Revolution in Tunisia & Egypt, Protests in Libya, Bahrain, Oman & Yemen
 

here is a translation of a manifesto written in the name of "the egyptian protestors" that outlines a set of demands...at bottom, what these folk want is an end to the mubarak government and the martial law that has enabled it to remain in power since 1981...

this link takes you to a live blog at the guardian which summarizes events and coverage(s) of them:

Protests in Egypt - live updates | World news | guardian.co.uk

which gives you an idea of what's going on if you are not following.

notice that the united states is watching to see which way the wind blows, but appears to be reluctant to throw mubarak under the bus because mubarak has been willing to play ball with american policies toward israel. one more reason for mubarak to go.

this is an on-the-fly analysis of yesterday's protests in cairo:

Egypt protests are breaking new ground | Simon Tisdall | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk



as part of the wikileaks state department offering, this information about mubarak:

Wikileaks: Egypt's Mubarak Likely to Remain in Office for Life | Middle East | English

which parallels in many ways the information contained in the same offering about the corruption amongst the (now former president) ben ali's family.

if you haven't been following, this wikipedia link is a useful overview of what happened in tunisia:

2010?2011 Tunisian uprising - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the transition there is not over yet, btw. things are still pretty fluid.

===

both these events (and the turmoil that's been caused by the documents that surfaced over the past days about the obama administration selling out the palestinian peace process, caving in---again----to the israeli right) seem to me positive outcomes of the wikileaks phenomenon.

in both cases, old and corrupt authoritarian regimes have been shaken fundamentally by a population that has, in the main, found many of its more cynical/accurate perceptions of the governments confirmed.

the tunisian people rid themselves of ben ali. this is a good thing.



what's happening in egypt is not at this point as clear-cut, primarily because, while there are reports that mubarak and his family have already left the country, it's clear at this point that the government imagines that it can contain what's happening.

there's been some fatalities and about 900 arrests at this point.

what do you make of what's happening?
what kind of coverage are you seeing in the american press of it?
why do you think that coverage is as it is?

how do you see things playing out in egypt?

feel free to post information that you find which seems interesting.
i'm not sure about putting up background information on mubarak and the situations in egypt more broadly--i'll hold off for now...

I don't a have much to say at this point, as I'm slowly digesting the information that's coming out of both places.

However, I've read somewhere that the Egypt protests were, at least in part, inspired by the events in Tunisia. You brought up American media, but I think the media in general is an interesting aspect in this.

What I suspect is that the Internet and social media are a big factor in how these events have unfolded. The transmission of information, the reaching of a consensus among thousands, and the galvanization/mobilization of the public has never been more quick and powerful since the advent of these technologies and the adoption of them as the primary means of communication and social sharing.

And then you throw things like WikiLeaks into the mix.

I suppose this means that it's become much, much more difficult to be authoritarian. Ask the Chinese.

just a quick note on media coverage: yesterday there was a lot of comment from egypt about the lack of coverage from al jazeera of the protests. this was in marked contrast to the extensive coverage given the tunisian protests/revolution. the speculative explanation is not surprising: people thought that the mubarak government had made a deal with that of qatar...

al jazeera is still not giving egypt much space, really---but there's more than there was yesterday.

there's little doubt that not only more centralized media forms are playing a basic role---decentralized media is pivotal.

this is an interesting piece that i just stumbled across...it's arguing that ben ali was a perfect client for the united states. so the imbrication between american foreign policy and repressive dictatorships is coming to the fore:

Ben Ali Tunisia was model US client - Opinion - Al Jazeera English

while all the blah blah blah about "freedom" from the empire turns to wood.

this could be a very complicated situation for us realpolitik...it should be interesting to watch this play out. you know, for the theater.



===================

btw---here's another blog compendium, from the ny times. it includes names of some of the bloggers/twitter accounts, links to a yfrog page with photos of tuesday's demos, and links to some youtube-hosted footage.

Egyptian Bloggers Report on New Unrest - NYTimes.com


====================


a mix of interesting stuff, rumor, chaos...#Jan25 on twitter....

Twitter / Search

here in the UAE it's headline news along with the political woes of Lebanon over the last few days. i dont watch much TV, so i dont know what al jazeera is or isnt broadcasting, but the feeling im getting here is that most arab governments are watching this closely. Most governments here are run as autocracies, and any sort of protest would be a challenge to its right to rule.

despite the protests, i dont see anything coming from this protest for the time being. I think the pivotal point is going to come about when Mubarak dies and its time to pass the mantle on. mubarak's son isnt very popular in egypt and doesnt have the popular support of the people or the government. and since he is not from a military background, doesnt have the support of the military.

i see a lot of commotion when Hosni breathes his last, and its not going to be pretty i dont think.

i read somewhere--twitter i think---that there are something on the order of 1.6 million people involved with "security" in egypt.
there are 83 milliion people in egypt. around 90% are in cairo.

it's hard to say what a tipping point is in this kind of situation. it certainly appears at the moment that mubarak (or the apparatus that owes their various positions to him) thinks they can fight whatever it is that they are fighting...by which i mean that it may be that the state is locked into a dynamic they do not quite see (maybe) in which the attempts to fight the popular movement spread the popular movement.

this is the problem/limit of direct repression.

on the other hand, it's entirely possible that you're right and mubarak regime can maintain itself in place until hosni buys the farm.

there are calls racing around for a show of popular dissent on friday afternoon that'd be bigger than tuesday. no way at this point to know how that'll play out, but it's out there.

I believe the military will again decide the fate of the Egyptian government. Their budget is extremely large for their GDP, and is about the only political force which isn't fractured into a thousand fragments at the moment. The Muslim Brotherhood is organized, but their general message doesn't strike a chord with most Egyptians at the moment... but it's a kind of lesser of two evils that might catch some ground if things aren't guided well.

Really, with all the money/training/etc we've given to Egypt for free to ensure they keep the peace with Israel, I don't see anything happening without the military brass deciding and green-lighting.

thought it might be interesting to post this (and maybe others)...a very dear friend of mine and excellent writer is living in cairo. she's started documenting her experience of the protests and posting it as notes on facebook. here's one.

this is a webspace from one of the main organizational nodes within the egyptian maybe-revolution (one can always hope)

We are all Khaled Said. Working against torture and inhuman treatment of Egyptians in their own country. Standing up against corruption in Egypt.

very interesting updates.


seaver: while in the abstract you are correct, there is a point past which it isn't possible for the military to hold a situation together, particularly if there are divisions within the military organizationally (by which i mean divisions that are not necessarily factions within the command, though that's a possibility as well).

the protests this afternoon---which should be on now---will be interesting.

