Mubarak resigns amid mass protests

Here is the problem. Mubarek is supported by the US as he is their last stand because if he falls then the rest will follow. The US is caught in a bind; while supporting democracy that blows warm air up its proverbial backside it is afraid of what is evolving in Egypt and the people are saying that it’s all the fault of the US. Now the US is issues platitudes about orderly transfer to power blah blah to appear statesman like, but in actual fact it’s giving Mubarek total support via Saudi Arabia.
The US has become terrible at this – they real have.

‘‘I will say once again that I have lived in this country and I have taken responsibility in relation to this country, and Egypt is going to stay above all until I hand over power. Egypt will remain the beginning of my existence and also the end.’‘

B92

Mubarak’s statement clearly indicates that he is oblivious of what is happening in Tahir Square.He came to believe that he is invincible. Bowing to protesters demands is inconceivable
to him. He really believes that, without him, Egypt would disintegrate into chaos. Now it seems,by clinging to power instead of his immediate and long overdue departure,he is dragging his country into chaos, real bloodshed.

The protesters in Egypt have been remarkably peaceful and patient so far, and most of them would have been happy just for Mubarak to go. No-one was calling for his head to be impaled on the palace railings. I suspect that after last night, however, all that could change.Mubarak looks every bit the 'dead man walking'.

Here is the problem. Mubarek is supported by the US as he is their last stand because if he falls then the rest will follow. The US is caught in a bind; while supporting democracy that blows warm air up its proverbial backside it is afraid of what is evolving in Egypt and the people are saying that it’s all the fault of the US. Now the US is issues platitudes about orderly transfer to power blah blah to appear statesman like, but in actual fact it’s giving Mubarek total support via Saudi Arabia.
The US has become terrible at this – they real have.
(sj, 11 February 2011 12:54)

You're right.The US isn't interested in seeing real, popular, democracy blossom in Egypt, for many reasons. If the US has to choose between 'interests' and democracy, they will choose the former, as they have.

If Obama was serious about democracy in Egypt and across the region, he would have said so and called for the dictatorship to end, but he hasn't done so. The US political establishment is afraid of change, because this would become a direct challenge to western interests. This is why Obama has been talking about a transition to a controlled and managed democracy, the dictatorship re-branded, so that things will more-or-less remain the same.

If the Egyptians succed in their demands and oust Mubarak and his regime the momentum will become unstoppable for the whole region.

It's actually worse than that - the US are being blackmailed by the Saudis who say that they will step in to bankroll Mubarak's regime if Obama puts too much pressure on him. It's no bad thing to see US power ebbing but less happy when creatures like the Saudis move in to fill the vacuum.

(Amer, 11 February 2011 18:24

Iran and China are different from Egypt as much as these two countries are different from one another. The government in Iran, believe it or not, has popular ground roots support despite what we are told in the media. You see Iranians that seek change listen to western music, wear western style cloths, but they are a minority in the country. It would take a lot for an “Egyptian style democracy” to take hold.
China is China. Late last year the Chinese communist party held a conference in Bejing during which a very senior party functionary stated that as the country becomes richer the people will seek greater participation in government (i.e. democracy) and that the ruling party will bow to those desires. However, he did say that any transition will be timely and orderly so that “our country continues to prosper”. The communist party will stand aside when the time is right and that time is approaching soon – say next 10 to maximum to 15 years. The one thing the Chinese fear is for democracy to take hold too soon and then their country disintegrates due to outside interference/manipulation.
The Egyptian “revolution” is not welcome news to the US as it fears that a real democracy would eliminate support for the US or maintain a friendly relationship towards Israel in the form of keeping Gaza closed. They also fear that other countries in the region will fall to this new idea of getting rid of their dictators.
Despite the US making noises about orderly transfers, democratic elections etc they are supporting Mubarek through Saudi Arabian money. It now academic as Mubarek has resigned.

Yes Serbs, America controls everyone and everything. It's clear to me now.

Are you people serious? The only reason why this gained moment is because of the US media coverage. America and it's citizens would prefer the proliferation of democracy; even in Egypt.

If America is a bad super-power why didn't your holy BRICS countries step in and help Egypt evolve? Where is China, the largest economy in the world? What about human rights in Egypt?

