jump to last post 1-23 of 23 discussions (69 posts)

Is the Uprising in Egypt a US Backed Coup?

  1. AnnCee profile image78
    AnnCeeposted 6 years ago

    It occurred to me to wonder why all of a sudden the 30 year lid has come off the Egyptian masses.  Wikileaks leaked documents indicate that Israeli intelligence thought Mubarak's Egypt was stable right up to the protests exploded.  There have been some indications that the Egyptian population was beginning to make noise, for example there have been stories published in the government controlled media designed to inflame Muslims against Christians, reportedly in an attempt by the Mubarak government to deflect anger away from itself.

    It also occurred to me that Barack Obama invited the Muslim Brotherhood to his Cairo speech despite their well-documented declaration of world jihad and war against America.  In that speech he said that America is not a Christian nation. He as much as indicated to the Middle East that now that he was president America wouldn't be evil anymore as it was in the past.

    Obama gave credibility to the Muslim Brotherhood, he gave them a nod.  Did he give the Egyptian people a nod of permission to revolt against the Mubarak regime?

    The Egyptian military is western in its outlook and organization.  It depends on the US for money, supplies and training.  It has declared itself on the side of the people.

    How much does the Obama administration have to do with this uprising?

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



    http://aangirfan.blogspot.com/2011/01/u … -coup.html



    Well, this is an interesting time.  We may  never know exactly what is going on but I am certain it is not as simple as the people of Egypt suddenly rising up.

    1. DTR0005 profile image86
      DTR0005posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I don't think any American administration, liberal or otherwise, wants to destabilize the Middle East.  American foreign policy since the Truman years has been one of "dancing with the devil" - at least involving Mid-East policy. American administrations (Republican and Democrat) have a long history of supporting governments that are "friendly" to the US but brutal towards their own people. Perhaps the classic example is that of Iran. The Shah had been faithful friend to America since we installed him into power in 1948. He was also a brutal dictator and hated by his people. But he was "good" for America and our jockeying for power in the region with the Soviet Union. And Obama, to no one's surprise, has walked a very careful line in this whole matter. I don't necessarily agree with the administration's position on Egypt - if we are going to talk the talk, we need to walk the walk. In other words, if we are going to continue to preach the "self-determination of peoples" we need to accept that a people's choice, in regards to self-determination, may not be favorable to our best interests.

    2. KFlippin profile image61
      KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It has been highlighted in the news that Condaleeza Rice made strong statements during her tenure as Sec. of State in regard to the situation in Egypt, so it is not new news that things in Egypt were not as they should be from an American viewpoint during the Bush Admin..  After the election of Obama, it is my understanding per the news that we did not do much verbally or otherwise to chastise Mubarek for being a dictatoriol and vengeful ass toward objectors of his government, as with China we pretty much have sucked up.

      If there is any coup that has anything to do with the USA, it is merely by inference IMO, and the timing was surely made to coincide with the planned visit of their Army chief at our Pentagon.  I do not much believe in such things as mere coincidence, so the timing was used by someone to flame the fires of discontent without the Army chief present, yet in our clear leadership presence, which is for sure odd.  But, the powers that wish to influence Egypt were as aware as the USA of this scheduled visit to the USA.

      As another factor, tonight for the first time it has been suggested that the food inflation in Egypt that has so magnified is a direct result of Bernankes loose monetary policy, in particular of course this latest QE2 which is propping up artificially the US stock market per many so called experts, as well as weakening the value of the dollar, which of course has global ramifications.

    3. KFlippin profile image61
      KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this



      But.....I have to say your points are well made, and as much as I wish to reject the notion, we, or rather the current admin, may very well have something to do with this, although I can not imagine Hillary Clinton seeing clearly and not objecting and not informing the rest of the country and the world of what she knows or suspects at this stage of the game.  Hillary as Sec. of State gives a legitness to our international affairs that this administration would not otherwise have, IMO.

