Egypt and Barry

skyraider

Veteran Expediter
US Navy
So, do u think Barry and company is loading up their goodwill plane and heading to Egypt? Will Barry bow to the Muslim crowds and tell them how bad the USA is? They and Barry are all related anyway IMHO. Hope he packs his robes this trip.:rolleyes:


Ps, u all come on down to the farm,,,3 acres of parking, free tennessee whiskey, hotdogs,portapotties for the ladies, trees for the men,,,sounds like fun doesnt it? lol:D
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
So, do u think Barry and company is loading up their goodwill plane and heading to Egypt? Will Barry bow to the Muslim crowds and tell them how bad the USA is? They and Barry are all related anyway IMHO. Hope he packs his robes this trip.:rolleyes:


Ps, u all come on down to the farm,,,3 acres of parking, free tennessee whiskey, hotdogs,portapotties for the ladies, trees for the men,,,sounds like fun doesnt it? lol:D

I bet Barry is just lovin' this stuff. This is the return on Carter's investment. This mess could lead to REAL problems, world wide. Not that anyone in the White House cares.
 

Poorboy

Expert Expediter
I bet Barry is just lovin' this stuff. This is the return on Carter's investment. This mess could lead to REAL problems, world wide. Not that anyone in the White House cares.

Yeah, But could this country be next with Barry at the helm? Just asking opinions is all:D
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Barry is leading this country down the path of confrontation as well. Any time you put in policies that are unpopular with a large percentage of the population, and back those up with the threat of
force, you are headed for problems.

This mess in the Middle East goes back a very long time, not even getting into the several thousand year history in that region. Much of the problems we see now are due to the "messing" about by the English a hundred years ago, give or take a year or two.
 

OntarioVanMan

Retired Expediter
Owner/Operator
in a couple hundred years or so..give or take a year or so...the world will be blame the US for all it's meddling around the world and the legacy it leaves behind....and most has been bad so far....cept helping win the big wars of course...
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Figures this administration would back an extremist revolt. There are armed groups running around breaking Muslim extremists out of jail in Egypt. This could get VERY bad.

People had better hope that this thing does NOT go the way that Iran did. Turkey is having demonstrations as well.
 

hdxpedx

Veteran Expediter
Fleet Owner
Let's see, Barry allows EGYPT'S SUEZ canal to fall to a IRANIAN style regime. therefore cutting off the worlds evil oil shipping routes causing it to spike far out of reach - collapsing the world's.. maybe I'm ahead of myself here.. But King george did just state at the WTO meeting that countries going their own direction no longer should be the norm.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
This is quite likely what is really behind this. Watch out if an Iranian style country is set up.

The stability of the entire region and the world's economy is at stake. This is no laughing matter. This is the stuff that leads to World Wars.




Armed gangs free Muslim militants in Egypt


Gangs of armed men attacked at least four jails across Egypt before dawn, helping to free hundreds of Muslim militants and thousands of other inmates as police vanished from the streets of Cairo and other cities.

Egyptian security officials said that overnight armed men fired at guards in gun battles that lasted hours at the four prisons including one northwest of Cairo that held hundreds of militants. The prisoners escaped after starting fires and clashing with guards.

Armed gangs free Muslim militants in Egypt - Africa, World - The Independent
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
You guys just don't get a few things.

1 - the administration is scared about a real regime change in Egypt. They have no control outside the money, they can't take military action, they can't do much except to have the same rhetoric that it puts out there with the same attitude they always have had.

2 - the administration's worst nightmare is to have any real change to the Egyptian government that would close off or limit the relationship between the US and Egypt while at the same time getting closer to one of Egypt's older ally, Syria. Iran may not be the player in any of this for a lot of reasons, and people don't see the differences between the Persians and the rest of the region and assume too much.

3 - the Suez Canal is important to much of the world but more importantly there are treaties setup with Israel over the canal and the area around it, if there is a change to radical or fundamental type of government, Israel may take military action to gain control of the canal and this may be supported by other nations in the region - including Syria.

4 - we seem to have taken a very arrogant position that we can control this and that there is no one else in the world that can deal with it on either a diplomatic or a military level. Our messiah has spoken a few times about the people of Egypt while missing the point that he has no voice in the matter.

5 - I think that if Egypt falls, Libya on their west frontier will have to deal with the problems of the regime change while on the east and south will be a cause to be worries even though their southern neighbor is having issues.

6 - the world is laughing at hillary's comments, the administration should be working, not getting air time and this is one of the things that make us look like a joke. It didn't help to have the state of the union pep rally either, which wasn't about the state of our country but visions of sugar plums dancing in Obama's head.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Queen Hillary was sent out there to look like a fool on purpose. Obama does not like her, or the Clinton's in general, and uses her to play the clown. He is sending her out with that "message" knowing how dumb it sounds while supporting this mess in the shadows.

