The Middle East Revolution [2010-2011] Thread: I love baton - General

[QUOTE=MercZ;27784391]Yeah, but the thing is the United States goes and lectures people about "Freedom" and the importance of Democracy... but there are plenty of nations like Egypt that are just as questionable in regards to human rights and "democracy"- the only difference being of course that nations like Egypt are on the good side of the United States.[/QUOTE] Not only are undemocratic countries like Egypt on the good side of the USA, but the USA oftentimes funds them and backs them. [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Devodiere;27784563]Egypt, while they were quite bad with it, are nowhere near as bad as many other nations or even the terrorist groups. Saudi Arabia would be worse than Egypt for both but the advantages they give are more important than lecturing them. You try to make a safe world and eliminate even more radical factions, then you perfect democracy.[/QUOTE] Don't try and defend America for helping these countries. There is no excuse to having a undemocratic country like that. Democracy should [b]always[/b] be the first priority.

Egypt might be a good place to branch off to in a few years, how do you guys feel about bamboo products? :P

that depends on defining who is the ally here ?the government of egypt or the people of egypt?

[QUOTE=Stupideye;27784693]Don't try and defend America for helping these countries. There is no excuse to having a undemocratic country like that. Democracy should [b]always[/b] be the first priority.[/QUOTE] Yeah, aim for the top, most democratic thing around and end up with Theocratical factions taking power. It's just not possible to make everything perfect all at once so they have to choose their battles and pick the peaceful, fauxdemocratic nation over the violent, radical and authoritarian one. It's only temporary until the chance to become true democratic comes up, until then though it is the best course of action possible.

[QUOTE=ewitwins;27784791]Egypt might be a good place to branch off to in a few years, how do you guys feel about bamboo products? :P[/QUOTE] we like it , we have many bamboo products :D

What's happening right now? Why aren't the people taking out Mubarak, can't they go in the palace?

[QUOTE=wanksta11;27784979]What's happening right now? Why aren't the people taking out Mubarak, can't they go in the palace?[/QUOTE] 1. Army is guarding the palace. 2. Mubarak may not even be in Cairo but Sharm el-Sheikh [QUOTE=Devodiere;27784864]Yeah, aim for the top, most democratic thing around and end up with Theocratical factions taking power. It's just not possible to make everything perfect all at once so they have to choose their battles and pick the peaceful, fauxdemocratic nation over the violent, radical and authoritarian one. It's only temporary until the chance to become true democratic comes up, until then though it is the best course of action possible.[/QUOTE] And yet the US is perfectly fine with religious nutjobs influencing domestic policy here? Or supporting the Mujaheddin knowing what the end result would be? Hell even the US-backed government in Afghanistan fashions itself as an "Islamic State". This isn't even mentioning Saudi Arabia and other states. The US apparently has no problem with the religious right-fashioning many domestic policies though. But uh, isn't the [i]point[/i] of democracy to let people take reigns of their own country? Or at least that's the impression I'm getting when the US slams states like Iran for abuses in this regard. This spectre of "theocratic" government is what the US holds over their heads to justify supporting dictators because apparently the people can't be "trusted" with the direction of their country. The real concern is they need yesmen who will commit a nation's resources to following the US's policies in the region. This nonsense about "theocracy" is just a smokescreen they throw up to obscure that. Make secular revolution or movements impossible and you only feed strength to religious-based ones. This is exactly what Mubarak is doing anyways.

[QUOTE=wanksta11;27784979]What's happening right now? Why aren't the people taking out Mubarak, can't they go in the palace?[/QUOTE] imagine if the USA was in mass protest like Egypt now imagine trying to storm the white house