    4. profile image0
      china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      More multicoloured misinformation spinning huh ?  this content is as distasteful as the coloured type is garish, small  minded rhetoric trying to big it up.

    5. Ralph Deeds profile image72
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      You're like a broken record. Whatever problem there is in the in the U.S. or the world--blame Obama.

      1. KFlippin profile image61
        KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Well, darn, is that not what the constant liberal song and dance was during the Bush Administration?  Why on earth would a lib make such a statement on the heels of a Republican Admin that was the most excoriated in recent history, IMO?  Even today Bush is still blamed for current events!!  Obama is blameless??  Yeah.

        1. Ralph Deeds profile image72
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Well, I didn't and don't blame Bush for everything, just nearly everything. He's among the worst presidents in our country's history. The jury is still out on Obama. I'm quite critical of some things Obama has done or failed to do. Egypt is not one of them. My impression is that he's playing this delicate situation quite well. As you may have noticed, the stock market apparently believes that Egypt is moving in the right direction.

        2. Jim Hunter profile image61
          Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          "Well, darn, is that not what the constant liberal song and dance was during the Bush Administration?"

          During the Bush administration?

          They are still blaming him.

          1. Flightkeeper profile image77
            Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Yeah, they're blaming Bush now for the monster blizzard in Chicago and the rest of the midwest.

            lol

          2. Ralph Deeds profile image72
            Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            True. We're still not out of the deep recession and huge debt for which Bush was responsible.

        3. Ralph Deeds profile image72
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          It's silly to suggest, as Ancee did, that the current situation in Egypt is the result of an Obama plot or any action or inaction on his part. However, as you may have noticed progressives or if you prefer, "liberals" have been criticizing Obama on a number of other counts nearly as much as they criticized Bush.

    6. profile image0
      Texasbetaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Are you ever going to provide a single link from a reputable source? EVER? Just once would be nice.

  2. knolyourself profile image61
    knolyourselfposted 6 years ago

    Yes why now? For my part I would say the last thing the US, Israel and the Middle
    East Monarchies would want is uprisings
    by the people. These would have to be
    out of their minds to foment such things, unless one actually believed that America
    wants democracy in the Middle East.

    1. AnnCee profile image78
      AnnCeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      What I've been getting is that every president for thirty years has pushed Mubarak to ease up on human rights and do more for the Egyptian people.  He has chosen not to listen to them.  He has been very helpful as far as not supporting terrorists and suppressing them in Egypt as well as maintaining a good relationship with Israel.  It seems the billion plus per year the US pays him pays for that role.  As far as any input into his domestic affairs he thinks that is his own business.

      One of the Mubarak supporters who came to the square yesterday came right up to a CNN camera and shouted something like, "You are not our president, our president is Mubarak.  Eff you Barack Obama."  This man was well dressed and well groomed.  He looked like an upper middle class business man.   I couldn't help but think he was telling America and Barack Obama what Mubarak wanted to say.

      It seems that Barack Obama coming out and saying that September wasn't good enough and Mubarak had to leave now might have been too much for a dictator who has said no to American presidents for decades.

      Muslim Brotherhood spokesman said on the Hannity show that Barack Obama is on the side of "man being the final authority" and his exact opposite, Osama Bin Laden is on the side of Allah being the final authority.  The Muslim Brotherhood, he said, sides with Osama Bin Laden.

      Interesting and very complex times.

      50,000 Americans in Egypt.  2,000 out last I heard with the State Department urging people to the airport with no delay.  Heard one American woman this morning locked in her apartment with people trying to break in.




      I think Barack Obama let his belief in his own personal magical charisma cloud his judgement in how to approach Egypt.  There are plenty of old hands with plenty of knowledge of the people and customs involved.  Apparently he thought his gift could overcome reality again.

  3. Doug Hughes profile image60
    Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago

    Good to see the wingnuts all got their tinfoil hats on.
    http://s1.hubimg.com/u/4540120_f248.jpg

    1. KFlippin profile image61
      KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Transparency is a beautiful thing......so try Saran Wrap, or some of those other nuevo brands of clarity.....

