New Egyptian War: Americans Lose, Again
“ There is only one side that the US government has never supported: our side. The American side. It has never supported the side of the US taxpayers who resent being forced to fund a foreign dictatorship, a foreign military, and foreign protestors. It has never supported the side of the majority of Americans who do not wish to get involved in the confusing internal affairs of countries thousands of miles away. It has never supported the side of those of us concerned about blowback, which is the real threat to our national security. Unfortunately, US administrations continue to follow the same old failed policies and Obama is no different. More intervention, more foreign aid, more bullying, more empire.”
by Rep. Ron Paul, July 08, 2013
Looking at the banners in the massive Egyptian protests last week, we saw many anti-American slogans. Likewise, the Muslim Brotherhood-led government that was deposed by the military last week was very critical of what it saw as US support for the coup. Why is it that all sides in this Egyptian civil war seem so angry with the United States? Because the United States has at one point or another supported each side, which means also that at some point the US has also opposed each side. It is the constant meddling in Egyptian affairs that has turned Egyptians against us, as we would resent foreign intervention in our own affairs.
For more than 30 years, since the US-brokered Camp David Accord between Israel and Egypt, the US supported Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak. Over that period the US sent more than $60 billion to prop up Mubarak and, importantly, to train and seek control over the Egyptian military. Those who opposed Mubarak’s unelected reign became more and more resentful of the US, which they rightly saw as aiding and abetting a dictator and denying them their political aspirations.
Then the US began providing assistance to groups seeking to overthrow Mubarak, which they did in 2011. The US continued funding the Egyptian military at that time, arguing that US aid was more critical than ever if we are to maintain influence. The US Administration demanded an election in Egypt after Mubarak’s overthrow and an election was held. Mohamed Morsi of the Muslim Brotherhood won a narrow victory. The US supported Morsi but kept funding the Egyptian military.
After a year of Morsi’s rule, Egyptians who did not approve of his government took to the streets to demand his removal from power. The US signaled to the Egyptian military that it would not oppose the removal of Morsi from power, and he was removed on July 3rd. With the overthrow of the Muslim Brotherhood-led government came the arrest of many politicians and the closure of many media outlets sympathetic to them. Then the US government warned the same Egyptian military that undermined democracy that it needed to restore democracy! Is it any wonder why Egyptians from all walks of life are united in their irritation with the United States?
Despite the Egyptian government being overthrown by a military coup, the Obama Administration will not utter the word “coup” because acknowledging reality would mean an end to US assistance to the Egyptian government and military. That cannot be allowed.
Instead, we see the same Obama administration that is on a worldwide manhunt for pro-transparency whistle-blower Edward Snowden demand that the Egyptian military exercise "political transparency" in its dealings with the ousted Muslim Brotherhood-led government.
So, successive US administrations over the decades have supported all sides in Egypt, from dictator to demonstrator to military. There is only one side that the US government has never supported: our side. The American side. It has never supported the side of the US taxpayers who resent being forced to fund a foreign dictatorship, a foreign military, and foreign protestors. It has never supported the side of the majority of Americans who do not wish to get involved in the confusing internal affairs of countries thousands of miles away. It has never supported the side of those of us concerned about blowback, which is the real threat to our national security. Unfortunately, US administrations continue to follow the same old failed policies and Obama is no different. More intervention, more foreign aid, more bullying, more empire.
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama on Saturday reiterated that the U.S. is not aligned with and is not supporting any particular Egyptian political party or group and again condemned the ongoing violence across Egypt.
ReplyDeleteObama made those points during a telephone conference with the National Security Council about developments in Egypt, according to a statement issued by the White House. He was spending the weekend at Camp David, the presidential retreat in Maryland.
"The United States categorically rejects the false claims propagated by some in Egypt that we are working with specific political parties or movements to dictate how Egypt's transition should proceed," the White House statement said. "We remain committed to the Egyptian people and their aspirations for democracy, economy opportunity and dignity. But the future path of Egypt can only be determined by the Egyptian people.”
More intervention, more foreign aid, more bullying, more empire.
ReplyDeleteOOrah!
I guess Obama is another one challenged by Irony.
ReplyDeleteThe aid over all these years was going mainly to the Egyptian military and the idea was to buy some peace in the area, keep the waterways open and it worked for what, 25 years?
ReplyDeleteMcCain may lack a sense of irony. He said we should cut the aid off now because it is not going to a democratically elected government. Heh, after the US sent aid for ever before that to the earlier governments. And he voted for it.
