Gee, who didn’t see this coming…well, besides our State Department and the Obama Administration in general (al Arabiya link);
Hundreds of thousands of Egyptians rallied Friday in Cairo’s Tahrir square with Islamists in the forefront to protest against what they say are attempts by the country’s military rulers to designate themselves as the guardians of a new Egypt. It was one of the largest rallied in Egypt in recent months.
Most rallies in Tahrir have been led by liberal- or left-leaning groups. But Friday’s rally was dominated by the country’s most organized political group, the Muslim Brotherhood, which has rarely come out in full force since the protests that forced President Hosni Mubarak to step down in February.
Emphasis is mine.
I’m not sure what it’s all about, but I’m pretty sure it’s going to end up being our fault.
Thanks to Old Trooper for the link.
Jebeebus! That picture at the link is amazing. Now, that’s a protest. It is also big trouble. For now, at least, the guys with the guns and ammo hold sway. And the language of the opposition is interesting. The spokes-imam must have uttered the keyword “democracy” five times. The only problem is that that democracy business doesn’t include non-Muslims.
AirCav, democracy doesn’t even include the Muslims who don’t go along with the MB. Democracy for me but not for thee, seems to be the theme of the MB.
And, this whole thing is obviously the fault of the 1%.
UpNorth. I don’t know world politics or geo-politics well enough to speak to the mess in the Middle East with any authority. For the life of me, as Jonn asked, who couldn’t see this coming? This is what Obama wanted. What I cannot fathom is why he wanted this. He spoke of “the people” and of democracy and, in the end, here, there, and soon to be everwhere, there’s imamocracy, to coin a term.
For as long as the ‘Arab spring’ has gone on, I’ve had to wonder……with all of the relevant and pertinent issues to oppose Obama on, anybody has to invent flaky theories that he had anything to do with populations rising up against oppressive regimes.
CI: Did I imagine that Obama gave support to the uprisings?
Is your question pertaining to your perception of events or querying my post?
Your post. My impression is that Obama has given support to the ‘peoples’ and that his support has encouraged them to action. Is this impression wrong?
@7 – Prior to Tunisia, I certainly hadn’t seen anything tangible from Obama…..other than the general American principles of self determination, have you?
I’m sorry but, he should have known that this would happen. There were warnings from the get get go, that MB was behind this. Now we’ll reap the fruits of this.
“Imamocracy” seems to be a pretty good description of what’s going on in Libya, Tunisia and Egypt. Soon to be followed by countries in the Persian Gulf.
@9 – Doc, that’s sort of my initial question….what could or should have a US president done to intervene in the self determination of another nation?
well Anything he COULD have done SHOULD have been done years ago, in such a way that we at least know the players involved.
Well, my impression is formed by what I recall of Obama’s supportive statements regarding democracy and self determination in Egypt, Libya, and elsewhere. I understood those statements to be a we’re-with-you message to the people of those countries. My problem, if my impression is correct, is that we moved from the predictable and fairly stable to the great unknown where the replacements may be hostile to American interests and worse than those they replaced. I walk gingerly here because I’m aware of my relative ignorance in these matters.
My post @13 was in response to CI’s post @8.
@12 – I’m not sure what that means.
@13 – I’m no foreign policy savant either, but in general terms, our nation has always purported to stand as an example of self determination, not that our model is always followed. It can easily be argued as well, that if the previous regimes weren’t oppressive and unaccountable to their citizens, they may still be here today.
That we support/ed many of them out of political expediency may tangentially implicate us, isn’t quite the same as a candidate for President saying “Barack Obama has laid the table for the Arab Spring by demonstrating weakness from the United States of America.”
Not that expect any better out of Bachmann.
I was unaware that Bachmann said that but it does point up another issue that most Americans find blurry: What is our foreign policy? We seem to be all over the place without a clear sense of what we’re doing and why we’re doing it. Again, I do not read whatever white papers might exist or follow State Dept. goings on. It’s just an impression that the dissension and confusion in our domestic policies is also found in our foreign policies as well. And since Obama is in charge, he is responsible for the course we take.
“That if the previous regimes weren’t oppressive and unaccountable to their citizens, they may still be here today.”. Well put, if Hosni and Muammar weren’t so interested in lining their own pockets, but had done even a little to ease the squalor, they’d probably still be around.
@16 – “And since Obama is in charge, he is responsible for the course we take.”
And I agree.
I do admit to having a nerdy hobby of reading foreign policy wonk fodder….and as such, I tend to get a little spun up over what I perceive as political posturing by our elected class in regards to foreign policy.
I could ramble on at length, but I was really interested in what Obama [or any POTUS] could or should have done regarding the Arab spring, if the perception exists that someone should/could have.
Fair enough. If we all live long enough, we’ll see what happens ultimately. And if not, our children will. I just pray they see it from afar.
I, too, was under the impression that our official position was supportive of the revolution in Egypt. Cannot quote what was said on which days, but certainly remember hearing statements from both Obama and Clinton which may not actually have said, “Rah, rah, go radicals!” but were crafted to leave exactly that impression, one which I have no doubt were interpretted by the radicals in exactly that way.
@8: Obama sure has a funny way of showing support for the people, because he was quiet as a church mouse when Iranian protesters were being shot in the streets, but gave verbal support to the ones in Egypt and Tunisia, as well as those in Syria now. We won’t even get into the Libya thing. I wonder why he was silent about Iran?
CI: Here’s what Obama SHOULD have done. Support the people trying to get freedom in Iran. That is one area where pretty much ANY major change would be for the better, and prior to ’79 when Carter threw the Shah to the wolves, Iran was an Ally of ours. As for Egypt, there should have been slight (bunt noticeable) pressure on Mubarak to step down and slowly work toward a democratic election. If the changes had started back in say ’05, in slow but measurable steps say 6 months at a time, then we could be sure of what was going to happen AND have the moral high ground.
Also with Libya, we SHOULD have sent SF or CIA boots to that theater, to assess who was in charge, and support them. Also we could have done proper support, and ensured that this didn’t take so long. We could have also prevented the execution of Momar, which is NOT the outcome we wanted (trials are nice) and could have guided the peace that will *eventually* follow.
Lastly. . .Yemen. We should have wiped the floor with that place a LOOOONNNGG time ago. say about 2000 after an indecent involving the USS Cole.
@21 – I don’t argue that this Administrations relative silence during the Green Movement is debatable; though I think that debate should recognize that US influence/interference can as easily have a detrimental effect as well as beneficial. Perhaps leaning one way earlier with negligent results caused the Administration to lean the other in later events.
@22 – Pahlevi’s Iran was an ally, but also a brutally repressive regime. We don’t like the mullah-ocracy in Tehran now, but there also wasn’t much of a moral argument for supporting the Shah in 1979. Political expediency and short term policy decisions have worked both positively and negatively throughout our history, and that trend continues to this day, vis-a-vis Iraq and Afghanistan.
Your assertion of action towards Mubarak’s regime is on target, but also encompasses the previous 2-3 Administrations, at least.
I suppose a larger philosophical undercurrent would be to address the balancing of the principles we profess to, with the support for regimes that are antithetical to them.