---------- Post added at 05:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:52 PM ----------

here's a collection of slogans from tuesday and wednesday's protests, transcribed and translated:

The Angry Arab News Service/????? ????? ?????? ??????: Egyptian slogans

and another link to the guardian's live blog:

Protests in Egypt - live updates | World news | guardian.co.uk


the protests appear to be bigger and more widespread. there is a report that el-baradi has arrived in cairo, which makes this a more explosive confrontation with mubarak regime because the main opposition leader is now in the country.


this is a state dept page about egypt that gives some basic numbers concerning us aid to egypt.
Egypt

note the extent of support for the military.
think about who's running the show.

tomorrow should be interesting.

It's all very interesting. It's interesting to see how the situations in Tunisia, Egypt, and Yemen all seem to derive from the same source of social power in the people: they are realizing they have power in coordinated movement against corruption and authoritarianism, and this is reinforced by what they see beyond their own situations....all happening at once it seems.

And I'll reiterate: I cannot see how this sort of thing could happen as such without the power of the Internet and social media. (With the exception, perhaps, of Yemen, whose population is quite impoverished compared to Tunisia and Egypt....but you never know.)

It would seem that a long history of authoritarianism in a few parts of the Arab world could very well come to an end. If only we could see this happen in the oil-rich nations.

NYTimes.com - Thousands Rally Against Government in Yemen

if it happens there, maybe it can happen in the united states.

i just got this from my friend in egypt a couple minutes ago. it gives an idea of where things may be heading:

be careful what you wish for. just dont complain when the price of oil triples overnight.

a lot of what is happening at the moment is a result of western imperilism. propping up dictators, despots, and implementing pseudo-democracy and one man shows seemed to have been the order of the day when the middle east was being carved up.

this was only a matter of time, but will definately put gulf nations at risk of being toppled. i have no doubt that the oil rich gulf nations will see this through, largely because the revolt is stamping out poverty and corruption. Both of which are probably lowest out of all arab nations, which wins the oil rich gulf states favour and support of their people.

oil rich nations have been able to buy off their opposition since oil became a useful commodity. The only nations that have seen political reform in the middle east (Iraq and Iran aside) have been the ones without oil (Lebanon and Bahrain come to mind).

I am a bit ashamed to say that I haven't been following the news the last few weeks. What is happening is just starting to capture my attention (and my imagination) only today. I look forward to learning more about it. thanks for the links.

democracy is not really democracy in lebanon. i'm not so sure how much exposure this had had in western press, but the recent toppling of the government by hezbollah as a political motive for Hairir's support of the UN report on Lebanon is worrysome.

With Hariri now replaced with the hezbollah backed Mikati, i can only pray and weep for lebanon.

as much as the west wants to see many of these governments go, i think an immediate overhaul of arab nations is definately not a wise decision for neither the east nor the west. the political vacuum this will leave can only leave more room for fundamentalists to get a stronghold in government.

At what point does a political riot become a revolution?

Yeah I've heard that before, time and time again. Unfortunately it just doesn't face reality when it comes to Egypt and Yemen (Tunisia is... unique).

Egypt is still ruled by the Socialist Government set by themselves. Yeah we give the government money, arms, and training... but that's simply the carrot to prevent them from re-re-re-invading Israel. Aside from Israel we don't ask anything of them nor interfere.

Yemen is another government ruled completely by the Arabs in their own revolution. Hell this one is easier to pin on the Saudis and Egyptians as they were the power brokers in the decade long civil war. Each one playing Yemen to help suit their own needs and desires.

If you ask me, as true as it is that England/France divided the M.E. along lines that never existed... at this point they've settled themselves out accordingly. No one is alive today from that point, they've all developed their own identities as well as toyed (and gave up on) Pan-Arabism. At this point it's whether or not they can have freedoms without letting the crazies take over as seen in Turkey, or if it'll dissolve and raise new dictatorships as seen in early Iraq.

gee you'd think that this democracy via the domino theory idea would be welcomed by the united states...but of course no, because such things are just words and what really matters is that the mubarak government continue to play nice with the united states over it's degenerate and retrograde policies toward israel/palestine. so american-sponsored "freedom" is 30 years of martial law, corruption at an unimaginable scale, sclerosis at almost every level. people are rightly sick of it.

of course the government tries to pin things on the muslim brotherhood because they play well with the american line of trying to appear to support democratic movements while in fact being a straight-up neo-colonial imperial power and supporting any regime no matter how foul, so long as what is says can be squared with what the americans say in order to sell empire as if it were something else.

at this point, the muslim brotherhood is not significantly involved in the protests. more or less the entire leadership was arrested over night in any event.

i do not have a sense of el baradi's support more broadly.* i sometimes get the idea that he is a television figure, someone that appeals to news outlets because having a head to follow around makes things easier for tv viewers to follow.

this appears to be a very widespread popular revolt that's unfolding largely on generational lines. i don't see it as necessarily being about "the crazies"---i think that's the sort of thinking that the mubarak regime would like to see out there because it justifies what they;re doing right now as we speak.

protest becomes revolution when the regime caves in.
personally, i hope we see the end of hosni mubarak's 30 year state of emergency very soon.

meanwhile, the united states, those heros of democracy, continue to equivocate publicly.

but i wonder what the back channels are like.



*el baradi likely represents (and helps to coalesce) divisions within the egyptian socio-economic elites. and he's symbolically interesting. the intersections of this ore elite-driven dissent and the popular movements of this past week could be interesting, assuming that el baradi doesn't find himself being suicided out a window or some such.

Dismissing that Obama's nature and his administration is to equivocate, are you suggesting that you want US intervention? If so, what do you want the US to do?