[QUOTE=MercZ;27785230]And yet the US is perfectly fine with religious nutjobs influencing domestic policy here? Or supporting the Mujaheddin knowing what the end result would be? Hell even the US-backed government in Afghanistan fashions itself as an "Islamic State". This isn't even mentioning Saudi Arabia and other states. [/quote] Well the Mujahideen were the ones fighting the Soviet invasion so they were at least trying for some kind of self-determination. Also the Leftist government put in place before the USSR invaded brought in a bunch of unpopular social reforms that everyone hated. It was the lesser of two evils and definitely more democratic. Also when helping the Mujahideen, they had no clue they would turn into the modern day Taliban. [quote]The US apparently has no problem with the religious right-fashioning many domestic policies though. But uh, isn't the [i]point[/i] of democracy to let people take reigns of their own country? Or at least that's the impression I'm getting when the US slams states like Iran for abuses in this regard. This spectre of "theocratic" government is what the US holds over their heads to justify supporting dictators because apparently the people can't be "trusted" with the direction of their country. The real concern is they need yesmen who will commit a nation's resources to following the US's policies in the region. This nonsense about "theocracy" is just a smokescreen they throw up to obscure that.[/QUOTE] Well I suppose it was a bit of a generalisation to say Theocracies are evil, if the people are religious enough then they might want one. Then you have the times when such Theocracies force laws on the people that they aren't too keen on, just like in Iran. They are very much uninfluenced by public opinion and that's probably the best definition of undemocratic you can get. It always strikes me as odd that people portay the US as imperialistic setting up puppet governments everywhere. They have a lot of diplomatic influence because they are the world power and need to. They don't force people to agree with them and don't make demands. Everything other people do that is in the US' interests is either in their interests also or the US has made it highly beneficial to them. Egypt for example; you help in the Israeli peace process (they kinda wanted to), we will give you a ton of cash to build your military and economy. That's not yes men, if anything it's bribery.

[QUOTE=ThePutty;27785239]imagine if the USA was in mass protest like Egypt now imagine trying to storm the white house[/QUOTE] we'd get shot

[QUOTE=Devodiere;27785388]Well the Mujahideen were the ones fighting the Soviet invasion so they were at least trying for some kind of self-determination. Also the Leftist government put in place before the USSR invaded brought in a bunch of unpopular social reforms that everyone hated. It was the lesser of two evils and definitely more democratic. Also when helping the Mujahideen, they had no clue they would turn into the modern day Taliban.[/quote] If the US had the foresight to think the Soviets were ggoing to make moves into that reason, I think they would have had the foresight to see the end result of encouraging religion rather than secularization. They were fine when the new government that emerged from the wreck of the secular, soviet-backed DR Afghanistan began to impose its religious views. The issue came when the group known as the Taliban began to outmaneuver them on the ground when fighting for popularity among the masses. This is problematic among US policy [quote] Well I suppose it was a bit of a generalisation to say Theocracies are evil, if the people are religious enough then they might want one. Then you have the times when such Theocracies force laws on the people that they aren't too keen on, just like in Iran. They are very much uninfluenced by public opinion and that's probably the best definition of undemocratic you can get.[/quote] But the US has no issue in having a theocracy form in Saudi Arabia or the roots of one still existing in Afghanistan? Or what of the support for Suharto's Indonesia? The difference between them and big bad Iran is that they play ball with the United States. That's about it. [quote] It always strikes me as odd that people portay the US as imperialistic setting up puppet governments everywhere. They have a lot of diplomatic influence because they are the world power and need to. They don't force people to agree with them and don't make demands. Everything other people do that is in the US' interests is either in their interests also or the US has made it highly beneficial to them. Egypt for example; you help in the Israeli peace process (they kinda wanted to), we will give you a ton of cash to build your military and economy. That's not yes men, if anything it's bribery.[/QUOTE] Look at the history of US foreign policy and you'll see it has always been for the same cause- while they throw up arguments for democracy and freedom, the real purpose is to establish spheres of influence and open markets for their business. This does tie into their position as a World Power like you said, but you're seeing it in tinted lenses. Like where you said that "They don't force people to agree with them and don't make demands". You just need to look back at the history of Central and South America to see this is completely false. There have been plenty of coups and violence instigated solely due to the United States' interests in the area. And this bit: "Everything other people do that is in the US' interests is either in their interests also or the US has made it highly beneficial to them. " What? Hell you just look at Egypt and see plenty of reasons why this is false. Sure, it's beneficial to those at the top of the Egyptian state but for no one else. Egypt's economy has stagnated for the past 30 years, it's security apparatus is more developed than social services, and poverty and hunger is an issue. In fact for the Middle-East Egyptians sometimes fill a role that Mexicans do here- cheap labor. Many Egyptians go to work in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, and for a time, in Iraq. Where is the benefit the Egyptians receive? So far they've only gotten American made tear-gas. And the US is forming yesmen- that's precisely the result they get with bribery. The two are not separate. They get politicians more worried about what their masters in Washington demand of them than the citizens they are supposed to represent. Look, I don't care about the US's business- I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy in criticizing the lack of democracy and freedoms in some states while many states they back- Mubarak's Egypt, for one- also suffer from the same problems.