    2. Evan G Rogers profile image82
      Evan G Rogersposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      have you read "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man"?

  4. johnjones profile image60
    johnjonesposted 6 years ago

    Political reform is needed to keep Egypt going. The people of Egypt are in dire need of transparency and accountability of their government.

    1. KFlippin profile image61
      KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Well said, I hope one day they get that transparency and accountability in government, along with the USA electorate.

  5. Mighty Mom profile image92
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_ElQ6uj_xmu0/S479sEAltdI/AAAAAAAABTI/IyJg-8y5uFI/s400/HILLARY-CLINTON-SATAN-WITCH-ILLUMINATI.jpg

    Yo KFlip!
    Thanks for the props!
    Your galpal,
    Hillary

  6. Hugh Williamson profile image89
    Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago

    I just watched a news piece that pointed out that Egypt is the worlds biggest importer of wheat and the prices of wheat have risen 70% in the past year. Why?

    It seems that this rise is caused by speculators on wall street who, in 1991 were cut loose from federal regulations restricting futures speculation. This is why oil went to $140 per bbl. awhile back when the supply was actually quite plentiful. Speculators.

    I don't believe in the gov't regulation of anything -- unless it's absolutely necessary. I'd say that regulating speculation in commodities IS absolutely necessary since, as we've seen, people WILL opt for revolution in the face of exploitation.

    1. uncorrectedvision profile image62
      uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Deleted

      1. Hugh Williamson profile image89
        Hugh Williamsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        This is an open forum my friend "uncorrected" -- for everyone. If my opinion bothers you, don't read it. smile

        1. Doug Hughes profile image60
          Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          This is from an interview done by 60 Minutes - note the speaker is not some crazy liberal economist......

          "As the president of the Petroleum Marketers Association, he represents more than 8,000 retail and wholesale suppliers, everyone from home heating oil companies to gas station owners.

          When 60 Minutes talked to him last summer, his members were getting blamed for gouging the public, even though their costs had also gone through the roof. He told Kroft the problem was in the commodities markets, which had been invaded by a new breed of investor.

          "Approximately 60 to 70 percent of the oil contracts in the futures markets are now held by speculative entities. Not by companies that need oil, not by the airlines, not by the oil companies. But by investors that are looking to make money from their speculative positions," Gilligan explained.

          Gilligan said these investors don't actually take delivery of the oil. "All they do is buy the paper, and hope that they can sell it for more than they paid for it. Before they have to take delivery."


          http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/ … 7770.shtml

    2. uncorrectedvision profile image62
      uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Perhaps you should read more and opinion-ate less.  Speculation in commodity prices tend to do several things all positive.  The futures contract pays the producer a stable and profitable price for an unpredictable product - wheat, corn, oil, etc, thus guaranteeing the producer a price enabling his continued productive activities.  It tends to stabilize prices by guaranteeing a fixed price for the quantity of product and time frame of the contract, thus giving a reliable price to those processing the commodity and the end consumer.  The speculator takes a risk that the product will fall below the price negotiated with the producer.  If the price remains the same as the contracted price he makes a profit, if it rises he makes a larger profit but competes with producers holding their own product speculating that the price will rise.

      Prices are far more complex than the simple opinions usually expressed.

      Wheat prices are rising for several reasons.  The rising price of fuel, the alternate use of productive land, rough weather, regulatory structures, shipping risks, competing bidders for product, etc....  The greatest thief of all has the most influence over price and is aided by fiscal and monetary policies - inflation.

  7. thirdmillenium profile image59
    thirdmilleniumposted 6 years ago

    Egypt has just naturally followed Tunisia. It is just a spill-over from Tunisia and nothing more. Can not read anything more into it. What is more, many more Arab nations are likely to follow and the most dangerous powderkeg,  Pakistan may end up dropping its 10 N-bombs hither and thither but mostly on India and trigger world war III
    Happy tidings, folks big_smile

    1. profile image0
      china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Just a 'spill over from Tunisia' ?  It is hard to imagine that such shallow words could spill out of a computer.