I believe that there is a more than even chance that Obama (or those who run him) are hoping for a collapse of Egypt. I think that they want to see Israel fall. It is more than possible that they are looking for a Arab block in the region. Maybe to offset Iran. Maybe even to work in concert with them, though that is not as likely.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Queen Hillary was sent out there to look like a fool on purpose. Obama does not like her, or the Clinton's in general, and uses her to play the clown. He is sending her out with that "message" knowing how dumb it sounds while supporting this mess in the shadows.

I believe that there is a more than even chance that Obama (or those who run him) are hoping for a collapse of Egypt. I think that they want to see Israel fall. It is more than possible that they are looking for a Arab block in the region. Maybe to offset Iran. Maybe even to work in concert with them, though that is not as likely.
 

skyraider

Veteran Expediter
US Navy
you guys just don't get a few things.

1 - the administration is scared about a real regime change in egypt. They have no control outside the money, they can't take military action, they can't do much except to have the same rhetoric that it puts out there with the same attitude they always have had.

2 - the administration's worst nightmare is to have any real change to the egyptian government that would close off or limit the relationship between the us and egypt while at the same time getting closer to one of egypt's older ally, syria. Iran may not be the player in any of this for a lot of reasons, and people don't see the differences between the persians and the rest of the region and assume too much.

3 - the suez canal is important to much of the world but more importantly there are treaties setup with israel over the canal and the area around it, if there is a change to radical or fundamental type of government, israel may take military action to gain control of the canal and this may be supported by other nations in the region - including syria. ************************** Treaties,,i get a kick of the usa and treaties,,,ask the american indians about treaties,,what a crock of sheetzeeee , yep our treaties with the indians,,rite,,we dont keep our word, what was the saying: Whiteman speaks with forked tongue,,,omy.:eek:

4 - we seem to have taken a very arrogant position that we can control this and that there is no one else in the world that can deal with it on either a diplomatic or a military level. Our messiah has spoken a few times about the people of egypt while missing the point that he has no voice in the matter.

5 - i think that if egypt falls, libya on their west frontier will have to deal with the problems of the regime change while on the east and south will be a cause to be worries even though their southern neighbor is having issues.

6 - the world is laughing at hillary's comments, the administration should be working, not getting air time and this is one of the things that make us look like a joke. It didn't help to have the state of the union pep rally either, which wasn't about the state of our country but visions of sugar plums dancing in obama's head.

and hillary,,all she does is burn up jet fuel.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
This is a different issue than the Indians. For that matter applying what I said about slavery in the other thread can also be applied to our present treatment of the Native Americans aka Indians.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
There's a whole host of things people just don't get.

This is not a revolution prompted or backed by Islamic fundamentalists, the Muslim Brotherhood in particular. Not even close. This revolution was prompted largely by the embarrassment of seeing what the people of Tunisia did. The people of Tunisia had had enough, and the people of Egypt realized they'd had enough a long time ago, and the Tunisians prompted the people of Egypt to finally act.

The people of Egypt, all of them, are doing this. Young and old, Muslim and Christian, men and women (some veiled, some not) are all standing side-by-side in this. They want what we want, jobs and security. They've seen the center of the Arab world dwindle down to a seat of poverty, illiteracy and despair. That's what this is all about.

The Muslim Brotherhood, especially since 1970, has been anti-violence. While they do have as one of their stated goals the Qu'ran and Islam as being the only world religion, they do not promote violence as a means to that end. Every time someone within the Muslim Brotherhood promotes violence, they end up breaking away or getting kicked out of the Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood can be thought of as the flip-side of non-violent Evangelical Christians, i.e., really, really annoying but not violent.

In Iran, 90%, maybe 99% of the people support the regime there, and support a religious State. Not so in Egypt. The people of Egypt don't support the regime, nor do they want it replaced by an Islamic State.

The people of Egypt revere the Egyptian Military as bone fide heroes. Not in a fake way like the US reveres its military soldiers as heroes, but in a very real and tangible way. To be a soldier in Egypt is not unlike being a rock star over there. The people love the military, and the military sees its role as protecting the citizens of Egypt against anyone who wold hurt them. They military isn't likely to throw all that way just to keep some crackpot in power, especially a crackpot that the US put in place.

The police, on the other hand, are hated by the people. The police is part of the ministry, directly attributable to Mubarak, and have for years been brutal and totalitarian. The police would slap people around, beat them up, even kill people, just because they could. Notice on the second day of the protests, the police were hard to find. They knew. Right now in Egypt, being a cop is about as popular with the people as being in cop in Juarez is with the drug cartels, and both have the same fate waiting for them. The only difference is, the cops in places like Juarez are trying to do good things, but the cops in Egypt are more like the cartel members.