The chances of a conflict with Israel are less with the Egyptian military in control.
We should if anything increase aid to the Egyptian military now. Cheaper in the long run.
What are you anyway, a warmonger?
:) irony
bob
The aim of Morsi was to impose sharia asap.
DeleteOne vote, one time, then sharia and the blessings of the MB.
bob
John Bolton on this subject, who has some doubts too about the validity of the earlier elections, but no matter -
ReplyDelete"Liberty is a higher value than democracy."
Meaning if democracy just leads to sharia it isn't really democracy, which needs unending really free elections, free of speech, respect for human rights and all that uncool stuff, no looking to allah.
bob
Egypt foils infiltration of 10 Hamas militants into Sinai
ReplyDeleteEgyptian border guards foiled on early Sunday morning an infiltration attempt of ten Jihadists -- presumably Hamas militants from the Gaza Strip into North Sinai, a security source told Xinhua.
"The militants were coming out of a smuggling tunnel in Rafah border city and ran back when the Egyptian guards approached, leaving behind seven boxes of bombs, ammunition and live bullets," the source said, noting that they are believed to be members of the Palestinian Islamic Hamas movement.
A few hours ago, a group of gunmen bombed a pipeline in North Sinai that provides natural gas to Jordan.
The attack came after the Egyptian army ousted President Mohamed Morsi on Wednesday in response to millions of protesters who demanded his removal due to his "maladministration" since he came to power a year ago. However, supporters of the Islamist- oriented president condemned the move as "a military coup" and vowed to sacrifice for Morsi's legitimacy.
On Friday, at least five soldiers were killed in North Sinai in armed attacks by extremist Islamist groups in Arish International Airport, a security camp in Rafah, a police station and two security checkpoints in Sheikh Zuwaid and other security premises.
Ah yeah...
HAMAS OPERATIVES ARRESTED WITH EXPLOSIVES IN CAIRO
ReplyDeleteMuslim Brotherhood proxies plot retaliation for military's ouster of Morsi
Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/07/hamas-operatives-arrested-with-explosives-in-cairo/#X6eDL1UJ8J6RTGFQ.99
Seven members of Hamas were arrested in Cairo after being caught with explosive-laden cars meant to be used in a series of attacks in Egypt, according to a senior Egyptian intelligence official speaking to WND.
The official said the Hamas gunmen were working in conjunction with members of the Muslim Brotherhood pending a decision by leaders within the Islamist group to order attacks in retaliation for the military’s ouster of Mohamed Morsi as president following days of massive popular protests.
Getting interesting... So glad they didnt have and spray paint..
Another interesting opinion from a foreign source who lived through sharia lite and doesn't want sharia imposed anywhere - "I hope the right people get the justice." Her way of saying she supports the military in Egypt.
ReplyDeletebob
Well let's be honest. Nasserism aint to cool either...
Delete.
ReplyDeleteModern liberalism, among other things, is a psychological state, in which very-well-off Americans find ways through their income and privilege to be exempt from the ramifications of their own ideologies, while adopting causes and pets that exempt them from guilt over their own status and limitless opportunities. Judging by their concrete actions, they are indifferent to the poor whom they romanticize at a safe distance. In short, voting for larger government and subsidies is seen as a necessary cost of being a reactionary, liberal elite...
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2013/07/08/liberal_apartheid_119115.html#ixzz2YSsue5sA
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter
.
Senator Paul does not seem to understand the importance, to US interests, in keeping the Suez Canal open to traffic.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that the US has managed to accomplish that, despite repeated invasions by Israel, a measure of continued US success, in Egypt
spoken like the true moslem brotherhood goon you are....
Deletelol
what a fucktard you are...
Watching your cousins throw one another off rooftops warms the soul.
This comment has been removed by the author.
Deletelet's revise that to say ...
DeleteThe death toll, in Egypt, lower than that in Israel, where the state finances the murders 20,000 Jews each year.
Year after year after year, of the 21st century.
The Chief Rabbinate of Israel driven to distraction by the continued murder of Jews by the secular state of Israel.
Next the anoni will tell us that the Chief Rabbinate of Israel is anti-Semitic and are consumed by the issue of abortion because they are rapists.
ReplyDeleteNothing could be further from the truth.
anoni is a secular Israeli, one that uses any tool in the box to advance the political agenda of genocide by the state of Israel. The state of Israel, supporting genocide in the lands of Palestine and the Americas, in both the 20th and 21st centuries.