      1. thirdmillenium profile image59
        thirdmilleniumposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Good for you but it started as a spill-over and grew  into a full-pledged storm feeding on its own strength. Anyway, Hosni  is on his way to a dusty death

  8. Paraglider profile image89
    Paragliderposted 6 years ago

    This is not all about America, folks! President Obama needs to recover some credibility for America by withdrawing all support from Mubarak. That done, he needs to play a waiting game. The people of Egypt have the momentum and will decide where they are going. Isn't that what the US is supposed to stand for?

    1. uncorrectedvision profile image62
      uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Awesome, just what the world needs, another Islamic Republic.  I wonder how long the 2000 year old Christian community in Egypt will last under the Muslim Brotherhood?  After all the Christians in Darfur, Irag and Lebanon are doing so well.

      1. profile image0
        china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The significant difference is that the countries you mention have all been destroyed or partially destroyed through being attacked by christian nations or with the co-operation of christian nations.  I guess that 9/11 being the reverse of this situation did not result in a backlash against Islam ?

        In respect of these issues shallow words are the beginning of deceipt and misinformation, if the people of Egypt democratically do go for an Islamic Republic how can you argue with their decision ?

        1. uncorrectedvision profile image62
          uncorrectedvisionposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Really, Darfur is a backlash against Christian oppression?  How about East Timor, a nation formed to preserve its Christian population.  Lebanon has spent nearly 60 years being torn apart by Muslim violence against Christians.  Then there is the Palestinian territories where Christians are under constant threat.  How about the Uygar terrorism, their oppressors are not Christians.

          1. profile image0
            china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Uygar terrorism ? the last time I was in Xinjiang the 23 ethnic minorities were fighting each other occasionally here and there, culminating in an attack on the police who were trying to keep order - but terrorists?  definately not.

        2. DTR0005 profile image86
          DTR0005posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Well American foreign policy will find a way - since the 40's we have never been really about the "rhetoric" we vomit on the American voting public - freedom, self-determination, destiny, etc., etc. As long as the oil flows and Israel is happy, we are happy. Our best buddies in the Middle East, Saudi Arabia, are nothing but a dictatorship but they are "friendly," weatlhy, and hold all the energy cards up their sleeves. And a comment for UNCORRECTEDVISION - You might want to check in or just how free Christians are to practice their faith in Saudi Arabia. I have known several families who have lived there for several years. Friday is the big day when everyone gathers around the mosques for the public executions (beheadings.) The Saudis actually sell concessions at these events. But more importantly, there is no "right" to practice Christianity openly - unless of course you live in a "Western Compound." Nice people, wouldn't you say?

    2. Doug Hughes profile image60
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Paraglider - I always learn from you and usually agree. However as I read between the lines, Obama has threatened to pull all US support if Mubarek uses force to crush the protests. This is a better option than pulling all support and leaving Mubarek no incentive to use  restraint.

  9. profile image59
    C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago

    I don't think it's a conspiracy or US backed COUP. Its the economy. The world over people are suffering. When the economy is bad, so are peoples tempers. Also Mubarek is in his 80's. The timing is right. There had to have been lots of people looking for an opportunity, even among his inner circle.

    1. Paraglider profile image89
      Paragliderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Especially among his inner circle. Same old, same old. Fortunately, this time they were not on the ball and have lost their chance.

      1. profile image59
        C.J. Wrightposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Always true. Keep your friends close and your enemies closer. Many people on a leaders "cabinate" are NOT truly friendly. Obama and Hillary come to mind. Not the extreme case, but an example.

  10. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image61
    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago

    Whether anyone accept or not, it is America, USA, which is instigating the upriing.  Why not before? It is just to detract the American public  from the economic failures.. just to keep the people in good humour.  It will certainly occur one day in USA also if they dont go on track and set right their own economy. I think Mr.Obama only  is capable of doing that.

