Oh for Christ's sake. The Muslim Brotherhood will NOT be taking power in Egypt except at most as a junior coalition partner, if that. Quit listing to the Corporate McPravda hysteria.

Originally Posted by '58 Flat

And not for nothing, but if the Muslim Brotherhood wins a "democratic" election in Egypt - and they almost certainly will - the real winners will be the neocons, who will use the outcome of that ballot to paint all Muslims, or at least the vast majority of them anyway, as enemies that need to be defeated, by any means necessary. They will then be able to paint non-Islamists within the Muslim world as weird heretics rather than "moderates."

Dude, they're going to do that anyway. Warmongering bastards don't need any particular factual excuse to be warmongering bastards. That's just what they do.

If the opposition pushes the current ruling party out in Egypt, at least Egyptians will have been able to have a greater hand in choosing their leaders. No matter what other people do, that's a good thing.

Originally Posted by Odin

Yup. the Near East be 4T. Iran Iraq, Lebanon, and Syria are now going into a 2T as well. Arabia is probably on the same time line as Egypt, SA had a 4T going from the founding of the kingdom in the 20s to the first Arab-Israeli War of 1948.

I agree. The Mideast is a 2T sort of thing. Egypt has so far displayed both Woodstock and Altamont. Always remember and never forget, 2T's feature protests and violence. (I remember the whole thingie. wrt 2T's. )

... Rags dealing with assorted North American snow storms and other weird 4T winter weather. It's SNOWING again and -11 temperatures. This is just not normal for Oklahoma.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

I agree. The Mideast is a 2T sort of thing. Egypt has so far displayed both Woodstock and Altamont. Always remember and never forget, 2T's feature protests and violence. (I remember the whole thingie. wrt 2T's. )

... Rags dealing with assorted North American snow storms and other weird 4T winter weather. It's SNOWING again and -11 temperatures. This is just not normal for Oklahoma.

I would disagree. Its a 4T. Young people out of work, with the exception of hired thugs has the population fed up with the current system, and Egypt involved with WWII about the same time ago with its own crisis, and specific events mirroring other 4T societies in the area.

WWII caused most of the world to start cycling together. After this 4T, the whole world just might be cycling together.

All eyes may be on Egypt - but what about Tunisia, whose coastline is literally visible from the Sicilian island of Pantelleria on a reasonably clear day?

Thus there is every bit as much cause for concern in Italy - and by extension, all of Europe - as there is in Israel.

Originally Posted by '58 Flat

All eyes may be on Egypt - but what about Tunisia, whose coastline is literally visible from the Sicilian island of Pantelleria on a reasonably clear day?

Thus there is every bit as much cause for concern in Italy - and by extension, all of Europe - as there is in Israel.

Funny you should say that...

Protesters stage rally outside Berlusconi's villa

The Tunisian coastline may be visible from the island of Pantelleria but there is a vast cultural gap between Maghreb and Europe. You'll find out the protests in Egypt and these you have dug up from Italy have fundamentally nothing in common. We're talking different worlds altogether. In fact, the more Arabs, Berbs and others coming here, the wider the cultural and mental rift is growing. Only the other day, UK Prime Minister David Cameron joined Angela Merkel in denouncing multiculturalism as a failure.
Indeed, if something happens in say Egypt or the Barbary States, expect rather the opposite to take place among Europeans.

As for the protests in Egypt themselves, with Mubarak's resignation pending and all, I'm starting to wonder whether the passions aren't in the process of becoming successfully diverted and the whole thing won't soon be starting to die down and fade away.

Did we say they had to be related? There are plenty of reasons for Italy to want their PM out, as I recall.

Freed Google executive helped spark Egypt revolt

Gulf leaders hear rumblings of dissent

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates – There were only a few dozen Saudi women at a protest to demand the release of prisoners they claim are unfairly linked to militants. Yet the small act of defiance in Riyadh is part of a wider question for autocratic rulers in the Gulf who wonder if the ripples from Egypt could head their way.

It's too early to predict what — if any — street demonstrations could rise across a region symbolized by its skyscraper-studded wealth, super-powerful sheiks and monarchs and some of Washington's most important military footholds.

The failure to draw crowds at planned rallies in Syria last week also underscores that the protest fire from Tunisia and Egypt apparently can be stamped out by hard-line state security, which is also a hallmark of Gulf states.

But there's no shortage of hints that reform-seeking groups in the Gulf are trying to seize the moment.

Here is a small rant. In all of the talk about democracy and change in the Middle East, one thing I have not heard anything about is protections for minorities under majority rule, like our Bill of Rights. I'm sure the Copts in Egypt are very concerned about this issue.

Maybe I've missed it. I hope so.

They did it...Mubarak is stepping down.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41506482...ica/?gt1=43001

Originally Posted by ASB65

They did it...Mubarak is stepping down.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41506482...ica/?gt1=43001

Not!

A couple of observations. First, Arab North Africa, for the most part, has too many people to support with indigenous agriculture and energy supplies. Most North African countries are net importers of energy and food. Most North African countries are now failing to export enough of anything else to the world to make up their import deficit associated with energy and food. Their populations exceed their bio-physical limits. Now that they are running out of energy reserves to sell (energy production fell sharply some time ago), these problems have became too real to ignore. This is just the beginning of this crisis and it probably doesn't matter what form of government is in power. Source. Another Source.