I'm going to post something I read this morning on Reddit that was incredibly helpful in explaining in basic terms the background and context for the current situation:
Source

what do you make of what's happening?
It's incredible. People who have been living under the iron fist of tyranny are rising up en masse to fight for their liberty. It's inspiring. It's also a bit terrifying. A lot of people have been hurt so far, and even a few deaths. This is only going to increase in the coming days. My thoughts are with the revolutionaries. It gives me hope that the citizenry of a country under the rule of such a government can still stand up for what they believe in. I sincerely hope they succeed.

what kind of coverage are you seeing in the american press of it?
It's been really bizarre. They have been covering it, which is a bit more than I expected, but the information being released seems highly detached and it's being supplied with little to no context. While President Obama did mention some vague support in his State of the Union, I'm not seeing the broad support I'd like for the revolutionaries.

why do you think that coverage is as it is?
Forgive the generalization, but the American media is stupid. If they've decided to care, they're probably scrambling to get more information despite the fact it's been widely available the whole time.

how do you see things playing out in egypt?
I honestly don't know. As was said in the above quote, Egypt is not Tunisia in that it has a powerful military and police force who are likely to want to protect the status quo. Still, the people of Egypt appear very much hungry for change and the fact that the Egyptian police and government have been so heavy-handed in their response is likely to spur on more revolution. I'd give it 50/50 at this point, until more information starts coming out.

intervene? direct american military intervention in egypt? are you high?


a few minutes ago, hillary clinton made a statement....folk are interpreting it as a shift toward this (this is the interpretation i am biting from the guardian blog--the material its based on can be found at the linked site that follows)

Protests in Egypt - live updates | News | guardian.co.uk

egypt is the second largest recipient of american military aid in the world.
it is frankly seen as payment for egyptian support of the degenerate policy the americans have adopted toward palestine/israel.

so long as the americans continued to express support for mubarak, directly and indirectly, the military would be likely to support the government---prop it up after 30 years of unimaginably corrupt state-of-emergency rule.

this is the first indication at all that the united states is not simply doing what it's done for years--talk the blah blah blah of "freedom" and "democracy" while supporting brutal dictatorships wherever and whenever other policy interests are served. but it's also clear that this has come after the us has been equivocating---they want to see which way the wind blows and are trying to navigate a way to contain all this revolt stuff, to channel it their way.

i would prefer to see the acceleration of the collapse of the american empire and the logic that allows this residual cold-war foulness to continue.

but at this point things are obviously very fluid and getting decent information is a problem. closest you'll find is al jazeera. this link takes you to their live feed:

Al Jazeera English: Live Stream - Watch Now - Al Jazeera English

which continues to put american infotainment "news" to shame.

most communication remains cut off---the net is largely blocked into and out of egypt, cellphone communications as well....

Why do I need to be high? You made a comment that I found interesting and I asked you a question about it.

I never suggested to know what is going on or why. The complexity in the dynamics of this issue in my view does not lend itself to knee-jerk reaction. I don't know or understand our President's philosophy or plan on these types of issues. I think Bush was a bit more clear, but his approach was thoroughly rejected in 2008. I am curious to know what "we" want and why.

i just saw this from the associated press:

link same as above, from the guardian live blog/aggregator.

if this is accurate, then this is the first potential tipping point. the americans are in a position to split the army away from mubarak. the wind seems to be blowing in that direction.

but the situation is still fluid.

interesting stuff.

This is a political forum and I again ask you a political question based on the comments in your posting. Do you support US intervention (intervention can mean things other than military use)? If so, why and what do you want done?

In the past I have developed a belief that most here feel the US should not get involved in the internal matters in other nations and i would have thought that many here would be of the belief that past US involvement may be a contributing factor to the current conflict. That is the basis of my question.

the us is already heavily involved with egypt. they've been instrumental in propping up mubarak for most of the 30 years of martial law he's inflicted on the egyptian people. like seaver pointed out above, the main institution through which this involvement has played out is the military. egypt is the second largest recipient of us aid, behind israel. it is clear---the wikileaks cables on this do it if it wasn't--but it was clear--that this aid owes everything to egypt's having signed a treaty with israel and in so doing become a de facto buffer in defense of american policy toward israel in the region. in exchange for that, the americans overlook appalling human rights abuses except when it suits them as under the bush regime to send people being extraordinarily renditioned so that the egyptians can fuck them up.

the obama administration had moved more publicly close to mubarak after a period of relative distance maintained by the bush people, presumably because if you're going to exploit the fact of torture you need to appear to deplore it. because that's how we roll.

so the problem for the united states is pretty obvious---maintaining position across what could be a revolution.

what faux news is "reporting" on this is idiotic--that "groups linked to al-qeada could come to power"----a transparent reference to the muslim brotherhood, the routine evocation of which has rarely if ever failed to turn on the financial "counter-terrorism" spigot from the americans. but the fact is that they've had nothing to do with these protests---and when they did come out in support of them yesterday, the entire leadership was almost immediately arrested.

so that's out.

i dont know enough about exactly what el baradi's constiuency is to say much about the role he might play, assuming that he doesn't meet with some unfortunate accident in the next day or two.

but i do think the americans are hoping to manoever the army into acting independently of mubarak's government by signaling that the funding is up for review as a result of how the next days go. or the army could act in support of the government if the wind blows that way.

like dlilsh said, all this is a direct consequence of american imperial policies and logic. it's exactly the opposite of the (empty) language of "Freedom" that people who live on this side of the mirror like to flatter themselves by thinking that the united states stands for. this, the opposite side of the mirror, is far more real.

anyway, that's kinda where i think things are.

You stated that the US continues to "equivocate publicly" which contrary to "cowboy diplomacy" may be the exact correct thing to do (even if it is accidental rather than purposeful), I am not sure, but what I read into your comment was that you thought it was the exact wrong thing to be doing. Your response is not clear.

Quick! Somebody find a way to turn this into a futile argument about nothing in particular. I bet we end up talking about boats.

Mubarak is stepping down. I'm very surprised the Egyptian Military has stayed neutral, they would have been the defacto crown-assigner... and they stayed out of it. I believe the brass will ensure the Muslim Brotherhood stays suppressed and lets it roll.

Good for the Egyptians, the vast majority of the country are smart enough to stay secular... and would help be a beacon to the rest of the regions.

Mubarak isn't stepping down; he's replacing the government.

He's continuing his presidency. He's appointing another government.

It's a mockery of democracy.

Expect more Egyptians in the streets on Saturday. They won't be appeased by this. They want Mubarak out.

Ace, pardon my interruption. You've posed an interesting question... and as I consider scenarios where we might become engaged as an influence of good, my realization is not at all what I had expected, especially at this time in my life ...

In answering your question: "Do you support US intervention (intervention can mean things other than military use)?" I want to say YES. We should absolutely feel compelled to intervene in situations like this... as should all nations of honor. But we... apparently (due to the century-long meddling of our combined leadership) have "none".

I can't see where our attempts at diplomacy can ever be trusted due to actions under the current and past (several) administrations. I believe we are a nation of generally good and honest people. I believe "we" would never knowingly support the things that have been done in our names. This must change.

... I'm out of time and should better explain my view ... but I'll need to let it go for now.

BTW - I don't always agree with what you have to say, but appreciate your integrity in these debates. You never seem to get down in the gutter. It's tough not to sometimes, maybe we can all aspire to something more honorable in our daily lives and pass it on.