    USA has engineered upriings in several countries.... In Uganda in 1974, in Burma since over a decade, in USSR during 1989-91. There are many more in its bag.

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image72
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      That's far from the truth. On the one hand the US is excoriated for supporting a dictator and now by you for allegedly fomenting an uprising. The US primary interest in Egypt has been to have a stable ally with good relations with Israel. A democratic Egypt has been a secondary interest. I don't believe that there is any simple, single explanation for the current uprising. There are many contributing factors.

      It's true that the US has meddled in the affairs of other countries, most notably Iran, but you greatly overestimate its influence. Just curious what is your political affiliation in India? (I am a lifelong Democrat in the US, but I don't agree with everything the country has done by Democrats or Republicans.)

      1. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image61
        VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        In India, I am strictly non-political. I have no political affiliation, as I was a government official for nearly 40 years. I will read about them but wont take part in their proceedings.

        If I have to list out my favourite political parties,  I will sum up as below:

        1. Indian National Congress : Patriotic, secular, but corrupt.
        2. Bharatiya Janata Party :  Patriotic, but too much right-wing and pro-high caste Hiduism.
        3. DMK (Tamilnadu): Rationalist, Patriotic, but bent on incorporating family members in party and government.
        4. AIADMK (Tamilnadu): Give chances to even the lowest ranks in the society, but not friendly to labour unions.... has a craze for dismissing employees anywhere and everywhere.
        5. Communists: Very much unpatriotic, pro-Chinese, go to the extent to shout that Mao is their leader...  should be banned.

        I also wont hesitate to blame the the parties and government wherever it errs. Because, I came up without any favour from any quarter.... sheer merit only.

    2. Daniel Carter profile image91
      Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Gorbachev is more to blame than the US in the fall of USSR. Without him, it wouldn't have happened. There was no force from the US when it fell.

      Conspiracy theories about the US's involvement are rampant, but until the hard evidence arrives, it's mostly a good set of movie plots.

      I DO, however, believe the US has a lot of influence around the world, but that has plainly diminished over the past few years. Nonetheless, it isn't one player who brings about such changes. Why would the people of Egypt revolt, if not because they are dissatisfied with their government? Why does the US need to take blame for causing it? Certainly the US does have influence, but I don't see how it can be blamed for it.

      Makes no sense.

      There may be some insight in regard to the economic disasters. The government being bought off by the money machines is no surprise to anyone. That is a war that also spills on to foreign soil, as we witnessed the stock markets across the globe melting down with the US. That skirmish is yet to happen, but I also believe that in the end, it will. People will rise up against the money machines before it will oust the government. Americans are not likely to oust the government as much as they are prone to make swift and drastic changes to their representation in government, which we are now seeing.

      1. KFlippin profile image61
        KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The USA does not in any way need to take one iota of blame for the uprising in Egypt.  I would say that up until the past couple years, life must have been bearable there, but the food inflation put them over the edge.

        I would also remind that Mubarek was criticized by the Bush Admin, and all this lapsed with Obamas new huggies regime.

        1. Paraglider profile image89
          Paragliderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Why are we talking about 'blame' for the popular uprising? The uprising is praiseworthy. Blame is attached to the violent counter-revolutionaries who appear to be in, or organised by, Mubarak's 'secret' police.

          1. Ralph Deeds profile image72
            Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Very true.

      2. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image61
        VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I agree that Gorbachav is mainly responsible for the fall of the Soviet Union.  But I can read from news reports that all the 85 Regional commanders in the Soviet Union were paid enormously alongwith huge bungalows, to keep quiet if and when the Soviet govt. orders military action against breaking away countries.  But Gorbachav could have prevented it. He has not approached China or India for help at that time.  Their economy were in shambles. So, they had to be witnesses for the breakup.

  11. mikelong profile image85
    mikelongposted 6 years ago

    I want to second Evan's recommendation that people read "Confessions of an Economic Hitman"...

