• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Egypt needs our help now more than ever

donsutherland1

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 17, 2007
Messages
11,862
Reaction score
10,300
Location
New York
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
An op-ed written by former National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft and Eric D.K. Melby who served on the National Security Council staff makes a strong case that the U.S. focus its aid to Egypt with the goal of helping Egypt regain economic and political stability. The op-ed argues that such an outcome is in the interests of the U.S.

Excerpts:

Debating what label to put on the recent events deters from the truly important task: developing a strategy to support the restoration of Egypt’s economic and political stability. President Obama’s call for a reassessment of U.S. aid should focus primarily on how we can help Egypt, rather than on whether we should help...

Egypt remains the most important country in the Arab world because of its history, its population, its economy and its example. Helping it achieve its goals at this critical juncture clearly is in America’s interest and that of the international community. The United States is in a unique position — by virtue of its international influence and time-tested relationship with Egypt — to convene the relevant parties and to stimulate action. It also has a unique responsibility to do so.


Egypt needs our help now more than ever - The Washington Post

IMO, Scowcroft and Melby have made a far more coherent argument than those based on emotional appeals that "democracy" in Egypt was set back and, therefore, the U.S. should suspend assistance. The latter arguments assume that Egypt had become a democracy prior to the recent events. It had not. It held elections, but the deposed President refused to respect separation of powers in unilaterally overriding the nation's high court. He had put the nation on a path of increasing Islamization that ran counter to Egypt's longstanding tradition as a moderate and secular state. Ultimately, what happened in Egypt is strictly an Egyptian affair.

The U.S. can and should play a constructive role in helping Egypt in its period of transition. It should resist the temptation to succumb to emotional appeals that risk damaging U.S. interests with respect to Egypt, interests that are far more compelling and far more critical than anything related to Syria.
 
Egypt is one of the oldest civilizations and I think it would hurt their national pride and risk alienating all factions if the US interfered too much. I think they will eventually work it out....at least I hope so. But I also think it might be a bad idea to stop their funding at this time because that would surely alienate the military and then the US would have no influence whatsoever.
 
many people believe the west is in a fight with islamism

the rise of these islamists were supported against socialism and the collapse of eastern bloc opened the door to the better control of this region and " moderate islam" ( the islam which will obey the imperialism ) was chosen to form the political structures of the middle eastern countries .

claiming to be fighting against islamism while supporting them at the same time and threatening to stop helping them because they want to get rid of teh islamist nightmare is not honest action
 
many people believe the west is in a fight with islamism

the rise of these islamists were supported against socialism and the collapse of eastern bloc opened the door to the better control of this region and " moderate islam" ( the islam which will obey the imperialism ) was chosen to form the political structures of the middle eastern countries.

Who chose "moderate islam" to form the political structures of the ME? Islam has so many factions within factions that its almost too difficult for the US to know who to support or not support and so they end up making mistakes. But no matter what the US does it's not going to please everybody anyway.

claiming to be fighting against islamism while supporting them at the same time and threatening to stop helping them because they want to get rid of teh islamist nightmare is not honest action
Yah, thats not good....it looks like the US is confused who or what to support.
 
Who chose "moderate islam" to form the political structures of the ME? Islam has so many factions within factions that its almost too difficult for the US to know who to support or not support and so they end up making mistakes. But no matter what the US does it's not going to please everybody anyway.

Yah, thats not good....it looks like the US is confused who or what to support.

hi moot
there is no moderate islam ,islam is islam ,islamism is islamism. they are different concepts


they want to define it as moderate so that it wont seem so scary to the other ones living in this region

we dont want usa to do anything because it does it for its own benefits ,not for a real peace or democracy

USA supports the arabian spring and the islamist terrorist actions in syria (through its collaborators ) and it knows what to support ,it is smart enough to know what to support here

l need to trust some reasonable honest senators who tend to show their oppositon to the bills to be passed to decide what kind of further assistance will be sent to syria

any islamist action is always less democratic than any other ideology because their followers are not real muslims who obey every verse written in kuran .

so supporting these monsters in the name of democracy just because they were elected doesnt seem so honest

if election is only one criteria of a democracy

iran is democratic too
 
Last edited:
Egypt is one of the oldest civilizations and I think it would hurt their national pride and risk alienating all factions if the US interfered too much.

The age of a civilization is an important factor regarding intervention? This isn't Star Trek.
 
The Egyptian people have made it clear that they want nothing to do with Obama and that in their eyes he is a corrupt, terrorism-supporting asshat.

I really don't think they need or want our help.
 
The age of a civilization is an important factor regarding intervention? This isn't Star Trek.

Not regarding intervention, but regarding the stability of a democratic government once it is established. I sometimes make the point that since the Middle East is the birthplace of civilization, it has great potential to join the West in the advancement of civilization.
 
Not regarding intervention, but regarding the stability of a democratic government once it is established. I sometimes make the point that since the Middle East is the birthplace of civilization, it has great potential to join the West in the advancement of civilization.

Well, they are getting enough help for some advancement. More than enough to introduce them to at least the 19th Century.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/afric...illions-aid-sent-them-since-ouster-morsi.html
 
Not regarding intervention, but regarding the stability of a democratic government once it is established. I sometimes make the point that since the Middle East is the birthplace of civilization, it has great potential to join the West in the advancement of civilization.

