US Sec of State Rice criticizes govt of US ally Egypt

[Ramo]

I believe that we are arguing about the current state of Egypt's politics. Not some hypothetical situation in the future.

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by GePap


"Actually, no, they had not shceduled the elections just then, IIRC.

They did it soon after, but not when Allawi took over, as some ill informed people might think."

Well im quite glad youre no longer saying Allawi was appointed to defer elections. The UNSC res establishing the January deadline was passed in June, I think. About the same time Allawi was selected. I dont recall when i posted about the demo.


"Again, no, those elections had not yet being scheduled. As for your second part, the group most connected to the insurgency, the Sunnis, DID BOYCOTT the election, and their turnout was miniscule compared to the Shia and the Kurds. "

I did not say otherwise (though the Sunni arabs seem to be having second thoughts now.


"No one here was surprised by the events of Jan. 30. 60% turnout, not including the Sunnis, vast turnout in the Kurdish areas, as everyone expected, and since the Ayatallahs had made it a duty to vote, large turnout in the Shia areas as well. "

You mean on January 29, when it was pretty clear what was going to happen on the 30th? youre right, few were surprised, except at how quiet the day was.

In June? In August? Even in November. It doesnt take that much to be right about whats going to happen the next day.


"Then the Iraqis were late in forming a government"

OMG, their first real democratic govt ever, and it takes them two whole months to form a cabinet!! Obvioulsy you dont follow say, Israeli politics closely.

" no one knows yet if the consitutional vote wll be delayed by 6 months"

no one knows if it will be delayed by two weeks, either. Or two months. Or not at all. No one know if the Iranian govt isnt about to collapse. "No one knows X" isnt a meaningful statement. They HAVE formed a govt. They have entered into negotiations with they Sunnis (including AMS and IIP), who seem quite willing to participate, but bargained over number of reps. They have reached an agreement in principle on the number of Sunni reps, and are now arguing over which Sunnis get chosen. Geez, political give and take.


"and if we measure the insurgency in bodies, the election did not change that."

So now youre saying body counts are more important than political progress?

"You have a very variable memory, obviosuly."

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


"Some joining the chants". From where does htis become thousands? All of a sudden you know exactly what the author meant by "some"?

If you are psychic, you should have won that 10 Million already.

Pardon. It IS possible that thousands lined the streets and watched, but less than one thousand (that would be hundreds) joined the chants. 2000 watchers, say 500 joiners, in addition to 300 in the streets. OTOH when a reporter says "thousands" 2000 is presumably the lower limit - they could mean anywhere from 2000 to 9000, say. Id say 5000 is a safe guess. those who joined in are less than 20% - thats SOME - as opposed to a few? I dunno, could be. AP probably wont follow up on this. I could look for an Egyptian blogger, but you wont beleive them anyway.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
I believe that we are arguing about the current state of Egypt's politics. Not some hypothetical situation in the future.

we're arguing about whether an election without MB would be meaningful. If MB is the main opposition cause the secular opposition has been crushed in the past, and if the secular opposition is getting to close to surpassing the MB, and IF in an election, it was clear that the secular opposition would make real democratic changes of the kind that most MB supporters want (and which the Khatami moderates could NOT bring about in Iran) then the election would seem to me to be QUITE meaningful.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I did not say otherwise (though the Sunni arabs seem to be having second thoughts now.

So sunny joe you thought that Sunnis would follow the boycott announced by their leaders? How pessimistic of you

You mean on January 29, when it was pretty clear what was going to happen on the 30th? youre right, few were surprised, except at how quiet the day was.

In June? In August? Even in November. It doesnt take that much to be right about whats going to happen the next day.

Many people claimed the elections hearelded the end of the insurgency-they have been showns..blah, blah, blah.

That did not happen. That is where the lack of surprise comes in.

OMG, their first real democratic govt ever, and it takes them two whole months to form a cabinet!! Obvioulsy you dont follow say, Israeli politics closely.

OMG! The Israelis don;t have a timeline set up by which tiime their supposed to have a consitution, a timeline set up prior to the very elections!

no one knows if it will be delayed by two weeks, either. Or two months. Or not at all. No one know if the Iranian govt isnt about to collapse. "No one knows X" isnt a meaningful statement. They HAVE formed a govt. They have entered into negotiations with they Sunnis (including AMS and IIP), who seem quite willing to participate, but bargained over number of reps. They have reached an agreement in principle on the number of Sunni reps, and are now arguing over which Sunnis get chosen. Geez, political give and take.

And thus, what's going on with the constitution?

Give and take will be much harder when it comes to whom controls Kirkut, the northenr oil, the amount of autotnomy for ther Kurds, and the role of Islam in the government.

That's what to come, so the artificial timelines set up prior to the elections might obviously not be met. That's a great first message, no? Makes you wonder about the whole setting up of timelines.

So now youre saying body counts are more important than political progress?

No. I am saying that claims that the elections marked a huge and long term defeat for the insurgents have proven, well, wrong.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Pardon. It IS possible that thousands lined the streets and watched, but less than one thousand (that would be hundreds) joined the chants. 2000 watchers, say 500 joiners, in addition to 300 in the streets. OTOH when a reporter says "thousands" 2000 is presumably the lower limit - they could mean anywhere from 2000 to 9000, say. Id say 5000 is a safe guess. those who joined in are less than 20% - thats SOME - as opposed to a few? I dunno, could be. AP probably wont follow up on this. I could look for an Egyptian blogger, but you wont beleive them anyway.