  12. Rajab Nsubuga profile image61
    Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago

    I wish that we remain focused here. Read the economic performance of Egypt visa- avis that of the Countries on the African continent. If we are to talk about the history of revolutions, I think we would be facing a different direction and not Egypt. However, let it be noted that Abdul-Nasser once stated that the U.S held 99% of the cards in the middle-East. It would be sheer naivety if one directly linked the uprising in Egypt to the U.S. But it won't be wrong if one tried to establish an indirect correlation based on the hiked prices of wheat and the control of petroleum prices by the U.S.

    Dating back in history, as early as the 1789 French Revolution, there has been wide discontentment among the populace as a result of famine(natural cause) or poor economic performances by gov'ts. The highly technical systems and developed democracies of the west might have jumped the trap this time but one can not say the same for the developing countries which are largely African and Asian. Watch the space.

  13. Rajab Nsubuga profile image61
    Rajab Nsubugaposted 6 years ago

    Finally, I think the predictions of Karl Max have come to bare. That a capitalist setting would be characterized by frequent recessions and revolts. A time when the working class (proletariat)will be able to determine their fate.

  14. Flightkeeper profile image77
    Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago

    I think it's convenient in the Middle East to blame everything on the US.  It's a way to not take responsibility for how badly things are going in their countries.

    1. Doug Hughes profile image60
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It's convenient for wingnuts to blame everything on Obama,

      1. Flightkeeper profile image77
        Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        lol How you manage to bring Obama into every thread is funny.  Can you say obsessed? lol

        1. Ralph Deeds profile image72
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Did you read the Ancee's title of the thread and her first post speculating that Obama was behind the protests? Here's the title of this thread:

          "Is the Uprising in Egypt a US Backed Coup?"

          1. Flightkeeper profile image77
            Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Did you not notice that the conversation had evolved already past that point? roll

  15. A la carte profile image60
    A la carteposted 6 years ago

    Why would the US get rid of it's biggest supporters in the middle east apart from Israel...maybe the common man has a voice and is sick of corruption.

  16. prettydarkhorse profile image63
    prettydarkhorseposted 6 years ago

    to let your people/constituents kill each other just so you can hold on to power is beyond my understanding.

    I don't think the US backed this coup, people are fed up.

    IMHO, this might be brought about by cultural transmission through Internet etc. People realized what they are missing, and perhaps people really crave freedom. Eventually they will seek for a better life.

    1. Paraglider profile image89
      Paragliderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Absolutely right smile

  17. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    The thing I find kind of telling is when there is a protest in a other country, but they use ENGLISH on their protest signs!
    Like in Egypt, I've seen banners written in Arabic,(I'm assuming). But there was this huge banner stating "End the Regicide"...If you're protesting in Egypt, why use the English language?
    It's not the native tongue. Who are they trying to reach? Or who is behind it? And it's laughable if that is an American group behind it. It's so obvious it's comical!

    1. Ralph Deeds profile image72
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      English is widely spoken by educated people and business people in Egypt. It's possible the sign in English was for the benefit of TV Crews, reporters and photographers from the U.S. or the UK and for people from all around the world. English is spoken more widely by educated people around the world than any other language if I'm not mistaken. A couple of signs in English is not an indication that the U.S. had anything to do with the revolt, except in the sense that the protesters resent our support for   the Egyptian army and treating Mubarak as a friend for 30 years.

      1. Doug Hughes profile image60
        Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The anti-Mubarak protesters are cultivating international support - particularly US support. So naturally a lot of the signs are in English, geared for an American audience. If Obama had given Mubarak the OK, tanks WOULD have been used against the protesters and no one knows this better than the protester on the street.

        1. Paraglider profile image89
          Paragliderposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I don't necessarily agree with that. The Egyptian army is largely a conscript national service force to protect the borders and cross them in times of war. It is popular with the people and would not jeopardise its popularity by firing on civillians. Don't confuse the army with the police, who are in effect the regime's terror squad.