Some commentary on Mubarak's decision to retain power:

Mubarak's strongman-approach to revolts hardly surprising - The Globe and Mail

this is one of those moments that can take someone in the states whose viewpoint is of the side of the mirror that people are told to look at here and shift them by giving them a clear view of the opposite side of that mirror....you can see the american imperial order at work, you can see how it has operated and how it continues to operate. you can see the importance of repressive, brutal tyrants like hosni mubarak for american policy. you can see how this has transcended the superficial differences between the two conservative parties that divide power amongst themselves in the american oligarchy. you can see why people around the world simply do not believe that the united states stands for any of the things it claims to stand for---how could they? ho could people demonstrating in cairo tell themselves that the american government supports their aspirations for freedom when they **know** that the united states has supported mubarak, funded and armed mubarak's regime?

fortunately almost everywhere there is still a distinction drawn between the american state/empire and the people who live in the united states---so if you hear infotainment stream talking heads say "they hate us" it's inevitably a lie---people hate the american empire, and rightly so. it should burn, and burn it will. but that empire is not the only possibility for the united states.

i maintain the pollyanna belief that people in the states will be inspired by people in cairo and will dissolve the neo-liberal oligarchy before it's incoherence dissolves us.

there's no hope for the "intervention" in egypt. i don't even know what that would mean. the united states is acting in/on egypt now in an attempt to maintain some control regardless of what happens---aligning with the army but not quite coming out against mubarak---empty blah blah blah in vague support of the people but nothing too strong....

i would like to see the united states come out clearly against mubarak.

time to go hosni dear. retire. buh-bye.

meanwhile, back in egypt:

Egypt protests - live updates | World news | guardian.co.uk

That's an commendable belief, roachboy.

Unfortunately, those who are most likely to revolt in America have in mind some kind of libertarian utopia.

The situation in Cairo looks like dksuddeth's wet dream

btw--i just flipped on cnn for the first time in many months...after watching al jazeera's coverage off and on yesterday (until i had to wrest my life back for a while)...and the low level of the coverage is shocking. it's shallowness, it's stupidity--but **especially** the compulsive use of words like "riot" "anarchy" "looting" "fear" and "al qeada"

this is the response of american corporate infotainment to popular uprising---WHAT'S GONNA HAPPEN TO OUR STUFF? WHERE ARE THE POLICE? BE AFRAID FOR YOUR STUFF. STAY ON YOUR COUCH IN FRONT OF THE TV WHERE IT'S SAFE. FREEDOM IS THE FREEDOM TO WATCH TV ON YOUR COUCH. DO NOTHING. SCARY SCARY CRIMINALS BAD. PEOPLE WHO DEMAND FREEDOM WANT TO STEAL YOUR SHIT. SCARY FREEDOM BAD. STAY INSIDE WHERE THE COMMERCIALS ARE. SCARY BAD RIOT CHAOS BAD.

Mubarak has taken the unprecedanted move of naming a vice president. the first time he's ever done that during his presidency.

im currently watching al jazeera, and Tahrir Square it still full of thousands of demonstrators, but outside in the suburbs, looting and shootings have changed the landscape of the protest. some communities have set up 'neighbourhood watch' groups to protect their suburbs from looters and thugs. There's also reports coming in right now of thugs cutting off water to suburbs. it looks like law and order has totally broken down. this is a scary situation.

the body count on cnn of 25 dead is way understated. al jazeera has shown images of the dead in the morgues. in one morgue alone in Al Salam city, there are 15 dead (by gunfire) as reported by one al Jazeera reporter. Another reporter has reported 15 and 23 dead respectively

even one of the most respected sunni scholars Yusuf Al Qaradawi has asked Mubarak to step down for the good of the coutry. Qaradawi is a massive voice all over the muslim world, so i think this is the nail in the coffin for Hosni. Ive spoken to some egyptians here, and they're telling me that Hosni has sent his family abroad. im not even sure if that is true or not, but its interesting nonetheless.

my first post in this thread i predicted the mubarak government taking control of this, at least until mubarak's death. im eating my words here. I dont think Hosni will last the week.

---------- Post added at 04:57 AM ---------- Previous post was at 04:54 AM ----------

btw, al qaeda hasnt even been mentioned ONCE during the last 5 hours of constant al jazeera updates.

apparently state television is telling people to be afraid, to organize vigilante actions...
there are reports of the ndp provoking looting.

this is obviously not over yet.

---------- Post added at 07:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:23 PM ----------

still more reports coming in of the police directing looting actions.
speculations are that the idea is to discredit the protest movement by creating the "chaos" that he claims to stand against.
a page from the book of the algerian fln....

Yeah, been reading about that in different sectors today.

On a different note:

I have high hopes that folk here in the U.S. & around the globe will be emboldened
to shake & stir ourselves out of varying states of Apathy.

it appears that those geniuses at cnn are concerned that a threat to a radically unequal distribution of wealth and power in one place might spread to threaten radically unequal distributions of wealth and power everywhere. such reactionary and shallow drivel. the united states is not served by its corporate infotainment streams. shocking stuff.

i have to go do something else for a while. it's 11 pm in cairo. i think people will have to sleep.....

I've only watched news coverage of the protests in Egypt once and I was almost immediately dismayed by the lens of 'Americanism' through which this event is being portrayed. As if 'commentators' in America are somehow better equipped to perceive this situation than are the people on the streets of Cairo right now. It's kind of sickening. So I stick to news articles.

Perhaps it is a weakness of mine, but I can't seem to find a place in this event for my own country's best interest. I wish nothing but success for the protesters in Egypt. They have my support and my admiration.

i think this is a good statement. it's a wholesale rejection of the american attempt to have its cake and eat it to, make vague hand-waving in the direction of supporting the demands of the revolt while in fact being ready to thro all that freedom business into the trash if it disrupts business...

Middle East Report Online: Dead-Enders on the Potomac by From the Editors

The streaming video coverage on Al Jazeera's english-language web site is so much more insightful and penetrating than the US cable channels. I highly recommend it for 24-7 coverage. I have the US cable news channels on for comparison only. It's like night and day.

What mixedmedia says just above about our country without a clear place in this event is very true. On the one hand the Saudis have denounced the protestors in no uncertain terms and support the Egyptian regime, while the Iranians support the people in the streets (disingenuous as it is, it makes sense from a realpolitik perspective). That leaves us between a rock and a hard place and demonstrates that the US is stuck behind the 8-ball while history happens...

Frankly, over the year, the US has done enough damage in the Middle East. They need to stay out of this entirely (i.e. publicly and behind the scenes).