It's time to get serious and taking accountability of all your actions instead of pinning on America as the bad guy.




Thanks,

"If the Egyptians succeed in their demands and oust Mubarak and his regime the momentum will become unstoppable for the whole region.
(Leonidas, 11 February 2011 14:31) "

Let us hope! In Iran, they've placed an opposition leader who had called for demonstrations in support of the people of Egypt under house arrest - a good sign they're nervous.

Who's current on what's happening in China?

Msr al-hara! Hurrah!

Long live Mubarak! Long live Russia! Long live Serbia!
(Patriota, 11 February 2011 14:48)

I think you spoke little to soon, since Mubarak is history.

Vice-President Omar Suleiman is a deranged piece of work he headed the national intelligence agency of Egypt equivalent of the CIA or KGB/FSB. The U.S. sent him the extra rindentions to torture and kill. The tortured put him at lot of those torture sessions and order his henchman to murder foreign nationals so others would talk. Thats not even including the Egyptians that were tortured and killed by the sicko. If he takes over it would be a equivalent of a Stalin the purges would start. That is what he is trying to do with all his shady manoeuvring to be the head God help the Egyptians.

No more of these treacherous colour revolutions.

Long live Mubarak! Long live Russia! Long live Serbia!

Good riddance to Mubarak. Besides, being in power since 1981 or '82 is too long.

That's one thing the US got for its tens of billions of dollars to the Egyptian army over all these years - a professional army more devoted to the nation than to any one leader.
(Amer, 12 February 2011 00:21

The Egyptian army is concript based and not professional as you claim.One would argue the US military aid to Egypt was Mubarak's reward for the peace agreement he signed with Israel.The Egyptian army was loyal to Mubarak for 30 years and not to Egyptian people.Don't forget that on the 10th of February the supreme commander of the Egyptian army made a public statement in support of Mubarak.

(Amer, 12 February 2011 00:21
Iran is a country surrounded by “enemies” and so its government tends to be paranoid and to allow the likes of the BBC to fill the airwaves would be dangerous as it’s a western government propaganda media outlet. I was told by an Iranian recently returned from holidays that Iran allows Al Jazera to air its news program in that country.
The opposition in Iran is not as large as you might think but it’s funded by the west – it’s funny to think that the US brought Ayatollah Khomeini back to Iran after the over throw of the Shah of Iran and the old cleric bite the hand that fed him. As far as demonstrations are concerned, there were plenty during the Bush days where up to 500 000 were protesting against the Iraqi war, but this TV footage rarely made it out of the US – if the US was in the same position as Iran it would deal with its opposition the same way. Don’t think your government would be any nicer if it was hanging by a thread. Let’s hope you never find this out.
When all of this started in Egypt the US was silent for 3 days and when it finally made a statement it was meaningless; two days later people were saying in the street that it’s the US that wanted the Egyptians to be kept in prison (not my words but the demonstrators). The US was not on top of this situation, but was lagging seriously behind as it was more interested in keeping Mubarak than deposing him – the US was prepared to keep this guy in power via Saudi Arabian funds.
The US is very concerned over the events in Egypt and you just have to look at the Israeli Prime Minster to see he has aged overnight. All of this started with the Egyptian police trying to stop an unlicensed street hawker from making a living – this guy was distraught as this was his only source of income he then set himself alight. Increase in the price of food and oil on a population already living in poverty built up tension so this poor guy was only the catalyst.
The Egyptian army was armed by the US not to transform Egyptian society from a dictatorship to a democracy but to keep the status quo. Make no mistake the army would have been used if there was no danger of it breaking up and starting a civil war. This is Egypt; the place where police torture their prisoners; where the US sends its terror suspects to be tortured. This not “a professional army more devoted to the nation than to any one leader”; in fact far from it, but the day-to-day cost of living plus other longstanding grievances was felt by the vast majority of people and these people have sons in the army and guess who their sympathy is with? Mom, dad, uncle, auntie or Mubarak? The officer corp was also starting to break ranks.
China is something totally different.