That's the reality of anoni's politics.
Promoting and defending murder and genocide, proven historical facets of the policies propagated by the state of Israel, at home and abroad.
The Chief Rattinate of Arizona again demands the right to control the bodies of women. Again he comes out against a woman's right to choose, continuing his war on women.
ReplyDeleteWhy don't you drop the argument Rattinate, you are repetitive and absurd.
Deletebob
It's actually good that rat posts on this blog it shows Rats anti-Israel and Anti-Zionist bias
DeleteNo one would believe the words that come out of rats mouth better than allowing rat to speak.
Thank you Mr. rat for proving what a piece of filth you really are
boobie claims to stand for women, while he promotes the right of murder babies.
DeleteHalf of which would grow to be women.
They denounce the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and Judaic Law
While supporting the state of Israel financing what the Chief Rabbinate of Israel describes as murder, under the precept of Judaic Law.
The secular state Israel continues the anti-Judaic slaughter of innocents, regardless of the Rabbinate's pleas for the right of life to take precedence over the authority to murder...
boobie says it is absurd to make a point of the Chief Rabbinate's assertions.
anoni wishes he could wrap himself in the Torah, but is reduced to calling me names.
Proving his position with regards Israel has nothing to do with Judaism, everything to do with protecting a secular and ethnically discriminatory European outpost in a portion of Palestine.
The claims to providing a Jewish homeland proven to be nothing more than a diversion. The state of Israel does not promote the birth of Jews, it finances their murder. Better for the state to import full grown adults than to invest in the raising of 20,000 infants each year.
No need to finance the expenses of raising children, when for a small flat fee those lives can be terminated. There are plenty more Eastern Europeans that are willing to move to a secular state in a portion of Palestine, on the shores of the Med.
For the state of Israel and their arms industry, it is better to build another Merkava battle chariot than a classroom.
anoni, he's all in.
No, no, Chief Rattinate, I didn't even mention my own opinions, was merely making yours more clear so the folks can understand you don't think women should be able to control their own bodies, have any right to have choices, their own choices, continuing your war on women.
DeleteUnfortunately I have to go so the Rattinate will get the last word.
bob
No, boobie, you assertions as to my beliefs are false.
DeleteI stand about where Mr Perry of Texas stands on abortion.
The woman could terminate the pregnecy prior to twenty wees.
It provides the women with her "Right to Choose", her ability to terminate what abortion rights advocates describe as an "unviable tissue mass".
The Texican legislation would protect the "Right to Life" of the soon to be born baby.
My position on abortion however has bearing upon the Chief Rabbinate of Israel and the precepts of Judaic Law. My position has no bearing upon the policies pursued by the secular state of Israel, in their portion of Palestine.
What is happening, boobie, I am merely reporting on the position of the sectarian authority on Judaic Law in Israel. The Rabbinate is the authority on what amounts to murder under the pecepts of Judaic Law. The secular state of Israel sanctifies and finances what the Rabbinate describes as murder 20,000 Jews each year.
In response to the reporting, the poster currently posing as anoni, reveals his secular position. He sides with the secular state rather than the precepts of Judaic Law, as interpreted by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel.
While you make think this is an absurdity, I beg to differ.
This subject matter exposes the reality of fraud that our Israeli poster, Quot, was attempting to perpetrate. Representing the state as Israel as to be one and the same as Judaism.
To criticize the state of Israel was tantamount to being NAZI or a radical Muslim.
When nothing could be further from the truth.
anoni accuses some residents of Israel that report the truth to be turncoats and traitors, to the state of Israel.
From his tirades and rants confirming that he places the authority of the sovereign political authority to murder, in his philosophy, supersedes Judaic Law's protections to a "Right to Life".
Now anoni position, boobie, plainly displays his anti-Judaic secular position on this grand issue. The socialism that is the Israeli state health care system makes all those that people that support "Right to Life" finance the murder of Jewish babies, in the secular state of Israel.
What we have here, boobie, is another example of history repeating itself.
One more episode where a secular ruler of Israel, operating with authority vouched for by foreign military powers, took steps that violated Judaic Law, against the very precepts of Judaism you have extolled, and slaughtered innocents to advance the interests of the sovereign authority.
It is certainly not absurd, it may be repetitious.