My feelings exactly.

i dont think that's an option. the us has been obviously involved up to its neck with mubarak from the outset...at this point, the us is trying to maintain a degree of policy continuity (which i still think they're doing by basically using its funding relation and personnel ties with the army) while finding some way to appear to actually support the revolt (which isn't easy as el barradei---rightly---keeps holding the americans' feet to the fire---though on this, the "street" is way out in front of him---and the us is losing credibility very quickly there) and somehow holding itself open to the possibility that mubarak won't leave---and maintain the appearance that they didnt throw an old ally under the bus...)...

in principle tho you're right.
but in this case principle is very abstract indeed.

i continue to be amazed by the low quality of american infotainment stream coverage of egypt, btw. if you want smart television analysis and better footage watch al jazeera.

i harbor some vague hope that this ill also damage the cesspool that is cnn.
fox is of course beyond the pale. so stupid, so retrograde.

It won't damage either CNN or Fox. The majority of their viewers are not going elsewhere for analysis. And, many, given the context in which they live, agree with the analysis.

I hear what you are saying about how deep the US already is with Mubarak and the Egyptian military. The thing is, there is a very fine edge to walk here. They can't come down on the losing side of this. They need to be able to count on whomever is in charge of Egypt -- and Egypt's military.

Those who think the US should intervene with direct military assistance, don't know their history (recent and not so recent).

I dont think the americans will make any sort of decision to side with anyone until they know who's going to come out the victor.

Siding with a losing side will be terrible news for american foreign policy in the middle east, but at some point their indecisveness will come back to haunt them.

I think they need to at least have a quiet word to mubarak and tell him to go. the only way Mubarak ( and the americans) can save face here is if he offers to stand down and remain in power as acting president until the elections.

Apart from that, i dont see how things are going to work out without leaving political vacuum.

the pieces look like they may be in place for some kind of transitional phase, but obviously the situation is still open-ended.

suleiman could head a transitional govt. and mubarak stand down. but that's unlikely to work because he's too close to mubarak.

el barradei could be brought in to head a transitional govt. this seems to me from the outside to be the most sensible option. what i don't know (obviously) is the relation of the army to el barradei.

haaretz is reporting that mubarak has agreed to talk with opposition figures.
the army has also apparently pledged not to hurt anyone protesting tomorrow.

Mubarak to talk with opposition as 250,000 protesters gather in Cairo - Haaretz Daily Newspaper | Israel News

the israelis are said to be quietly (that is off-camera) flipping their shit. good ole bibi, that hero of democracy, is urging the united states to back mubarak "for stability's sake"----which in the abstract is understandable, but is really very last monday.

the financial times is predicting a military dictatorship

FT.com / Global insight - Only certainty is army will play dominant role

at this point, though, i don't necessarily see that as inevitable.
i do think that the army will continue to run the show backstage, but i think they stand to benefit more from remaining out of power explicitly...at least from what i've been able to piece together.

what seems more obvious is that time is critical.
there's talk of a general strike.
food and fuel are already running low, logistics are at a snail's pace and cairo is a very very large city.

things could get ugly from any number of angles soon.

i hope mubarak figures it out and stands down.

Do you think Mubarak could wait it out? As food and fuel continue to dwindle he could use it as political leverage. Just a thought.

i dont really know. it's possible. i still think that the united states and likely europe has placed it's marbles with the army. 1.5 billion a year gets you some leverage. if that theory is right (and it's just a theory based on my take on stuff that happened friday and nothings' occurred since that shakes it for me...but am open to other readings)..then i think **may** be possible for mubarak to wait it out, but there will come a point that the army will be put in a position of having to choose...that's when things will change.

on the other hand, there's a real question as to how serious a game the united states can really play with that 1.5 billion. state said on friday that the funding was "up for review based on the outcome of the coming days"..

because if american strategic interests (read israel first of all) are contingent on the army's support of those objectives, then taking away the annual pay-off for making nice with israel would be a disaster for the americans.

so it's an interesting game.

there are several options and no way that i can see to tell which is the more likely yet.

what do you think? how does this situation look to you?

in the washington post this morning, there are indications that the obama administration may be inching closer to saying that it favors mubarak's resignation

Obama administration aligns itself with protests in Egypt with call for 'orderly transition'

but it's hardly what the headlines claim it is, a "firm alignment with the protestors"...i don't think the united states really cares that much what is transitioned to so long as this revolutionary business goes away. because that's how we roll.

the people have organised their own "million man march" today. where's farrakhan when you need him?

the army has said it wont take things into their own hands at the march, so a huge crowd is expected. could this day be the day?

There are several politicians and organizations in Canada (aside from the Prime Minister) who have taken clear stances suggesting a "peaceful transition" to a democratically elected government. It seems Harper is taking a page out of the Obama playbook by not being quite forceful in the suggestion.

It's hard to say. It all depends on how tightly Mubarak wishes to cling to power. He may still want to wait it out. It might have to come to what roachboy mentioned above with a general strike. If peaceful protest in large numbers doesn't work, I would imagine it would be only a matter of time before more disruptive measures are taken.

We can only hope that Mubarak caves sooner rather than later.

as expected petrol prices have started to shoot up and is the highest its been for 2 years. The obvious concern is the strategic passage of the Suez canal.

the problem with the fall of mubarak is that if the Suez fell into the wrong hands, it could wreak havoc with the worlds transportation and logistics.

i sure hope the egyptians have a contingency plan...if not we can always blame america for something. it's easy to pin it on the americans all the time.

The more I read about this the US is screw regardless of any action or inaction it might decide to take. I mean I get it, we've done that to ourselves in many ways for many years. Still sucks and I hope the Egyptian people move to a real representative form of government.

Certainly amazing to watch it all unfold.

if you wanted to watch it live, Al Jazeera English website is streaming live pictures of the 'Million Man March'

you can see it here:

Al Jazeera English: Live Stream - Watch Now - Al Jazeera English

I truly wish them success if they seek a democratic form of government. But I'm becoming very worried that the movement is quickly becoming co-opted by hard-line radical influences which seem to be very organized and gaining momentum. This is very reminiscent of Iran in 1979 where the vacuum of removing the Shah gave rise to the return of the Ayatollah Khomeini. This movement appears (to me) more orchestrated each day than grass-roots, which leads me to believe there is a considerable attempt by outside influences to shape the conflict.

who are these 'outside' influences that you speak of? the Muslim Brotherhood have not taken the lead in the demonstrations, but rather support them and call for the resignation of Mubarak. The only leader im seeing emerge who would be backed by the west is Baradei. Will be become another Karzai? i have no idea about Baradei's political credentials, but i can only see him as a stand-in for the next legitimate leader.