Second, due to a growing global middle class, mostly in East Asia, food prices have risen approximately 80% over the last three years while simultaneously reducing world inventories of basic staple foods as more and more people shifted to more inefficient diary and meat diets. To the poorer people of North African countries, who were already spending 30-50% of their income on food, this either becomes the "straw that breaks the camel's back" or the main problem, in and of itself. Source. Another source.

Since the problem is now acute, there may be relatively little that any new government or new form of government can do to address these trends in the near term. These issues will require a long term efforts to diversify these economies away from mostly energy exports and establish some method of population growth control.

Originally Posted by Justin '77

Why is is totally unsurprising that a lifelong Establishment Man, having spent time liaising between his ruling class and the ruling elites in a foreign country would naturally assume that representation (or lack thereof) of a viewpoint among elites is the only thing that matters? Like, if there are no Big Men leading a Political Movement for "liberalism"... then there is no such thing as liberalism in that place.

Fortunately for the inhabitants of the real world, the views of the Court and its men -- more important, the limitations and blinders they keep around those views -- aren't the net sum of reality (even, aren't the main thing). Nikolas II, Louis VXI, and Ceauşescu, among others, had to find that out the hard way.

Is your objection that the observation is invalid because you don't trust the source, an "Establishment Man" or is your objection that the observation is invalid because it could be wrong? Do you have any counter-evidence for conditions on the ground in Saudi Arabia?

Originally Posted by '58 Flat

Is it just my imagination runnin' away with me, or are the Coptic Christians inordinately overrepresented among the pro-Mubarak crowd?

But my problem with the radic-libs is that they refuse to even recognize that there is, in the world today, a fundamental clash of ideas, between the heirs to the Athenian archetype on one side (the Western modernizers) and the heirs to the Spartan archetype on the other (the Islamists). Indeed, the only difference between this clash and the Cold War is that the main point of contention was economic then, and social and cultural now.

Which is why, as far back as the spring of 1993, I labeled the current conflict "The Second Cold War" - a label that no one else out there, not even the necons, seems to have warmed up to.

Moreover, this is nothing new; indeed, it is almost a constant throughout modern, and even medieval and ancient, history - thus the Athenian vs. Spartan analogy fits the paradigm perfectly.

If so, I hope this works out better than the Second Peloponnesian War did for the Western modernizers.

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

Not!

Yeah, I heard that. Apparently our intelligence got that one wrong.

Originally Posted by RyanJH

Is your objection that the observation is invalid because you don't trust the source, an "Establishment Man" or is your objection that the observation is invalid because it could be wrong? Do you have any counter-evidence for conditions on the ground in Saudi Arabia?

To the second, nope. We're all talking from positions of near-ignorance (though, at least in my case, I've actually interacted with people who live on the Arabian Peninsula -- which may grant me the tiniest, most microscopic hair of a step above 'abject' ignorance). So my 'no evidence' at least evenly balances all the other 'no evidence's out there.
On the other hand, we do know that Saudi Arabia suffers from a hyper-repressive ruling elite. Any student of history would be justified in at least suspecting (people of Arabia being, nevertheless, people) that there is at least some inclination among the people living under such a regime to live freer lives.

To the first, the second option primarily, though tempered with the fact that courtiers have somewhat of an established track record in being wrong when they base an understanding of masses of people on the fantastically-limited subset of people with whom the court interacts. It's not his being "Establishment" qua "Establishment" that inspires one to skepticism; it's his cloistered, provincial worldview (a US Air Force Attache in a foreign country interacts in any kind of meaningful way only with the ruling class and their agents in that country -- a vanishingly insignificant number and class of people, comes to mass-movements; as well as one for whom there is no little amount of self-interest in leading the US government to believe that their class is the only thing holding back Horrible Consequences) that does that.

A Reagan puppet in Egypt is about to be ousted.

Mumbarak assumed Presidency in Egypt in October 14, 1981

Conservatives do love their dictators.

The Middle East never really had an end to the Cold War, that's why we are seeing these events happening.

A liberal revolution for democracy is happening in a very conservative Middle East with Kings, Princes and dictators.

Originally Posted by ASB65

Yeah, I heard that. Apparently our intelligence got that one wrong.

No - it's that Mubarak himself seems to be off-again-on-again about his resignation. Wishy-washy, trying to have it both ways. Is he an Adaptive, by any chance?

Originally Posted by The Grey Badger

No - it's that Mubarak himself seems to be off-again-on-again about his resignation. Wishy-washy, trying to have it both ways. Is he an Adaptive, by any chance?

Odin says by his estimation he'd be the equivalent of a 1924/1925 cusper in our timeline.

~Chas'88

Originally Posted by 85turtle

A Reagan puppet in Egypt is about to be ousted.

Reagan admitted to Alzheimers disease in 1994 - 17 years ago - and died in 2004 - 7 years ago. Funny, he is still the left's bogey man.

The guy you should be talking about is George Bush. What is amazing to me is how his "freedom agenda" has found its way into the language of Obama and Clinton. Bush is still relevant. Reagan is not.

James50

I have been away from the forum for the past 2 weeks so didn't really join this conversation, until my 11am programming has been interrupted by news of Egyptian Prez Mubarak stepping down and the protestors going wild!

Can this happen in other countries? Here in the US? I'm sure some one above already brought this up.

Mubarak has resigned.

James50

I guess he won't be getting a pyramid.

I hope the guy they elect is worthy of them and worthy of a pyramid or at least a nice step pyramid.