Now you are engaging in a hypothetical numbers game, to what end?

[GePap]

An interesting round-up of the Arab media:

http://www.fromallangles.com/newspapers/countries/egypt.htm

Rice's comments gardnered only attacks from Saudi funded or Egyptian official press. Nothing from anyone else, probably because more important things are afoot in the ME right now.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


"So sunny joe you thought that Sunnis would follow the boycott announced by their leaders? How pessimistic of you "

Its not clear how many followed the boycott, and how many stayed home out of fear. I never thought the turnout would be as high as in the Shia areas. Sunni arab turnout was about 15 to 20% overall, and was above zero even in Fallujah. Not great, not bad.

You mean on January 29, when it was pretty clear what was going to happen on the 30th? youre right, few were surprised, except at how quiet the day was.

In June? In August? Even in November. It doesnt take that much to be right about whats going to happen the next day.

"Many people claimed the elections hearelded the end of the insurgency-they have been showns..blah, blah, blah.

That did not happen. That is where the lack of surprise comes in."

So, if something i dont think will happen, happens, but doesnt lead to the result some people claim, then im right?

Try this one out = Some right wingers claim that theres NO global warming, AND that if it happened (which they insist it wont) the economy would adjust. So IF global warming happens, BUT the economy adjust, are these folks right about global warming?

BTW, I dont think i ever said the elections heralded the immediate end of the insurgency.

OMG, their first real democratic govt ever, and it takes them two whole months to form a cabinet!! Obvioulsy you dont follow say, Israeli politics closely.

OMG! The Israelis don;t have a timeline set up by which tiime their supposed to have a consitution, a timeline set up prior to the very elections!

OMG, cause a piece of paper has a timeline on it, all hell will break loose if they miss a deadline!!!

no one knows if it will be delayed by two weeks, either. Or two months. Or not at all. No one know if the Iranian govt isnt about to collapse. "No one knows X" isnt a meaningful statement. They HAVE formed a govt. They have entered into negotiations with they Sunnis (including AMS and IIP), who seem quite willing to participate, but bargained over number of reps. They have reached an agreement in principle on the number of Sunni reps, and are now arguing over which Sunnis get chosen. Geez, political give and take.

"And thus, what's going on with the constitution?

Give and take will be much harder when it comes to whom controls Kirkut, the northenr oil, the amount of autotnomy for ther Kurds, and the role of Islam in the government.

That's what to come, so the artificial timelines set up prior to the elections might obviously not be met. That's a great first message, no? Makes you wonder about the whole setting up of timelines."

So now youre saying body counts are more important than political progress?

No. I am saying that claims that the elections marked a huge and long term defeat for the insurgents have proven, well, wrong.

We dont know if they were a long term defeat, since they only happened a few months ago.

[GePap]

And a round-up of Egyptian news:

http://www.fromallangles.com/newspapers/countries/egypt.htm

The protests don't even register. It seems the Arab press does not see them as significant, as opposed to say, events in Lebanon right after Harriri's death.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
]

Rice's comments gardnered only attacks from Saudi funded or Egyptian official press. Nothing from anyone else, probably because more important things are afoot in the ME right now.

feel free to post about them, then.

[Ramo]

we're arguing about whether an election without MB would be meaningful. If MB is the main opposition cause the secular opposition has been crushed in the past, and if the secular opposition is getting to close to surpassing the MB, and IF in an election, it was clear that the secular opposition would make real democratic changes of the kind that most MB supporters want (and which the Khatami moderates could NOT bring about in Iran) then the election would seem to me to be QUITE meaningful.

How does that quote imply that the secular opposition is close to surpassing MB? What it says is that if the MB were inactive, the secular opposition might catch up eventually. That's a very diffent statement.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo

we're arguing about whether an election without MB would be meaningful. If MB is the main opposition cause the secular opposition has been crushed in the past, and if the secular opposition is getting to close to surpassing the MB, and IF in an election, it was clear that the secular opposition would make real democratic changes of the kind that most MB supporters want (and which the Khatami moderates could NOT bring about in Iran) then the election would seem to me to be QUITE meaningful.

How does that quote imply that the secular opposition is close to surpassing MB? What it says is that if the MB were inactive, the secular opposition might catch up. That's a very diffent statement.

"Worried that the proactive steps taken by secular Egyptian reformers like the Kifaya (Enough) Movement could cost the Brotherhood its position as Egypt's leading opposition movement has stirred the organization into action."

it doesnt say IF. It just says theyre worried, and they are responding by taking action.

[Ramo]

You omitted the previous sentence: "[The MB] has been roused from a public slumber."

So IF the MB doesn't stop its public slumber, the secular groups can overtake them. Which is pretty damn obvious - inactive organizations typically get overtaken by active organizations.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
You omitted the previous sentence: "[The MB] has been roused from a public slumber."

So IF the MB doesn't stop its public slumber, the secular groups can overtake them. Which is pretty damn obvious - inactive organizations typically get overtaken by active organizations.

by the same token, well organized organization typically are more popular than ones that are not well organized. The MB benefits from a legacy of being well-organized. Kifaya is just getting organized now.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap
And a round-up of Egyptian news:

http://www.fromallangles.com/newspapers/countries/egypt.htm

The protests don't even register. It seems the Arab press does not see them as significant, as opposed to say, events in Lebanon right after Harriri's death.

agreed. Those events, especially the massive anti-Syrian demos, led to the withdrawl of Syrian troops from Lebanon. Now who was emphasizing their importance, and who was trying to minimize it?