I wanted anoni, quot, "O", or "O"riginal, whomever to be fully committed in his anti-Semitic position on the murder of Jews in Israel, today, as it was just 2,000 or so years ago.
It is certainly a more viable topic, that of a secular socialist society attempting to attach a sectarian shield to their activities, than your attempts to provide a cross-gender slant to your posts.
Now, so I understand what the problem is ...
ReplyDeleteThe
Egyptian Army supported the move to democracy and popular elections in 2011.
During a massive public demonstration and with the acquiescence of major Islamic and Christian leaders in Egypt removed the President of Egypt from office, because the President and legislature was creating a theocratic government that violated the basis of democratic rule in Egypt.
The Egyptian Army deposed a budding theocratic dictator, replacing him with the Chief Judge and a promise of another round of free and fair elections. With the Egyptian Army guaranteeing that in a real republican democracy there are more than one citizen, one vote, one time.
The Egyptian Army is protecting democracy and the rule of law in Egypt.
Maintaining the freedom of passage through the Suez Canal.
And for committing those actions to maintain their responsibilities to the people of Egypt there are those that would advocate the US abandoning the efforts the US has made for decades in maintain a stable environment in the both the most economically strategic and theocraticly volatile region of the planet.
The policies the US has pursued, in Egypt, have been proven successful.
The Russian influence of the Nasser era has been eliminated, and there are no signs that Mr Putin will gain a foothold on the southern shore of the Med.
Little matter the rhetoric used by the current administration, those words carry little weight. The momentum that moves the Leviathan affirms once more that the US stays the course, regardless of the feckless pronouncements from the bridge.
So now that the security partners of the United States have done their duty, to their people and to the precepts and principles of republican government there are those that would claim defeat from victory.
For mostly purely domestic partisan purposes.
Mr Mansour issued the decree late on Monday.
ReplyDeleteIt says that a panel to amend the constitution - which was suspended last week - would be formed within 15 days.
The changes would then be put to a referendum - to be organised within four months.
This would lead to parliamentary elections - which could be held in February.
Finally, presidential elections would be called once the new parliament convenes.
The Muslim Brotherhood has so far made no public comment on the proposed timetable.
Mr Mansour's move comes amid continuing mass protests by both supporters and opponents of Mohammad Morsi.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23236534
On the Chinese side, Vice Premier Wang Yang and State Councilor Yang Jiechi are also new in their posts.
ReplyDelete"So, a lot of energy will be spent getting to know who is who and who does what at the table," wrote High Frequency Economics in a note to clients.
Other key officials attending the talks include U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke and China's finance minister and central bank governor.
On July 8, 1776, the Liberty Bell was rung to signal the first public reading of the Declaration of Independence.
ReplyDeleteThe benefits of the listening to an Oxford professor, almost twice through now. A more enlightened view as the the intellectual roots of common perceptions.
ReplyDeleteThere are certainly real life examples of both
Locke's and Hobbes's philosophical perceptions being seen up close and personal in society, at least in that of the modern United States.
Locke versus Hobbes
by jamesd@echeque.com
Locke and Hobbes were both social contract theorists, and both natural law theorists (Natural law in the sense of Saint Thomas Aquinas, not Natural law in the sense of Newton), but there the resemblance ends. All other natural law theorists assumed that man was by nature a social animal. Hobbes assumed otherwise, thus his conclusions are strikingly different from those of other natural law theorists.
The Grolier encyclopedia contrasts Locke and Hobbes as follows:
Locke’s considerable importance in political thought is better known. As the first systematic theorist of the philosophy of liberalism, Locke exercised enormous influence in both England and America. In his Two Treatises of Government (1690), Locke set forth the view that the state exists to preserve the natural rights of its citizens. When governments fail in that task, citizens have the right—and sometimes the duty—to withdraw their support and even to rebel. Locke opposed Thomas Hobbes’s view that the original state of nature was “nasty, brutish, and short,” and that individuals through a social contract surrendered—for the sake of self-preservation—their rights [...]
The folks that edit Wiki say this of mr Hobbes ...
DeleteHis 1651 book Leviathan established the foundation for most of Western political philosophy from the perspective of social contract theory ...
According to Hobbes, society is a population beneath a sovereign authority, to whom all individuals in that society cede some rights for the sake of protection. Any abuses of power by this authority are to be accepted as the price of peace. There is no doctrine of separation of powers in Hobbes's discussion. According to Hobbes, the sovereign must control civil, military, judicial, and ecclesiastical powers.