Egypt: The first step to democracy is to establish a dictatorship of the people

[SlowwHand]

HA! Pot, meet kettle; and Alby shows again that he's stupid.

[Aeson]

As I've pointed out, if there were a third group, pro-democratic and pro-American in Egypt, that might be worth supporting. But not the MB.

There are many, many people in Egypt, with various views on democracy and Americans. Sure, in general they probably don't look favorably on us, but supporting a dictator isn't going to help there. It's part of the problem.

It's like propping up the Communists. It's madness.

Supporting democratic movements is not like propping up the Communists. Propping up oppressive dictators is much closer. Communists were generally totalitarian, so at least they share position on that axis.

It's not a false dichotomy.

Yes it is. The fact that you can't see it just shows how skewed your world-view is. You're talking about the future of a nation as if there's only two possible outcomes. That is absurd.

No, I'd say I'm pretty comfortable siding with every president except Obama and Carter on this. Perhaps Bush is an exception as well.

... because supporting Saddam turned out to be such a good idea. As did our involvement in Iran.

Egypt now is nowhere near as big a problem as either of those, where we did do the moronic thing you're suggesting.

It's not all bad you know. The Americans actively funded democratic groups in Europe against the Communists, and worked against the Communists in Europe. They did pretty well there. We got social democrats instead of straight out Coms in power. Often though there is simply no such option to work with pro-Western democrats.

Yes, it's good to support democratic groups. No, this doesn't mean we should support totalitarian regimes we can find to oppress democratic movements out of fear that they might lead to totalitarian regimes.

You assert a chain of causation as regards the installation of the Shah into power but I know of no detailed evidentiary analysis that makes this case.

We helped support a revolution and then supported the Shah. It obviously didn't work out well for us in the long run. Iran is what we had hoped to avoid it becoming, and probably more-so for our meddling. We did enjoy some good deals on oil for a while because, but I don't think that's worth toppling a democracy.

Well, let's see:
1. It calls for resistance against the "Zio-American" enemy. That's you, in case you missed it.
2. It endorses terror attacks against American soldiers and the American army.
3. It calls for the release of terrorists responsible for attacks against American targets on American soil.
4. It endorses violent protests against American embassies.

1-4. You are conflating MB (or some portion of MB) with Egypt as a whole again.
1. Egypt is not my enemy. I can understand how my nation supporting a dictator over the Egyptian people (and elsewhere over those of the faith and/or ethnicity they identify with) could have caused some hard feelings. I wish my nation would stop with such moronic policies. In this regard, I have enemies ... those who support totalitarian regimes and offensive wars.
2. Not sure what you are referring to here. Perhaps it was something some guy said that you have now determined that all of Egypt, or something some criminal did while happening to be Egyptian? Did it happen while Mubarak was in charge like all your other examples in the last thread?
3. Asking for the release of prisoners is of 0 consequence. It's not going to happen. You can stop peeing your pants now.
4. Morsi condemned violence at embassy protests. Protests are free speech and I support their right to peacefully assemble, even if I don't agree with what they are protesting about. That is at the heart of American values, and it's a shame you would trample on them just because of your irrational fear of Muslims.

There's a word for that kind of group: an enemy. A movement that seeks to war with your society.

Egypt wasn't perfect under Mubarak or under Sadat. But after the Camp David accords it was not your enemy

Egypt has shown that there are elements in it which seek democracy. We should support those elements and hope they can sway the rest tot heir side. It's not a sure thing that they will work things out satisfactory, or what timeframe they will need to get there ... but it's better than a sure dictator (and the sure resentment we gain from supporting that dictator) forever.

[Zevico]

1-4. You are conflating MB (or some portion of MB) with Egypt as a whole again.

All of the MB. And I'm not conflating the MB for Egypt. I'm simply pointing out that the MB is a dangerously anti-Western organisation which the left has applauded into power.

4. Morsi condemned violence at embassy protests. Protests are free speech and I support their right to peacefully assemble, even if I don't agree with what they are protesting about. That is at the heart of American values, and it's a shame you would trample on them just because of your irrational fear of Muslims.

There you go again.

The US embassy in Cairo caught the ruling Muslim Brotherhood being two-faced as the protests were under way earlier this week, reports the Hill. The Egypt group’s Arabic feed praised the protests, while its American feed expressed support for American staffers:

Brotherhood’s tweet in Arabic: “Egyptians rise to defend the prophet.”