In terms of influence, i think the media is having more influence than any other nation on this whole thing.

today i was speaking with another egyptian friend who has family there and he seems to think that that everything is overblown and its a beatup by the media.

should egypt decide on anything other than a democratic system of government, do you think that the world will not support the egyptians for something that they choose? i'm pulling hamas parallels here, but i could be wrong.

it's obvious that for the cretinocracy that animates cable infotainment in the united states that "concern about hardline elements" is the new red scare.

not only is the muslim brotherhood not behind this movement, but they've kept out of it as things have unfolded. their role is overstated and has been for years because it's played to the new american red-baiting and has thereby served mubarak's interests.

some analysts are saying that power is already held my suleiman and that egypt is de facto a military junta. under this scenario, mubarak is a figurehead.

the geopolitical concerns are likely one of the reasons the united states and others have put their marbles in the hands of the army.
the canal has not been disrupted to now---the logic that could extend to its disruption would be a general strike. that's the place where the shit could hit the fan. and i suspect that after today, if mubarak continues to hang on, that things will go to the general strike.
and a general strike is meaningless unless it is an instrument of pressure. cutting off flows through the suez canal would certainly jack up pressure on mubarak to go.
but at this point, that's just a scenario.
if in fact the army has all the marbles, preventing the closure would be paramount and a pretext to consolidate their position.

so it's hard to know.
what's less hard to know is that western capital is not and should not be allowed to dictate the outcome. futures trading in oil is just that. speculators do not run the world.

the images out of cairo are awe inspiring.
mubarak has to go. i hope he does soon.

cretinocracy indeed... do you believe Iran is not highly interested in nudging the events to their interests? If not, would you consider them, or their numerous international "associates", an inside or outside influence?

Al Jazeera is saying there's 2 Million people in tahrir square...

amazing scenes

Egypt is nothing like Iran, neither politically nor socially. And this series of (what we now call) protests is nothing like the revolution in Iran, either.

Perhaps, but the question is who is best prepared to fill the impending vacuum of power? Which factions are most organized, funded and aligned?

i think although iran has voiced its support for the 'peoples will', it would be quite hesitant to be very vocal in supporting the people in chance that they embolden their own people against the iranian government.

The last time the people spoke loudly in Iran after the elections last year, things got pretty nasty. so no, i dont think Iran has any business in any of this. It's a two edge sword for iran in the same way it is a two edge sword for many other countries, including the united states.

iran would and could have influence over lebanon because of the sizable shiites population there, as well as iraq, and possibly nth yemen, ... but i fail to see how they would have any sway on the egyptians demonstrations.

these demonstrations are almost faceless and leader-less. However, that could be a bad thing for a new government because the vision could fizzle out without a united approach led by a charismatic egyptian.

current word is that Baradei is not going to attend the 'million man march' for security concerns which may not go down well with the people since they are risking their lives for their own liberation

If I recall, the Ayatollah Khomeini was the driving force behind the Iran revolution from the very start, fermenting a protest against the secularization and westernization of Iran even when he was in exile in the early 70s.

No comparison at all to Egypt. There is no such comparable leader in the Muslim Brotherhood, even if one were to believe the hype from the US right that this is somehow a religious extremists, or even al Queda inspired, event rather than a populist movement of students and the working class.

otto---i think that the central concern of everyone is that there be no power vacuum.
things are still quite open-ended right now, but there's no reason to expect there will be one because (and on this i think my take is correct) the us, europe and others who have a stake and influence (and the us has A LOT of both) are working with/through the army. like i said, some people are reading the situation as already a military junta---with mubarak as a figurehead---i don't see that as flying. what i expect is going to happen is that mubarak is going to be forced to stand down one way or another and that the military---likely someone other than suleiman, but maybe not (he's there after all) will start some kind of process to initiate elections.

i think it'd be way smarter for mubarak's cabinet to be a transitional affair and to give way to a credible temporary government that would oversee a move toward elections.

what would be the bad scenario would be for mubarak to try to stay in power for much longer.

you can't rely on fox or cnn for anything like coherent analysis of what's happening in egypt. or anywhere for that matter--but their collective failings are entirely evident in this case. what cnn is interesting to watch for is the parade of administration officials in damage control mode....

the images on al jazeera are stunning.

Add Jordan to the list of change....

Jordan?s Royal Palace says king has sacked government - thestar.com

Jordan’s Royal Palace says king has sacked government

AMAL HALABY Associated Press

AMMAN, JORDAN—Jordan's King Abdullah II fired his government Tuesday in the wake of street protests and asked an ex-prime minister to form a new Cabinet, ordering him to launch immediate political reforms.

The dismissal follows several large protests across Jordan— inspired by similar demonstrations in Tunisia and Egypt — calling for the resignation of Prime Minister Samir Rifai, who is blamed for a rise in fuel and food prices and slowed political reforms.

A Royal Palace statement said Abdullah accepted Rifai's resignation tendered earlier Tuesday.

The king named Marouf al-Bakhit as his prime minister-designate, instructing him to “undertake quick and tangible steps for real political reforms, which reflect our vision for comprehensive modernization and development in Jordan,” the palace statement said.

Al-Bakhit previously served as Jordan's premier from 2005-2007.

The king also stressed that economic reform was a “necessity to provide a better life for our people, but we won't be able to attain that without real political reforms, which must increase popular participation in the decision-making.”

He asked al-Bakhit for a “comprehensive assessment . . . to correct the mistakes of the past.” He did not elaborate.

The statement said Abdullah also demanded an “immediate revision” of laws governing politics and public freedoms.

When he ascended to the throne in 1999, King Abdullah vowed to press ahead with political reforms initiated by his late father, King Hussein.

Those reforms paved the way for the first parliamentary election in 1989 after a 22-year gap, the revival of a multiparty system and the suspension of martial law in effect since the 1948 Arab-Israeli war.

But little has been done since. Although laws were enacted to ensure greater press freedom, journalists are still prosecuted for expressing their opinion or for comments considered slanderous of the king and the royal family.

Some gains been made in women's rights, but many say they have not gone far enough. Abdullah has pressed for stiffer penalties for perpetrators of “honour killings,” but courts often hand down lenient sentences.

Still, Jordan's human rights record is generally considered a notch above that of Tunisia and Egypt.

Although some critics of the king are prosecuted, they frequently are pardoned and some are even rewarded with government posts.

It was not immediately clear when al-Bakhit will name his Cabinet.

Al-Bakhit is a moderate politician, who served as Jordan's ambassador to Israel earlier this decade.

He holds similar views to Abdullah in keeping close ties with Israel under a peace treaty signed in 1994 and strong relations with the United States, Jordan's largest aid donor and longtime ally.

