If we try to do that and it only breeds a next generation of "Islamofascists", then what?
I think you are right we should not be selling arms to our friends. But you are wrong about selling arms. We should be selling arms to EVERYBODY that can rub two pennies together. Iran, Russia, North Korea, everybody. We should sell them almost everything we make besides the really nasty stuff like weaponized biologicals, and especially nasty gases, or nukes. Everything else should be fair game to everyone if they can afford it. We should be the worlds arsenal. The Swiss make watches and chocolate, the Germans nice cars, the Chinese cheap plastic junk, the Koreans and Taiwanese electronic stuff, and America makes the best tanks and aircraft carriers and warplanes. If the Russians want aircraft and aircraft carriers from us we should sell them the equipment and vessels. If Johnny Jihad wants his very own F-22 Raptor with optional Premium Audiophile equipment, why should we deny him the very best, hell we ought to throw in a gold plated M-4 carbine in with it as a thank you. If anybody anywhere needs to defend themselves then they should all know to come to Uncle Sam's Munitions and Weapons Warehouse and Manufactory. After all nothing quite says I love you more then the gift of a fine weapon. It really shows you care.
There absolutely no sarcastic comments in the proceeding section. Really. No really............ Ok maybe. :2razz:
Got a Romulan BattleCruiser for sale? :lol:
You noticed Obama never said a word when the MB was screwing the country over, but now that the MB is geting their asses kicked, he's all miffed.
Hmm, maybe it had something to do with them being elected.
In any case, your obsessive Obamaphobia aside, there is no good answer here. The MB does have its roots in the countryside and urban poor. Most of the other parties don't speak up for that sector of the population. Regrettably, that sector is also uneducated and prejudiced, with a tendency toward religious extremism and exclusion. The MB leadershihp could have been a exemplar of moderate democratic Islamic rule, that moved the nation forward into tolerance, but instead, it wasted its good will by excluding all other parties and perspectives. So it really lost its mandate such as it is.
It may be that democracy can't work in Egypt without banning the MB, just like Nazism had to be banned to make Germany's post-war democracy work. Democracy is a messy business. It often involves violence in its genesis. We Americans spent 100 years killing each other until we finally got a real democracy, after the Civil War. And even then it took the Civil Rights movement to make that work. So only tea party types would blame Obama for what is going to be a long difficult road to democracy in the Arab world. Thank God Bush or Romney isn't there to muck it up by bombing somebody.
Hmm, maybe it had something to do with them being elected.
In any case, your obsessive Obamaphobia aside, there is no good answer here. The MB does have its roots in the countryside and urban poor. Most of the other parties don't speak up for that sector of the population. Regrettably, that sector is also uneducated and prejudiced, with a tendency toward religious extremism and exclusion. The MB leadershihp could have been a exemplar of moderate democratic Islamic rule, that moved the nation forward into tolerance, but instead, it wasted its good will by excluding all other parties and perspectives. So it really lost its mandate such as it is.
It may be that democracy can't work in Egypt without banning the MB, just like Nazism had to be banned to make Germany's post-war democracy work. Democracy is a messy business. It often involves violence in its genesis. We Americans spent 100 years killing each other until we finally got a real democracy, after the Civil War. And even then it took the Civil Rights movement to make that work. So only tea party types would blame Obama for what is going to be a long difficult road to democracy in the Arab world. Thank God Bush or Romney isn't there to muck it up by bombing somebody.
The successful uprising in Tunisia clearly inspired the Egyptian public, and when the Egyptian army decided to side with the people (probably the deciding factor), Mubarak didn't stand a chance.
And you didn't answer my question: Do you think the US should have tried to help Mubarak crush the Egyptian protesters? It seems that you approve of Brutal dictatorships killing their own people if it's in the US interests.
Democracy's a fine thing so long as the people I don't agree with never have it.
So says the mob too.
Or at least my bitch! :lol:
Freedom's a bitch.
I think the majoroty realized that a Government ruled by a radical religious orginization isn't exactly freedom.
Well, them and the military that is
Freedoms whatever you tell their asses it is, right?
We killed off all the facists during WW2. That seemed to have worked purdy good. The Islamofacists aren't going to just go away. Appessement doesn't work.
For those who are interested, Reuters reported:
Israel is urging the West to stick by Egypt's army in its confrontation with the Muslim Brotherhood, quietly echoing warnings by U.S. regional ally Saudi Arabia against putting pressure on the military-backed government.
"Israel shares its views with the U.S. and some EU (European Union) countries, and those views are to give priority to restoring stability," a senior Israeli official said on Monday.
Concerned Israel quietly backs Egypt's military | Reuters
I believe Israel and Saudi Arabia, both of whom have a far more intimate understanding of Egypt than the U.S. and both of whom have larger interests in Egypt's evolution are suggesting the best course possible. Rather than tilting at windmills of illusions of democracy, the U.S. should also throw its weight behind the development of a stable government with that government being charged with Egypt's future political evolution. If the Muslim Brotherhood wishes to join in a constructive fashion, the door should be open. If not, the U.S. should not try to impose a Muslim Brotherhood role on Egypt. At the same time, the U.S. should refrain from impulsive and reckless calls to sever foreign aid to Egypt.
Egypt is an important American partner. It is a relatively moderate society (witness how the public rose against the Morsi regime when that government tried to consolidate power and take Egypt on a path incompatible with the public's more moderate stances). It has been a reliable partner for peace. It has helped promote stability in a region that has had a lot of instability. The Suez Canal remains an important waterway.
Fascists during WW2 were part of armies of nations. There was a clear enemy during WW2. Terrorism has no real army or nation. Therefore, you can't really compare the two.
Nevermind that after they got elected, they set about installing a dictatorship, right? The Nazis were democratically elected.
Seeing how the MB's acted one elected, there's reason to believe that they rigged the election.
They became parts of armies of nations. Prior to that, they were nothing more than civilian thugs.
Today, the MB's marched nuns through the streets of Cairo and burned churches. Reminds you of Kristalnact, huh?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?