Brotherhood’s tweet in English: “We r relieved none of @USEmbassyCairo staff were harmed & hope US-Eg relations will sustain turbulence of Tuesday’s events”

US response to the latter: “Thanks. By the way, have you checked out your own Arabic feeds? I hope you know we read those too.”

The US embassy feed is run by Larry Schwartz, the senior policy officer responsible for the controversial American statement released just after the protests started.

The protesters violated your sovereignty, took your flag, tore it apart and replaced it with the black flag of Al Qaeda and Salafism. Does the name Al Qaeda remind you of anything? No?

They were smart enough not to do more. This time.

This MB statement, by the way, is not just an endorsement of what the protesters did. It's a call to do more.

[Zevico]

3. Asking for the release of prisoners is of 0 consequence. It's not going to happen. You can stop peeing your pants now.

Well the consequence is, in this case, not to the point. The point is that they're calling for the release of a man who participated in the first WTC bombing. What does that say about their views on the US-Egypt relationship?

[Zevico]

Yes, it's good to support democratic groups. No, this doesn't mean we should support totalitarian regimes we can find to oppress democratic movements out of fear that they might lead to totalitarian regimes.

Aren't you meddling with democracy? Who are you to prevent the people of Europe from choosing Communism, Nazism, etc?

[Zevico]

We helped support a revolution and then supported the Shah. It obviously didn't work out well for us in the long run.

Obviously. Which is why you haven't explained how our support for the Shah led to the Shah being toppled by Islamists. Because it's so obvious you can't even find the words to express explain it. Like some bizarre article of faith. Sermon 1: American support for the Shah is why the 1979 revolution happened; so sayeth the wise Aeson. Obviously.

[regexcellent]

Egypt, or as it is now known "here comes the new boss, same as the old boss." Who could have possibly seen this coming? (oh yeah, everyone)

What happened here is precisely the reason I have been saying that propping up Mubarak would have been the right move. Here we are again, with Egypt under the thumb of a dictator, only now he's a worse dictator. So much for that "Arab Spring."

[Aeson]

1-4. You are conflating MB (or some portion of MB) with Egypt as a whole again.

All of the MB. And I'm not conflating the MB for Egypt. I'm simply pointing out that the MB is a dangerously anti-Western organisation which the left has applauded into power.

You keep conflating Egypt and the MB, as if they're some monolithic block. You show this clearly by how you respond to anything said specifically about Egypt as a nation by using the pronouns "they" or similar when referencing MB statements or actions, without noting that you are speaking about MB rather than Egypt.

There you go again.

Yep, there I go not wildly blowing tweets out of proportion, and not having an extremely polarized view of the world. I can see room to call for protests without calling for violence. You obviously can't.

The protesters violated your sovereignty, took your flag, tore it apart and replaced it with the black flag of Al Qaeda and Salafism. Does the name Al Qaeda remind you of anything? No?

And Morsi condemned those acts. Again you seem incapable of differentiating between hooligans that do something wrong, and an entire nation, which is comprised of many factions, at least some of them who do not support the acts you think validate your calls for a totalitarian regime to oppress the entire nation.

They were smart enough not to do more. This time.

Ominous! Scary! OMG!

You know street gangs in the US do similar things to people's homes every day? They are criminals. The US doesn't need a dictator to stop them (not that it'd work anyways).

This MB statement, by the way, is not just an endorsement of what the protesters did. It's a call to do more.

No, it was a call for protests about the film. Everything past that was condemned by the Egyptian government.

[Zevico]

And Morsi condemned those acts. Again you seem incapable of differentiating between hooligans that do something wrong, and an entire nation, which is comprised of many factions, at least some of them who do not support the acts you think validate your calls for a totalitarian regime to oppress the entire nation.

No. As I've pointed out, the MB's twitter feed endorsed them.

[Aeson]

Well the consequence is, in this case, not to the point. The point is that they're calling for the release of a man who participated in the first WTC bombing. What does that say about their views on the US-Egypt relationship?

It says nothing at all. We already know they can't do anything about it. They know they can't do anything about it. They can say whatever they want, it won't change anything. So Morsi can appease some of the factions in Egypt which are more hard-line without any consequence.

Aren't you meddling with democracy? Who are you to prevent the people of Europe from choosing Communism, Nazism, etc?

You're conflating support for democratic movements under totalitarian regimes with toppling democratically elected governments that are not yet totalitarian regimes. They are very different things.

Obviously. Which is why you haven't explained how our support for the Shah led to the Shah being toppled by Islamists. Because it's so obvious you can't even find the words to express explain it. Like some bizarre article of faith. Sermon 1: American support for the Shah is why the 1979 revolution happened; so sayeth the wise Aeson. Obviously.

It's basic human nature. Someone oppresses you or your entire nation, you naturally dislike them and are more willing to turn to extremist groups for support against this new enemy. Kinda like you dislike Islamists so are more willing to turn to dictators. Yah, you don't really think dictators are a good thing in a vacuum, but because you're so scared of Islamists you're willing to tolerate dictators.

When we toppled Iranian democracy it was blatantly obvious that doing so would lead to ill-will towards us from the Iranians. It did. We can't be surprised that it did. Our actions (with Iran, and Saddam) failed to prevent what we were worried about happening, and probably just ensured that when it happened more people hated us enough to do things we don't want them to do.

This isn't difficult to understand. Our actions have consequences.

[Zevico]

You keep conflating Egypt and the MB, as if they're some monolithic block. You show this clearly by how you respond to anything said specifically about Egypt as a nation by using the pronouns "they" or similar when referencing MB statements or actions, without noting that you are speaking about MB rather than Egypt.

Egypt is not a monolithic bloc. My goodness. The MB is a monolithic bloc because they expel members who don't accept the basic premises of their organisation. That is, when members diverge from the MB line they're kicked out, forced to leave. Others quit in disgust. Back in the mid-90's there was a moderate MB offshoot which accepted democratic values and established a separate political party because they weren't welcome in the MB. To give another example, the former webmaster of the MB's English language website left the party fairly recently.

[Aeson]

No. As I've pointed out, the MB's twitter feed endorsed them.

The MB twitter messages called for a protest. It did not call for violence. That only happened in your own paranoid delusions.

Morsi (who is not the MB, even if he's been involved with them) condemned the attacks on the embassy and called for protests to remain peaceful. Your claims that he didn't is absurd.

[Aeson]

Egypt is not a monolithic bloc. My goodness.

You keep treating them as such. You're now conflating Morsi and the MB, to claim that Morsi didn't say what he said.

The MB is a monolithic bloc because they expel members who don't accept the basic premises of their organisation. That is, when members diverge from the MB line they're kicked out, forced to leave. Others quit in disgust. Back in the mid-90's there was a moderate MB offshoot which accepted democratic values and established a separate political party because they weren't welcome in the MB. To give another example, the former webmaster of the MB's English language website left the party fairly recently.

So if say, someone who was formerly in the MB, but left as part of his promise when taking office, said this:

By midday, searching for a middle ground, Mr. Morsi appeared on national television, telling Egyptians it was their “religious duty to protect our guests and those who come to us from outside our nation,” including their embassies, and businesses. “I know that the people attacking the embassies do not represent any of us. We all have to cooperate to express opinions while maintaining our principles, our correct peaceful ways that the whole world accepts,” he said.

They would kick him out of the MB he already left? But if the MB tweets something vague about protests then it definitely means Morsi didn't say what he said?

[Zevico]

If you think the MB's endorsement of a protest is not an endorsement of a protest, what is it? "Vague" is a nice little word you have there. Nice little dodge. What I think is that Morsi is lying. Telling one thing to you, another to others. Playing it both ways. It's a classic strategem. Used many times. It's fascinating, really. I mean, this a group that condemned killing Bin Laden. This is a man who is a 9/11 truther. You think he has a problem with lying?

[Aeson]

If you think the MB's endorsement of a protest is not an endorsement of a protest, what is it?

Now you're conflating "protest" with "violent actions that occurred during a protest and were condemned".

"Vague" is a nice little word you have there. Nice little dodge.

Yes, I dodged your paranoid delusion by sticking to reality. The reality is that the twitter messages didn't call for violence. They called for protest. Protest is not violence. Of course the messages were rather vague. Tweets have to be. There's only so much information you can fit into 140 characters.

You want to pretend they called for violence in the protests, even though they didn't, even though the violence that occurred during the protests were condemned afterwards by actors you claim didn't do so.

What I think is that Morsi is lying. Telling one thing to you, another to others. Playing it both ways. It's a classic strategem.

Yes, we know you are paranoid about all things Muslim. They all must be lying when they say they want peace and that they'll prosecute those responsible for scaling the walls of the embassy, because you know ... they're Muslim

It's fascinating, really. I mean, this a group that condemned killing Bin Laden. This is a man who is a 9/11 truther. You think he has a problem with lying?

I don't know if he's a liar or not. If he is lying, I don't pretend to know his "real" purpose is. However I do know what he actually said, and you claimed he didn't say it, so I know you're wrong.