In 2005, Abdullah named al-Bakhit as his prime minister days after a triple bombing on Amman hotels claimed by the Al Qaeda in Iraq leader, Jordanian-born Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

During his 2005-2007 tenure, al-Bakhit — an ex-army major general and top intelligence adviser — was credited with maintaining security and stability following the attack, which killed 60 people and labeled as the worst in Jordan's modern history.

Perhaps all of this is obvious to most. I just wanted a place to write it:

I read an interesting analysis of the double-edged sword that the U.S. policy in Egypt is facing. The analysis stated that the U.S. "must" support any move towards greater freedom, as this is the basis for our birth as a nation.

However, the U.S. "must also" support it's allies in order to ensure consistent ties to governments. Basically, if we bail on our allies when there are a couple of protests in the streets (think a week ago, not today), that our allies would find us fickle and would be less likely to align. This would be bad for long term diplomacy.

The analysis concluded that it's this quandary which the Obama administration is struggling to resolve. So the wait and see approach became the only viable approach the government could take.

While I agree with this analysis in principle, I think the key mistake is that our original alliance was to a government rather than a nation. Diplomacy with nations extends to all people of that nation, not just the officials in the government. If our nation had historically taken the position that our alliance is to "Egypt" rather than "Mubarak", we could maintain a sound diplomatic position.

In truth, it's no different than what we expect from other nations. Each 4 to 8 years, a new regime with a completely different view of running a government becomes our government. We have an expectation from our allies that they will accept this as fact and work just as diligently with each regime. It seems only fair that we would do the same thing. So, for me, this exposes a failure in US diplomacy policies.

it looks like the obama administration finally decided to do something beyond be pusillaminous and pull the plug on mubarak...but not quite...read on:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/02/wo...gewanted=print


mubarak is to make a speech soon (what that means, i dunno) in which he will announce something or another.

i am not sure that this is going far enough fast enough for the social movement that's taken shape. i think the moment of compromise from within even a temporary mubarak regime (now to september, say) is unacceptable.

so my suspicion is that one way or another, this will be a step along the way out, and not a viable transitional space.

but what do you think?

So, he agrees to step down (giving him 7 to 10 more months to take financial advantage of his current position). Were I Egyptian, this would be an indequate proposal.

I did find it amusing that AlJazeera said there were 2M people in Cairo today and American outlets report 250K. Quite a disparity.

It was my impression that the 2m figure included protesters all over Egypt, incl. Suez and Alexandria, but that there were well over 1m protesters in Tihrar Square in Cairo alone.

it probably won't happen, but at this point it would be really great if american purveyors of the news were to take a gigantic credibility hit over their coverage of these events. not only has it been shoddy but in some cases outright deceptive. we should be ashamed of ourselves if we sit back and watch Egypt demand to be given the reins of their country while we cannot even get ourselves to demand the responsible dissemination of information concerning critical international events.

So now that Mubarak has announced he won't run again, now what? Is this the victory the people of Egypt are looking for, or is it just phase 1?

Why do I get the feeling Mubarak's going to pull a switcheroo with Suleiman by having him replace him as president through an "election." Of course, with that setup, you can expect to have Mubarak acting as de facto president behind the scenes. You know, kinda how I suspect Putin is still kinda running the show in Russia....

I don't think it's enough, the elections aren't till September from what I understand. I think he needs to step down for the people to be satisfied at this point.

I wonder what the next year will bring? Libya, Syria, Jordon, Pakistan, Yemen, Lebanon...

Egypt is a mostly Sunni nation, while the regime and the majority of the population in Iran is Shia. The likelihood of Iran playing any significant role here is very, very small.

police-sponsored "pro-mubarak" mob attacking people in tahrir square. the army is standing around watching. the interior ministry denies that the police are behind things, so all the police ids that are being confiscated from the pro-mubarak thugs must be a coincidence.

live footage:

Al Jazeera English: Live Stream - Watch Now - Al Jazeera English


the net is back up from egypt: #tahrir on twitter is streaming live updates from the square.

I think we have failed to hear the message. Mubarak is not the problem, him leaving will not address the problem and in an international economy with failed economic policies that have unintended consequences the dominoes start to fall - and we end up with scapegoat responses.

Egyptians Face Food Inflation by Day, Roaming Looters at Night - Businessweek

Read more at Suite101: Top Egyptian Exports & Imports: Most Popular Products Traded Between Egypt & America Top Egyptian Exports & Imports: Most Popular Products Traded Between Egypt & America

The US's artificially low interest rates, US dollar devaluation and money supply management is severely hurting nations like Egypt with or without Mubarak. The price of corn alone is up over 80% in Egypt in the past year (thanks global warming fanatics and ethanol). So, what was the point in Obama requesting Mubarak to step down, and what good does he expect from it?

Egypt's economic growth has been among the highest in the Middle East in recent years....just not fast enough coming after years of stagnation and neglect.

The issue is not only economic. It is a corrupt regime, including rigged elections for years and a police force that acts as thugs for Mubarak.

Hardly the acts of a "scapegoat."

---------- Post added at 06:51 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:39 PM ----------

As to otto's cretinocracy.....one only need to look at the neo-con fear-mongering about how Mubarak is better than the radical theocracy that is "poised to take over the country."

Cretin #3 John Mccain: "El Baradei is not a friend of the United States. Second of all, he could be a figurehead for the Muslim Brotherhood ...."

Cretin #2 Bush's former US ambassador John Bolton: "the real alternative is not Jefferson democracy versus the Mubarak regime, but that it’s the Muslim Brotherhood versus the Mubarak regime...." and who suggests that if Mubakak falls, Israel should bomb Iran immediately.

And the #1 cretin: neo-con Islamaphobe Frank Gafney who insists that the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated the Obama administration....."Janet Napolitano, Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, is incessantly meeting with Muslim Brotherhood front organizations and I think has in the past, if not today, employed people who are associated with them."

funny stuff ace. from bloomberg as usual you'd learn nothing whatsoever about the political situation; replacing it is some bland bourgeois concern with how bad it is to raise wages and invest in job creation because according to some wholly dysfunctional neo-liberal ideology, any political orientation that distributes wealth toward the citizenry is a priori bad. so people like you, who buy into this sort of stuff, have no real problem with brutal dictatorships. hell you like em so long as they keep stuff stable. so you cannot imagine why people in egypt would mobilize to rid themselves of a 30 year state of emergency of rigged elections and political repression, or routine torture...

i expect you'd have been out with the pro-mubarak goons that rolled into tahrir square this morning just at the time the army happened to stop patting down everyone who entered the square for weapons the way they had been for the last week or so.

this democracy business has to stop. people should learn their place, right ace?

