Quote:
Originally Posted by dlish
i stopped reading after this...
democracy=liberty=freedom
if the people of egypt want democracy, i welcome it. If they decide on another system of government of their choice, who are we tell them what is best for them?
|
This was from an earlier portion of the speech:
Quote:
Historians will note that in many nations, the advance of markets and free enterprise helped to create a middle class that was confident enough to demand their own rights. They will point to the role of technology in frustrating censorship and central control -- and marvel at the power of instant communications to spread the truth, the news, and courage across borders.
Historians in the future will reflect on an extraordinary, undeniable fact: Over time, free nations grow stronger and dictatorships grow weaker. In the middle of the 20th century, some imagined that the central planning and social regimentation were a shortcut to national strength. In fact, the prosperity, and social vitality and technological progress of a people are directly determined by extent of their liberty. Freedom honors and unleashes human creativity -- and creativity determines the strength and wealth of nations. Liberty is both the plan of Heaven for humanity, and the best hope for progress here on Earth.
|
Bush places most of his emphasis on freedom. Democracy has taken many different forms in different nations, but the key is in people having a voice in self-determination.
The current economic plight in Egypt is a function of the country failing to tap into the intellectual and human capital of the nation. It is very easy to see the differences in the economy of a country like Israel with virtually no natural resources compared to countries like Egypt and the answer becomes very clear.
---------- Post added at 06:27 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:10 PM ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
pardon me, but i'm a whole lot more concerned about the mubarak regime trying to shut down the international press and human rights organizations while at the same time rhetorically making some ridiculous separation between the demands of some wholly abstract opposition and the "destabilizing role" played by "outside agitators" in tahrir square---prelude to massacre?-----than i am in engaging in some tedious rearguard action about the public rhetoric of the bush administration in 2011.
|
"Prelude to massacre?" I can not comment.
Quote:
|
why dont you start your own "why the bush administration was better" thread and talk to yourself there, ace.
|
The "Bush Doctrine" as it has been called by some, is very much at the center of this conflict. Understanding it, is a the key to minimizing violence. It was an error for our President to publicly state that he demanded Mubarak to step down. Clearly the intensity of the revolt intensified. Parties with varying agenda's are taking advantage of the chaos and lack of leadership.
Quote:
|
the complicated question in real time, in the context of stuff that matters in real time, is at what point does the international community intervene?
|
A more pressing question is when the Egyptian military intervenes? It appears that the military was hopeful that Mubarak's announcement to not run would calm matters it has not.
Quote:
|
if it is clear that a massacre is taking shape---and the potential is there----is it incumbent on the international community to do something? is this a rwanda-like situation wrapped in the guise of a civil war?
|
There is nothing the international community can do at this point. This matter has to be resolved by the Egyptian people.
Quote:
|
only the pro-mubarak thugs have guns--this largely because the police/internal security/interior ministry is organizing them.
|
This comment seems overly simplistic. Military leaders have appeared to support Mubarak ending his rule and they appear to want it done in an orderly manner. Given current conditions nothing is going to materially change in the next few months with or without Mubarak.