      2. Stump Parrish profile image61
        Stump Parrishposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        2 Shay, good point about english being an international language of sorts. I would assume that some in every country know how censored and or distorted the news American'a rely on is. Protest signs are a way to get the message out to the world. Using the most common launguage of sorts would help spread the word. I believe Iraquis had protest signs in english during the Iraqi war didn't they? Did that indicate an American backed coup was taking place? Well that might not have been the best example I could have used, hmmmm.

  18. Flightkeeper profile image77
    Flightkeeperposted 6 years ago

    Well you know the leftidiots believe that The Shiny One can do no wrong.  So they'll blame Bush.  lol lol

  19. Stump Parrish profile image61
    Stump Parrishposted 6 years ago

    Why doesn't someone call wikileaks and find out the truth?

  20. Istanbulguy profile image61
    Istanbulguyposted 6 years ago

    Of course we cannot be 100 percent on this but I don't see any good reason why the US administration would want Mobarak and his regime to be toppled. Mobarak regime has been on good terms with the Israeli regime for many years and it has also been a good US ally.

    There is no way the US would want to face the possibility of an Islamist regime in Egypt.

  21. AnnCee profile image78
    AnnCeeposted 6 years ago

    Well, there's one reason I can imagine. . .


    The left in the United States appears to be aligned with radical Muslims.  They share the goal of destroying capitalism and are willing to work together to that end.

    Do a little research and you'll find there is PLENTY of evidence.

    1. Istanbulguy profile image61
      Istanbulguyposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The left in the US being aligned with radical Muslims ??! Come on, Ann.

      Usually, this kind of remark is said by hardcore anti-Obama'ists who cannot stand him and who wants to show him in a bad way.

      I am neither a fan or foe of Obama but I just don't see him sympathising with that Islamist group in Egypt (or with any Islamist group, in fact).

      And, by the way, Obama is not really a left-winger.

  22. AnnCee profile image78
    AnnCeeposted 6 years ago

    Do the research, Istanbul.  Search "American left aligned with radical Islam."






    http://blog.tmcnet.com/blog/tom-keating … n-left.asp


    You will also find examples of specific leftists aligning with specific Islamic causes like Palestine against Israel.   That is a rather mainstream activity on the left it seems, with even institutions like the Methodist church spending much time and treasure on the issue, but it is interesting to see that SDS leader and wife of Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn who admired Charles Manson and advocated overthrow of the US government is active in the free Gaza movement.

    As far as I'm concerned GW Bush made a huge mistake when he went soft on Islam in the US after 9/11.  He opened up our security agencies to Muslims ostensibly to teach our agents to be tender toward Muslim sensibilities.  The Muslims instead have undermined our security from within, proselytized hoards of prisoners, and instituted the kind of political correctness within our military that resulted in the massacre at Fort Hood.

    I hope Representative King will find success in ratcheting back the internal damage that has been done.


    The Muslim Brotherhood and Islam in general has declared jihad against the west.   The would be bad Muslims if they did otherwise.


    I love Istanbul by the way and had always hoped to spend far more time there.   I liked it when the people in Turkey referred to themselves as bad Muslims in that they looked westward and hoped to have closer ties with Europe and the west.   I found the educated people of Turkey more like Americans in their eagerness, openness, optimism and humor than any people from any country I have ever visited.   Now I suppose they are being quiet.  And it is probably good that they didn't lose it like Greece did in joining the EU.  Too bad these modern, educated people will have to live under Islamic oppression though.  I suppose their children will be taught in the schools to hate the west, hate Christians and hate Jews.

  23. mikelong profile image85
    mikelongposted 6 years ago

    Part of American Cold War strategy was to undermine Soviet hegemony in the Mid East and Central Asia through "religious awakening."

    The CIA, with taxpayer funds, printed, shipped, and distributed Qurans inside Soviet republics with the intent of starting an internal religious war against the "godless" Soviets...

    "Ghost Wars" (I can't remember the author's name" goes into this very well...

    Therefore, whatever fears Americans have about "radical Muslims"....our nation had a role to play...

 
working