I can't connect directly to Al Jazeera English anymore. It can be found here though:

YouTube - AlJazeeraEnglish's Channel

not sure what site you're using Ring, but i just got on their site just now. here's the link

http://english.aljazeera.net/

Dlish, I tried to get on Aljazeera english earlier, and couldn't. I haven't tried it recently. Ring's worked though. It might be an intermittent failure.

That site has been working for me all along, up until a few hours ago.
Some friends in town have let me know they can't access it anymore either.

I dunno why. Perhaps it's our service provider, or something else.

It wouldn't load for me either. Maybe their servers are overloaded.

They addressed the issue in their Twitter feed: http://twitter.com/ajenglish

Meanwhile, Yemen's protests continue, though Ali Abdullah Saleh has announced he will not seek another term, nor hand power off to his son: Anti-government rallies in Yemen stay calm - Washington Post. He has held that position for 32 years.

I guess the only way to bring democracy to the middle east is with american guns.

Al Jazeera's servers have been occasionally pegged, just simply as a result of crushing traffic loads. But they have been coming back fairly quickly. World's best coverage by an equatorial mile.

news just in..

Algeria has just said it is lifting its 19 year State of Emergency...i guess they're getting the message...

wow..its been 2 weeks and we've got the arab steet finally talking

- Tunisia - government overthrown
- Egypt - numerous concessions with mubarak agreeing to step down after next election
- Jordan - public demonstrations ongoing
- Algeria - State of Emergency lifted
- Yemen - President agrees not to seek another term as well as not pass on the presidency to his son


who'd have thought that in the space of a fortnight things would change so quickly.

---------- Post added at 01:35 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:33 AM ----------

the problem with yemen is that the government is a key ally to fight al qaeda in yemen. if Ali abdullah Saleh goes, who's going to replace him?

do we trust anyone else?

where amira is, not far from tahrir square, it is no longer safe to go outside. mubarak's hired help has set up checkpoints around the square---foreigners are being at best harassed, at worst beat up or more.

what's really concerning is the actions directed against journalists and human rights workers. i think these witnesses have played a basic role in preventing a massacre. if that's true, then attempts to remove/silence/intimidate/eliminate them is an ominous development indeed.

I saw this policital cartoon and thought it summarized the concerns playing out in American media. I don't know enough about what is ~really~ going on in Egypt to say I agree with anyone's assessment of the situation or potential outcomes. I just think this cartoonist drew a clever, succinct image of the "American" take on things - flawed as it may be.

Just not fast enough....so a comparison to other economies is important because....?

When was it not a corrupt regime? What is the real difference this time? It is economics!

---------- Post added at 04:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:34 PM ----------

Why make stuff up?

If economic conditions for the people in Egypt were tolerable there would be no revolt. Mubarak has little control over the larger economic conditions in Egypt nor will his replacement. It is US economic policy that has the biggest impact on the economy in Egypt.

I supported Bush's call for free and open elections in Egypt, did you?

Get real, if people put up with 30 years of anything, they don't have a problem with it. Again, what is the real difference this time?

Wrong. The Bush strategy was clear and I supported it. He believed if Democracy gained a foothold in the ME it would spread. I don't recall you supporting Bush when he was in office on these issues.

ace--it is of no consequence to me whether you supported the superficial line of the bush administration or not.

democracy for the bush people was just a word. just like it is for you.

none of that is relevant to a discussion of what's happening now.

get real?

try catching up with it:

here's al jazeera's live blog:
Live blog Feb 3 - Egypt protests | Al Jazeera Blogs

a link to the live video feed:

Al Jazeera English: Live Stream - Watch Now - Al Jazeera English

the guardian:

Egypt protests - live updates | News | guardian.co.uk

ny times lede column:

Latest Updates on Day 10 of Egypt Protests - NYTimes.com

this is what's happening.

An excerpt from a Bush speech in 2003:

Remarks by President George W. Bush at the 20th Anniversary of the National Endowment for Democracy | NED

I suspect that you have some catching up to do.

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?

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.

why dont you start your own "why the bush administration was better" thread and talk to yourself there, ace.


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? 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?

only the pro-mubarak thugs have guns--this largely because the police/internal security/interior ministry is organizing them.

btw----mubarak is taking a page from the conservative book of demonization strategies. here's a good little analysis:

Mubarak Defies a Humiliated America, Emulating Netanyahu | Informed Comment

This was from an earlier portion of the speech:

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 ----------

"Prelude to massacre?" I can not comment.

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.


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.

There is nothing the international community can do at this point. This matter has to be resolved by the Egyptian people.

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.

Egypt protests - live updates | News | guardian.co.uk

the thugs from the mubarak regime continue to use the same tactics used by the american right to sell the "war on terror"



as far as background is concerned, this is far closer to the facts of the matter than any of the conservative gibberish ace is littering the thread with:

http://www.juancole.com/2011/02/muba...netanyahu.html

Not just me:

Egyptian protests: How a food crisis is driving a political crisis. - By Annie Lowrey - Slate Magazine

Think about it. What actually triggered these protests what was the most direct proximate cause? Mubarak announcing an end to food and energy subsidies.

uh...ace? revolts are always caused by the convergence of multiple factors. this is something of a "duh" point.
i assume that you've got some other objective in stating the obvious over and over again beyond simply stating the obvious over and over again?

best i can figure it, you're making some argument that the democracy demands in egypt are the automatic result of price fluctuations in foodstuff so that therefore....well what, ace?

what are you saying?
anything?

rb-

How do you envision the International Community intervening? I've been thinking about it since you suggested it and I can't think of a scenario which I believe would guarantee improving the situation.

i think i keep hoping for something rather than having something in mind. i have a very very close friend who is trapped in an apartment a block or two off of tahrir square. she cannot leave because foreigners are getting attacked on the streets. the dynamic appears to be spiraling toward the potential for very bad things happening. she's been out several days on the square too....it's one of the stranger experiences i've had, sitting in my apartment in massachusetts watching al jaz feeds and loading bits of information into facebook threads that she started in which she describes what she can hear outside and fragments of what she can see and asks people to tell her (and the people who are trapped in the apartment with her) what's going on. makes you feel terribly connected and wholly powerless, that kind of communication. so there's a personal dimension to this, a desire to make the situation stop somehow. it's perhaps more that than an analytic position. i do think that the united states has influence enough to turn the army, but obama is playing a conservative game here. but that's different...i mean that's not really intervening. that's pressuring the army to force the mubarak regime to stand down.