The US has security and other interests in the Middle East. Yes, the free flow of oil and an open Suez Canal is a part of that, but those are not the primary interests. The primary interest is that of stability in the region. Unfortunately, promoting and installing stability is a double-edged sword, which is why the US is in a very uncomfortable position right now. It is unfortunate that the quickest and easiest way to ensure stability, albeit for a relatively short term, is to install and back a dictatorship who will do things they way we want them to, to keep things stable.

Of course, a dictatorship comes with absolute power, which corrupts absolutely. And the US is once again in the untenable position of having backed a brutal dictator while ignoring the people. What OVM notes above won't take a couple hundred years - it's already here - and the US is scrambling to put its best face forward and show itself as backing the people for a democratic change. It doesn't matter what administration is in office, the US is gonna look bad no matter what. But Hilary certainly isn't making things any better by saying things like, “the legitimate needs and grievances expressed by the Egyptian people," is what Mubarak needs to respond to, while knowing full well those grievances have been legitimate for more than 25 years and the people of Egypt have asked the US many times to intervene throughout the years, and were answered with silence.

There will probably be some small incidents with the people and the military, but probably not widespread. The longer it takes for Mubarak to be removed from power, the more that "mob rule" will begin go take hold. The military isn't likely to try and quash the mobs, either, other than to protect the people (and probably the national treasures like museums). With the rise of mob rule and chaos there will be an increasing Islamic Fundamentalist presence, for sure. Can't let that opportunity go by.

But as things get more out of control, the greater is the chance for a straight military take-over of the government. And it will be done to protect the people. Before too long there will be thousands of foot soldiers in the cities, but they will not fire on the people, I believe. If they fire on anything, it will be on Mubarak's residence, at the loyal ministry police who are charged with protecting Mubarak. The people want Mubarak out, and were quite insulted that he appointed what is seen as just another US puppet as his Vice President.
 

skyraider

Veteran Expediter
US Navy
There's a whole host of things people just don't get.

This is not a revolution prompted or backed by Islamic fundamentalists, the Muslim Brotherhood in particular. Not even close. This revolution was prompted largely by the embarrassment of seeing what the people of Tunisia did. The people of Tunisia had had enough, and the people of Egypt realized they'd had enough a long time ago, and the Tunisians prompted the people of Egypt to finally act.

The people of Egypt, all of them, are doing this. Young and old, Muslim and Christian, men and women (some veiled, some not) are all standing side-by-side in this. They want what we want, jobs and security. They've seen the center of the Arab world dwindle down to a seat of poverty, illiteracy and despair. That's what this is all about.

The Muslim Brotherhood, especially since 1970, has been anti-violence. While they do have as one of their stated goals the Qu'ran and Islam as being the only world religion, they do not promote violence as a means to that end. Every time someone within the Muslim Brotherhood promotes violence, they end up breaking away or getting kicked out of the Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood can be thought of as the flip-side of non-violent Evangelical Christians, i.e., really, really annoying but not violent.

In Iran, 90%, maybe 99% of the people support the regime there, and support a religious State. Not so in Egypt. The people of Egypt don't support the regime, nor do they want it replaced by an Islamic State.

The people of Egypt revere the Egyptian Military as bone fide heroes. Not in a fake way like the US reveres its military soldiers as heroes, but in a very real and tangible way. To be a soldier in Egypt is not unlike being a rock star over there. The people love the military, and the military sees its role as protecting the citizens of Egypt against anyone who wold hurt them. They military isn't likely to throw all that way just to keep some crackpot in power, especially a crackpot that the US put in place.

The police, on the other hand, are hated by the people. The police is part of the ministry, directly attributable to Mubarak, and have for years been brutal and totalitarian. The police would slap people around, beat them up, even kill people, just because they could. Notice on the second day of the protests, the police were hard to find. They knew. Right now in Egypt, being a cop is about as popular with the people as being in cop in Juarez is with the drug cartels, and both have the same fate waiting for them. The only difference is, the cops in places like Juarez are trying to do good things, but the cops in Egypt are more like the cartel members.

The US has security and other interests in the Middle East. Yes, the free flow of oil and an open Suez Canal is a part of that, but those are not the primary interests. The primary interest is that of stability in the region. Unfortunately, promoting and installing stability is a double-edged sword, which is why the US is in a very uncomfortable position right now. It is unfortunate that the quickest and easiest way to ensure stability, albeit for a relatively short term, is to install and back a dictatorship who will do things they way we want them to, to keep things stable.

