BF2S Forums Egypt Unrest.

of course you don't, you want to see the whole world go to sharia law . . .

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

I love how some people in the media are worried about protecting Israel, a country of less than 8 million, to the point where they want Egypt, a country of 80 million, to remain a dictatorship.

A county governed by shira law is no better.

I don't think Egypt will ever be a country governed by Sharia Law.  They make an extreme effort to be as secular as possible.  To the point of kicking people out of hotels for having any semblance of a beard.  That's not to say that a new, more corrupt regime couldn't take over, but that's what these demonstrations are about - the general populace's discontent with corrupt, despotic regimes.  US rhetoric tries to tread a fine line between offering up support to the general population as a token support of 'democracy' and supporting the Western-friendly corrupt governments.  We love democracy, but only when the people elected/placed in power are decidedly pro-Western (ie. monied interests). 

We are going to start seeing powerful pro-West regimes in the country taking a more active role in the discussions there.  Already we are seeing Saudi Arabia commit resources.  We're playing our cards in the region in the form of having our regional allies submit pressure to the corrupt regimes so we (US) don't look completely hypocritical.  It's more of the same regarding US foreign policy, akin to the struggles and political rhetoric surrounding the Banana Republics and South America during the 20th century.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

I love how some people in the media are worried about protecting Israel, a country of less than 8 million, to the point where they want Egypt, a country of 80 million, to remain a dictatorship.

A county governed by shira law is no better.

I don't think Egypt will ever be a country governed by Sharia Law.  They make an extreme effort to be as secular as possible.  To the point of kicking people out of hotels for having any semblance of a beard.  That's not to say that a new, more corrupt regime couldn't take over, but that's what these demonstrations are about - the general populace's discontent with corrupt, despotic regimes.  US rhetoric tries to tread a fine line between offering up support to the general population as a token support of 'democracy' and supporting the Western-friendly corrupt governments.  We love democracy, but only when the people elected/placed in power are decidedly pro-Western (ie. monied interests). 

We are going to start seeing powerful pro-West regimes in the country taking a more active role in the discussions there.  Already we are seeing Saudi Arabia commit resources.  We're playing our cards in the region in the form of having our regional allies submit pressure to the corrupt regimes so we (US) don't look completely hypocritical.  It's more of the same regarding US foreign policy, akin to the struggles and political rhetoric surrounding the Banana Republics and South America during the 20th century.

I think if the an election were held tomorrow in Egypt the MB would gain a tremendous foothold that would be expanded upon over the years.

Damn straight the US is for democracies styled 'pro-western'... And why wouldn't one want more similar styled thinking governments around?  Battle of Civilizations baby!

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Damn straight the US is for democracies styled 'pro-western'... And why wouldn't one want more similar styled thinking governments around?  Battle of Civilizations baby!

but that's my point - Egypt isn't a democracy.  Jordan isn't a democracy.  Saudi Arabia isn't a democracy.  See Vietnam.  See any number of Banana Republics.  We are told to love democracy, that it is a founding and moral principle of our nation, yet we snub our nose at it if it benefits our perceived 'interests' (and those interests are by and large the interests of concentrated capital, not 'ours' as an American, concerned-for-our-brothers population).

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

Well I hope all the Americans that wish to do so go there and fight them in this battle

I bet you do Meklim.

Don't you? How else are you gonna get what you want when others aren't going to do it?

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

I bet you do Meklim.

Don't you? How else are you gonna get what you want when others aren't going to do it?

What are you on about?

Well, what's your end point in this discussion. Egypt becoming crazy terrorist Sharia nation. Must not happen as it is against US interests. And at the very least, like you said, it's a clash of civilisations and it's a battle for supremacy.

So, all I'm saying is...at the end of the day. If nobody feels they can get along. Then there's only one way to sort it out.

bye bye hosni?

DBBrinson1 wrote:

Mekstizzle wrote:

DBBrinson1 wrote:

What are you on about?

Well, what's your end point in this discussion. Egypt becoming crazy terrorist Sharia nation. Must not happen as it is against US interests. And at the very least, like you said, it's a clash of civilisations and it's a battle for supremacy.

So, all I'm saying is...at the end of the day. If nobody feels they can get along. Then there's only one way to sort it out.

Basically, ya or the hegemony could install dictators to run the countries that are a threat to its interests.

So yeah, basically the US needs to go to war against Egypt. Like what I originally said.

Well so much for speech at 20:00 GMT

fashionably late, I mean I would understand if it was Gaddafi, but Mubarak

he's not gonna resign, still watching live bbc feed...that square is gonna explode

DBBrinson1 wrote:

literally.

lowing wrote:

so it was unintentional? well what more do you want?

I'd like the IDF not to lie, or for people to take what they say with a pillar of salt.

Last edited by Dilbert_X (2011-02-10 16:13:02)