[QUOTE=Pharaoh;27784867]we like it , we have many bamboo products :D[/QUOTE] Well then if my business takes off hopefully I'll be seeing you guys in a few years, then :D [editline]1st February 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=EXoDUSFLT;27785985]we'd get shot[/QUOTE] Which is exactly the situation in Egypt. It's true of any nation, you can't expect to rush a nations capital and NOT have bullets flying. Unless of course the military is on the side of the people, but then you'll have private security for the President, or in this case the 21,000 soldiers under the direct command of the Egyptian "President".

[QUOTE=MercZ;27786093]If the US had the foresight to think the Soviets were ggoing to make moves into that reason, I think they would have had the foresight to see the end result of encouraging religion rather than secularization. They were fine when the new government that emerged from the wreck of the secular, soviet-backed DR Afghanistan began to impose its religious views. The issue came when the group known as the Taliban began to outmaneuver them on the ground when fighting for popularity among the masses. This is problematic among US policy [/quote] Wait, what? A leftist, communist sympathetic government took power in Afghanistan and the people started fighting it. The USSR invaded to secure the new governments power against the will of the people. The US assisted the Mujahideen in fighting off the Soviets so they could have their own government. The Afghan government after that was friendly to the US for helping them but the anti-West, extremist Taliban took hold of many rural areas by force. It has nothing to do with religion and if secularism is right or not, it's to do with what the people want. No-one likes the Taliban even, they rule by fear. [quote]But the US has no issue in having a theocracy form in Saudi Arabia or the roots of one still existing in Afghanistan? Or what of the support for Suharto's Indonesia? The difference between them and big bad Iran is that they play ball with the United States. That's about it. [/quote] Well Iran actively oppresses it's people while Saudi Arabia is just ruled that way but yeah, it's mostly who will play ball with them. More than anything they need to have some allies in the region. If they were to only ally with the truly democratic ones, nothing would get done. They have to work with the non-democratic ones to further the overall cause. [quote]Look at the history of US foreign policy and you'll see it has always been for the same cause- while they throw up arguments for democracy and freedom, the real purpose is to establish spheres of influence and open markets for their business. This does tie into their position as a World Power like you said, but you're seeing it in tinted lenses. Like where you said that "They don't force people to agree with them and don't make demands". You just need to look back at the history of Central and South America to see this is completely false. There have been plenty of coups and violence instigated solely due to the United States' interests in the area. [/quote] During the Red Scare and in the years since, they have mostly become fairly democratic. It might be a bloody history but the current result is that South America is more democratic than most areas of the world. I don't approve of them doing it but working towards to goal of self-determination using their methods has worked out. [quote]And this bit: "Everything other people do that is in the US' interests is either in their interests also or the US has made it highly beneficial to them. " What? Hell you just look at Egypt and see plenty of reasons why this is false. Sure, it's beneficial to those at the top of the Egyptian state but for no one else. Egypt's economy has stagnated for the past 30 years, it's security apparatus is more developed than social services, and poverty and hunger is an issue. In fact for the Middle-East Egyptians sometimes fill a role that Mexicans do here- cheap labor. Many Egyptians go to work in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, and for a time, in Iraq. Where is the benefit the Egyptians receive? So far they've only gotten American made tear-gas. And the US is forming yesmen- that's precisely the result they get with bribery. The two are not separate. They get politicians more worried about what their masters in Washington demand of them than the citizens they are supposed to represent. Look, I don't care about the US's business- I'm just pointing out the hypocrisy in criticizing the lack of democracy and freedoms in some states while many states they back- Mubarak's Egypt, for one- also suffer from the same problems.[/QUOTE] Oh come on, Mubarak misuses the funds and it's the US' fault? If they bribed the people in power personally then it would be breeding yesmen but it was given to the country itself with the people in control ruining it and there is nothing they can do about fixing that trend while they are being friendly with them. Egypt has economic issues but they are far more than any USAID could have fixed. Mubarak was corrupt but he was the lesser of two evils and if all goes to plan, Egypt will not be an evil at all. Mubarak and his government worked with the US, that is not the same as being a puppet government.

This is one of those events that later on I'm going to look back and be like "yeah, I was alive for that". It just gives me that feeling. Also, the video of the police retreating on the bridge with the surge of people taking it over is just so profound.

[QUOTE=Pharaoh;27784825]that depends on defining who is the ally here ?the government of egypt or the people of egypt?[/QUOTE] Heh. In an ideal world... I've got to ask- what percentage of Egyptians are really opposed to Mubie? It seems strange that you keep hearing about the military as not being hostile to the protesters and the huge numbers turning out, and yet there isn't, say, a coup.

I wonder whats going to happen right now. I went to sleep early so I could wake up now and spectate, considering that I have school early today. You guys should join irc #egypt, if you want to chat, theres a couple people there now but it's quiet.

Is anyone else scared that Egypt won't turn into a secular democracy like we all want it to?

[QUOTE=Litos456;27788369]I wonder whats going to happen right now. I went to sleep early so I could wake up now and spectate, considering that I have school early today. You guys should join irc #egypt, if you want to chat, theres a couple people there now but it's quiet.[/QUOTE] If you are going to try and get people to join a room on irc, you might want to say what network. Just saying. I'd assume gamesurge, if only because that's most common for FP themed rooms, but still.

Oh, sorry. I'm on Quakenet. I might check other networks though to see if there are more populated egypt related rooms there.

[QUOTE=ShaRose;27788568]If you are going to try and get people to join a room on irc, you might want to say what network. Just saying. I'd assume gamesurge, if only because that's most common for FP themed rooms, but still.[/QUOTE] Edit: Ninja'd!

[QUOTE=Litos456;27788689]Oh, sorry. I'm on Quakenet. I might check other networks though to see if there are more populated egypt related rooms there.[/QUOTE] Didn't really care overly, just a heads up.

Not much is happening still, I guess they're still gearing up. I hope I can stay up long enough to see them move out at least. :|

For anyone interested: BBC just reported that Reuters are reporting that the prime minister of Turkey has basically said that Mubarak should listen to the demands of his people. (I would get a proper quote, but they only briefly mentioned it and moved on a bit) They are also saying theres aprox 100,000 people in Tahir Square now. Edit: 1015: Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan says Hosni Mubarak "should listen to the demands of the people."

didnt wikileaks publish something that showed US's involvement, and how they helped motivate the start of the revolution intentionally? it was in the news forum a few days ago, cant find it now.

[QUOTE=Jsm;27789857]For anyone interested: BBC just reported that Reuters are reporting that the prime minister of Turkey has basically said that Mubarak should listen to the demands of his people. (I would get a proper quote, but they only briefly mentioned it and moved on a bit) They are also saying theres aprox 100,000 people in Tahir Square now. Edit: 1015: Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan says Hosni Mubarak "should listen to the demands of the people."[/QUOTE] That's because Obama called Erdogan yesterday. He says exactly what Obama did.

few hours ago - "a uniform similar to Army uniform stolen from some shops in cairo" 5 minutes ago - " Army forces in Tahrir square start to change their uniform to avoid conflict " oh god , I love smart armies :D Edit : according to aljazeera arabic : those who stole army uniform are probably police and want the people to think army will attack them and the army have orders to arrest anyone wearing the old uniform

[QUOTE=Pharaoh;27790123]few hours ago - "a uniform similar to Army uniform stolen from some shops in cairo" 5 minutes ago - " Army forces in Tahrir square start to change their uniform to avoid conflict " oh god , I love smart armies :D Edit : according to aljazeera arabic : those who stole army uniform are probably police and want the people to think army will attack them and the army have orders to arrest anyone wearing the old uniform[/QUOTE] Haha, that's hilarious.

They said if they get enough people, they'll march to the presidential palace

[QUOTE=ThePutty;27790225]They said if they get enough people, they'll march to the presidential palace[/QUOTE] Source please?

[quote]11:43am One of our correspondents on Tahrir square in Cairo just tweeted this: "Hey hey hosni is leaving tonight" is another chant now. Everyone says if numbers big enough they'll march to Presidents Palace tonight![/quote]