Of course, a dictatorship comes with absolute power, which corrupts absolutely. And the US is once again in the untenable position of having backed a brutal dictator while ignoring the people. What OVM notes above won't take a couple hundred years - it's already here - and the US is scrambling to put its best face forward and show itself as backing the people for a democratic change. It doesn't matter what administration is in office, the US is gonna look bad no matter what. But Hilary certainly isn't making things any better by saying things like, “the legitimate needs and grievances expressed by the Egyptian people," is what Mubarak needs to respond to, while knowing full well those grievances have been legitimate for more than 25 years and the people of Egypt have asked the US many times to intervene throughout the years, and were answered with silence.

There will probably be some small incidents with the people and the military, but probably not widespread. The longer it takes for Mubarak to be removed from power, the more that "mob rule" will begin go take hold. The military isn't likely to try and quash the mobs, either, other than to protect the people (and probably the national treasures like museums). With the rise of mob rule and chaos there will be an increasing Islamic Fundamentalist presence, for sure. Can't let that opportunity go by.

But as things get more out of control, the greater is the chance for a straight military take-over of the government. And it will be done to protect the people. Before too long there will be thousands of foot soldiers in the cities, but they will not fire on the people, I believe. If they fire on anything, it will be on Mubarak's residence, at the loyal ministry police who are charged with protecting Mubarak. The people want Mubarak out, and were quite insulted that he appointed what is seen as just another US puppet as his Vice President.

Hey, Turtle,,paragraph 5,,2nd sentence,,is that what u meant to say about our military ? It doesnt sound right.:confused:
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Hey, Turtle,,paragraph 5,,2nd sentence,,is that what u meant to say about our military ?
Yes

It doesnt sound right.:confused:
Probably doesn't sound right, but it's true, nonetheless.

The whole "support the soldiers even if you don't support the war," thing is a straight-up feel-good absurdity. It's like saying, "I support what you're doing, even though I don't support what you're doing." America has a national guilt over the way we treated returning soldiers from Vietnam, and have since swung the pendulum back too far in the other direction to the point where we're fawning over returning soldiers, as if they are, each and every one of them, returning from another successful D-Day invasion.
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
Turtle are you saying there's more to it than a ribbon bumper sticker? :p
I really don't want one sentence of what I wrote to completely derail the points I was making, and the other parts of the thread, but yeah, there's more to it than a fashionable yellow ribbon. The ribbons actually meant something for about three weeks.

While the yellow ribbon has many incarnations and quite a history, it was never used to remember or for welcoming home US soldiers. Thanks to Tony Orlando and Dawn's "Tie a Yellow Ribbon 'Round the Old Oak Tree", which was a song about a released convict having given instructions to his wife or lover to tie a yellow ribbon around the oak tree out in front of their house to indicate to him that he was welcome, and if he didn't see the ribbon he would simply remain on the bus and keep going, the whole ribbon things became a popular symbol for "Yes, we welcome you back home!". The convict didn't just see a yellow ribbon, but a hundred of them! Yay.

The Yellow ribbons were not seen on a national scale until the 1980's and the Iran Hostage deal, where yellow ribbons were placed all over the nation to welcome back the hostages. The ribbons actually meant something then. It was started in December 1979, when Penelope Laingren, wife of the most senior foreign service officer being held hostage, tied a yellow ribbon around a tree on the lawn of her home. The ribbon primarily symbolized the resolve of the American people to win the hostages' safe release, and it featured prominently in the celebrations of their return home in January 1981.

The ribbons popped up again during the Gulf War, a war that was not very popular, but that guilt thing had cries of "Support the Troops" even though you don't support the war, and they didn't want to repeat a Vietnam where the opposition to the war was piled onto the returning pawns, er, ah, I mean, soldiers. Gotta support those troops, show 'em a little luv, even though you detest what they are actually doing.

They came roaring back again during the 2003 invasion of Iraq, mostly in the form of entrepreneurial magnetic ribbons for the back of your car. There were cases where people had no ribbons on their car, and were met with, "Gasp! You don't support and love and worship the troops?!?! You really gotta get a ribbon, dood. They're all the rage these days."

And of course, others latched on to the popularity of the whole ribbon on display fashion so we now have pink ribbons, apparently to welcome back the safe return of breast cancer, or something like that. But I digress.....

Most people have no clue what our soldiers are doing, or why they are doing it. All they know is they gotta fawn over them when they come back, 'cause that's what you gotta do. There is no national vested hope or anxiety on the part of the people as to what the troops are doing. Certainly not like it was during World War II. And they don't want that public image of spitting on the returning "baby killers" of Vietnam (even though a lot of today's soldiers are committing the same atrocities of all the wars of yesteryear, as they always do in every war, everywhere). So, in the same way that we have over-the-top fake outrage over nappy-headed basketball players at Rutgers, we have the same over-the-top fake fawning over returning soldiers.

support_magnetic_ribbons.gif
 
Top