I expect, after Iraq regenerates the social capital annihilated by Saddam, it will begin rapid development and will once again be a great nation. Iran still has social capital, if it became a democracy it could begin rapid development almost immediately. If Iran poured its money into education, a functioning justice system, the enforcement of human rights and other development instead of nuke tech and the military (while invoking sanctions), the Iranian people could join us in the developed world in a couple generations and once again be world leaders.


But I don't think history has much to do with it. People are people.
 
I don't think just throwing money at a country qualifies as "help." Money isn't really useful without education, empowerment of women, etc. because all it will serve to do will be to give the elite more power.

You can throw all the money you like..never seems to get to the people it is aimed at..
 
I expect, after Iraq regenerates the social capital annihilated by Saddam, it will begin rapid development and will once again be a great nation. Iran still has social capital, if it became a democracy it could begin rapid development almost immediately. If Iran poured its money into education, a functioning justice system, the enforcement of human rights and other development instead of nuke tech and the military (while invoking sanctions), the Iranian people could join us in the developed world in a couple generations and once again be world leaders.


But I don't think history has much to do with it. People are people.

Well and to think.....the same scenario plays out for China to as well as Russia. But like you said, people are people. In the general context of things. So there isn't really much said there at all.....is there?
 
I don't think just throwing money at a country qualifies as "help." Money isn't really useful without education, empowerment of women, etc. because all it will serve to do will be to give the elite more power.

Yeah....I think we should have learned that lesson back in the 50's. When the MB was just getting started.

Course we always knew that the Egyptian Military. Owned most of Big Business in Egypt. Hence our throwing money at them all along.
 
I expect, after Iraq regenerates the social capital annihilated by Saddam, it will begin rapid development and will once again be a great nation. Iran still has social capital, if it became a democracy it could begin rapid development almost immediately. If Iran poured its money into education, a functioning justice system, the enforcement of human rights and other development instead of nuke tech and the military (while invoking sanctions), the Iranian people could join us in the developed world in a couple generations and once again be world leaders.


But I don't think history has much to do with it. People are people.

I agree, but think some regions might take longer to develop democracy than others. Afghanistan and sub-Saharan Africa are traditionally tribe-oriented societies, so trying to introduce systems of government (like democracy) that were created for settled societies has only made things worse by allowing turds like Idi Amin and Charles Taylor to take control.
 
I agree, but think some regions might take longer to develop democracy than others. Afghanistan and sub-Saharan Africa are traditionally tribe-oriented societies, so trying to introduce systems of government (like democracy) that were created for settled societies has only made things worse by allowing turds like Idi Amin and Charles Taylor to take control.

I would have to agree with you ML.....as like with EF's theory of a One Sized glove fits all, has never worked from the beginning. Not with man.
 
I really think that Egypt must succeed in establishing a true secular democracy. If they do, it will snowball through the rest of the region, hopefully proliferating true democracy through the only part of the world untouched by it.

If the military stays true to their word, they have all of my support in this. Morsi and his Islamist cronies can go to hell.
 
I[COLOR="#800000"] doubt it will snowball through the Rest of the Region[/COLOR]. That's like Eco.....trying to use that one Glove Fit scenario for the Entire Planet. Wont work and really is based upon nothing but Dreams of Hope.
 
I can never say this enough....WE. ARE. NOT. THE. WORLD'S. POLICEMAN!!!

If Egypt is ever going to sort out any form of stable government, then they need to do it all by themselves. History shows that while interference may serve to make shallow freinds, it also serves to create mortal enemies. Anyone wonder why Canada has no real enemies???
 
Security forces clashed with supporters of Egypt’s ousted president early on Saturday in a confrontation that left scores killed and injured, further dashing hopes for a resolution to the country’s political crisis.

Interior ministry forces backed by plainclothes enforcers allegedly fired teargas and live ammunition at supporters of ousted president Mohamed Morsi near a month-old protest encampment close to eastern Cairo’s Rabaa al-Adawiya mosque.




A health ministry spokesman was quoted by local media as saying 88 people had been killed and more than 600 injured in the violence, while field medics at the scene said they counted at least 200 dead in the melee.


http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/cae568d6-f6a3-11e2-8620-00144feabdc0.html
 
Last edited:
Egypt, Syria and Iraq all in flames.
We must stand idly by and watch there is nothing we can do to stop it.
Although I believe history shows where these things usually tend to end up.
 
Egypt, Syria and Iraq all in flames.
We must stand idly by and watch there is nothing we can do to stop it.
Although I believe history shows where these things usually tend to end up.

you started it and then claim you cant do anything

haha
 
Or we leave them to work their own problems out. Besides, they have no respect for America far as I know.
 
Or we leave them to work their own problems out. Besides, they have no respect for America far as I know.

you try to divide them attack them invade them but then claim they have no respect

maybe l need to start to think that 9/ 11 was an american conspiracy

because they used this as an excuse to attack the ME

if not why did they attack ıraq ? terrorists who killed your people were not ıraqi

but imperialism is such a thing

saudis and americans respect each other
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom