gaza since March 2006, when Hamas was sworn in as the elected Government of the Palestinian territories, including the West Bank. The poll win three months earlier terminated 40 years of the rule of the Fatah movement and its predecessors, and ended the patronage of many Palestine Liberation Organisation chieftains and warlords. Violence didn't erupt immediately but, by late December that year, it was in full swing.
Your kneejerk support for anyone who opposes Israel ends up putting you on the side of terrorists, Islamist thugs and 7th century lunatics. You really need to think before you post your snark.
12-11-2012, 06:14 PM
He has been brushed back by the same forces that ended Mubarak's regime. The citizens of Egypt don't appear to be shrinking violets and if the Brotherhood keeps offing people in counter protests, Morsi's reign will be rather short.
Regardless, your fear is the general fear of those who do not like the fundamental flaw in democracy; people who disagree with you get to vote as well.
Well, Morsi gave them the authority to arrest civilians, right? We will see if the Pro-Morsi thugs get rounded up.The Egyptian military is less concerned with protecting the nation than it is with protecting itself. Morsi's attacks on Mubarak, who was the Chief of Staff of the Air Force before Sadat appointed him to the vice presidency, is an attack on one of their own, and the generals see the vacating of his acquittal by Morsi, the replacement of the prosecutor and the command for a new trial as a preluede to an attack on them. The majority of them know only too well what will happen when Morsi has consolidated power and turns his attention to them, because they've seen the ongoing purges of secular officers in the Turkish military by the Ergodan government.
A wholly different group of individuals than those who gives a rat's ass if you think Morsi is a democrat.As for who you trust, who cares?
Well, you lasted longer than I thought you could. Took awhile before you got to the last refuge.First, one has to ask why Iron Dome offends you. Would you prefer that Hamas and Hezbollah be able to rain rockets on Israel without the Israelis having any means of defense?
12-11-2012, 06:53 PM
OK but Barry is conspicuously quiet about it now. That was kinda the point on why I was being an ass and asking the same thing in this thread everyday. No Barry fans were playing though. ;)
Barry was all about the "government of the people, yadda, yadda" when Morsi was being swept in but now...nothing. Why?
12-12-2012, 02:28 PM
My fear is a second Iran. Contrary to your illusions, the Muslim Brotherhood is not a benign group of democrats. They are fanatics who seek to undermine democracies throughout the world and replace them with Sharia-compliant Islamist states. Ten years ago, nobody thought that they would be the reigning power in Egypt, but they are. They are also the reigning power in Gaza, and through their alliances with other Islamist groups (including al Qaeda, which is run by Ayman al Zawahiri, who cut his teeth in the Brotherhood), they are on the verge of controlling Libya and Syria. None of this seems to bother you, but then, you never seem to take anything beyond the level of snark one-liners.
No, we'll see the pro-Morsi thugs round up the civilians who are protesting. The Brotherhood is already running detention facilities.
After beatings of protesters, Egypt opposition accuses Brotherhood of unleashing violenceIt's the same kind of violence that the SturmArbeitlung used in Germany and the Bolsheviks in Russia. It's typical totalitarian thuggery.
Published December 11, 2012
Associated Press
CAIRO – They showed a military-style precision: Crowds of bearded Islamists proclaiming allegiance to Egypt's President Mohammed Morsi and chanting "God is great" as they descended on tents set up by anti-Morsi protesters outside the presidential palace, swinging clubs and firing rifles. They set up a detention facility, interrogating and beating captured protesters.
The scene from bloody clashes outside the presidential palace a week ago hangs over Egypt's political crisis, as a daunting sign of how much more violent the confrontation between Morsi's Islamist supporters and the opposition that has launched a giant wave of protests against him can become.
Opponents of Morsi accuse his Muslim Brotherhood supporters of unleashing highly trained cadres — fired up with religious slogans — to crush their political rivals. They fear last week's violence was a signal that the Brotherhood will use force to push its agenda and defend its political gains in the face of a persistent protest movement demanding that Morsi withdraw a draft constitution largely written by his Islamist allies.
Ahead of a new mass rallies planned by both sides Tuesday, masked gunmen attacked anti-Morsi protesters in Cairo's central Tahrir Square before dawn, firing birdshot at them and wounding nine. It was unclear who was behind the attack, said security officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to talk to the press.
Officials from the Brotherhood and its political party deny using violence to quell critics, saying its supporters last week were defending the palace when police failed to do so — though by the time of the violence only around hundred protesters were outside the palace, conducting a sit-in.
They accuse former regime supporters and paid thugs of waging an organized campaign to topple Islamists from power and point to a series of attacks on Brotherhood offices the past weeks. Morsi supporters say they suffered more deaths and injuries during last Wednesday's bloody clashes that left at least eight people dead.
But testimonies and videos that have emerged from the nearly 15 hours of street clashes last week show an organized group of disciplined Islamists, working in units and carrying out military-type exercises as they broke up the tent sit-in at the palace.
Tharwat el-Kherbawy, a former Brotherhood member and now an opponent of the group, said the Brotherhood was surprised by the public opposition to Morsi's moves "and they had no hesitation in hastening to implement their ideas and resorting to violence."
He said the group's central organizational doctrine — which calls on members to "hear and obey" their leaders — gives its cadres a military-like structure. "If their empowerment project is facing resistance, this resistance must be quelled," he said.
Opponents of the Brotherhood frequently accuse the group of running a "militia," a claim the group vehemently denies. In either case, the group is known for its tight discipline, and it acknowledges that many of its young members undergo organized martial arts training.
During last Wednesday's fighting, nearly 140 anti-Morsi protesters were detained, tortured and interrogated at a makeshift center set up by the Brotherhood along the walls of the presidential palace, according to witnesses. The detained protesters were filmed making forced confessions that they had received foreign funds to join the protests, according to some who were held and an Egyptian journalist who snuck into the site.
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/12...#ixzz2EraFfQvv
I'm sure the occupy Austin crowd hangs on your every word. I'll think of you next time I go to the Pentagon for a briefing.
And yet, you didn't answer the question. Why do you have a problem with the Israeli Iron Dome system? You raised an objection to our subsidizing it, but it's purely defensive. Instead of accusing me of some vague offense against your notions of propriety in Israel-bashing, why not actually answer the question? What about Iron Dome offends you?
12-12-2012, 02:55 PM
It wasn't a question. It was a statement with an eroteme.
12-12-2012, 04:49 PM
No, it was a question. Exactly what do you find objectionable about Iron Dome? And before you claim otherwise, you stated that we underwrite Iron Dome, which means that you clearly have a problem with it. Now, if you have a problem with our funding it, I can put your mind at rest. We don't fund it. It was an Israeli project. They pay for it themselves. I also asked what you meant by "corrall[ing] Egypt", and you've yet to respond to that, either. And I'm still waiting to have you explain why building housing in their own capital is a "spit in [our] eye." Here's your comment, again:
Now, we could do the dance where you make a few snarky comments and I gradually have to back you into a corner until you make some half-hearted acquiencense to reality, but I've grown tired of that, and I know that the rest of us have, too. For once, just come back with a simple, clear answer.
12-12-2012, 05:35 PM
No, it wasn't. It was akin to asking when I stopped beating my wife.
Now, we can do this dance where you sneeringly imply that anything short of rhetorical fealty to the nation of Israel is antisemitism and I object and you end up doing the typical Odie filibuster and I get bored so I will save us all that time and you can assume I am already bored.
12-12-2012, 05:57 PM
On the contrary, you made the statement. You could have answered that you have no problem with Iron Dome, but obviously, you do. You also could explain what you meant by corraling Egypt and why Israel shouldn't be building housing in its own capital. These are legitimate questions, and they aren't hard to answer. In fact, it's easier to answer them honestly than it is for you to play the snark card and tapdance around them, but you'd rather do that than to stand by the positions that you espouse, especially since you love taking an obnoxious position and then acting outraged when you are called on it.
I haven't implied anything of the sort. I've asked you what you meant by statements that I consider factually unsupportable, and you obviously do, too, or you'd support them. If you can't or won't explain yourself, then perhaps I'm not the problem. Once again, what do you object to regarding Iron Dome, what did you mean by the US corraling Egypt and why is Israel's building of housing in its own capital a spit in the eye of the US? Explain yourself.
12-12-2012, 06:04 PM
That answer is not an option to this question:
Now, this is a question that could garner that response:
"Do you find Iron Dome objectionable?"
Try asking that one if you really want to gain information. I somehow doubt that is your intent, though.
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