(sj, 11 February 2011 22:32)

If the Iranian opposition were so insignificant, the government would not be blocking news of the events in Egypt (the BBC) or preventing a non-authorized demonstration in favor of the revolution there. (There will be a government-sponsored demonstration, where they will say - chant - that it was an uprising against US influence in Egypt, an Islamic revolution inspired by Iran's. The Iranian government is not big on allowing alternative points of view.) A popular demonstration there might have more of a chance now that subsidies for food and fuel have been cut, but the crucial factor, there and in China, is probably the willingness of the army to use force to maintain control. That's one thing the US got for its tens of billions of dollars to the Egyptian army over all these years - a professional army more devoted to the nation than to any one leader.

"The Egyptian army is concript based and not professional as you claim.One would argue the US military aid to Egypt was Mubarak's reward for the peace agreement he signed with Israel.The Egyptian army was loyal to Mubarak for 30 years and not to Egyptian people.Don't forget that on the 10th of February the supreme commander of the Egyptian army made a public statement in support of Mubarak.
(Leonidas, 12 February 2011 11:04) "

By "professional" I was referring to the training of its officer corps, not how it filled its ranks. These officers have attended US military schools, where they may have ignored the lessons on the role of the military in a democratic society, but were at least exposed to the ideas.

Of course the military aid was for the peace treaty Sadat signed with Israel - it was one of the conditions, that the US would support the Egyptian military. If we finally - when the chips were down - ended up with an officer corps that understands its role in a modern, professionally officered army in a democratic society - then I consider the money was well invested.

(sj, 12 February 2011 12:25)

"Iran is a country surrounded by “enemies” and so its government tends to be paranoid and to allow the likes of the BBC to fill the airwaves would be dangerous as it’s a western government propaganda media outlet. "

Yes, I can see how threatening to destroy one neighbor entirely and to overthrow the governments of others might tend to produce a situation where a country would find itself "surrounded by enemies."

"I was told by an Iranian recently returned from holidays that Iran allows Al Jazera to air its news program in that country.
The opposition in Iran is not as large as you might think but it’s funded by the west – it’s funny to think that the US brought Ayatollah Khomeini back to Iran after the over throw of the Shah of Iran and the old cleric bite the hand that fed him."

The problem with supporting NGO's and opposition groups is that it can be used by the government in power to discredit them as foreign stooges. On the other hand, with all the power of a state directed at efforts simply to obtain rights promised by the country's constitution and laws, is there an alternative?

"As far as demonstrations are concerned, there were plenty during the Bush days where up to 500 000 were protesting against the Iraqi war, but this TV footage rarely made it out of the US – if the US was in the same position as Iran it would deal with its opposition the same way."

If the footage rarely "made it out of the country," maybe it was because foreign governments had no interest in showing that many Americans were 1) against the war, and 2) had the right to say so. Or did you think that the US government could somehow embargo it?

"Don’t think your government would be any nicer if it was hanging by a thread. Let’s hope you never find this out."
If a government in a democracy finds itself "hanging by a thread," it will probably lose the next election, unless it makes some changes.

"When all of this started in Egypt the US was silent for 3 days and when it finally made a statement it was meaningless; two days later people were saying in the street that it’s the US that wanted the Egyptians to be kept in prison (not my words but the demonstrators). The US was not on top of this situation, but was lagging seriously behind as it was more interested in keeping Mubarak than deposing him – the US was prepared to keep this guy in power via Saudi Arabian funds."
The response was not clear and simple, but then, neither was the situation. Promoting democracy is one of the US' values, but there is also the problem of ensuring the stability of the source of a large portion of the world's oil. It's not just the US economy that would be damaged by serious unrest there, but the entire world's.


"The US is very concerned over the events in Egypt and you just have to look at the Israeli Prime Minster to see he has aged overnight. All of this started with the Egyptian police trying to stop an unlicensed street hawker from making a living – this guy was distraught as this was his only source of income he then set himself alight. Increase in the price of food and oil on a population already living in poverty built up tension so this poor guy was only the catalyst."
That was in Tunisia.

"The Egyptian army was armed by the US not to transform Egyptian society from a dictatorship to a democracy but to keep the status quo."
Military support to Egypt from the US was part of the Camp David accords between Egypt and Israel. It made it possible for the Egyptians to switch their client-ship from the Soviet Union to the US, a move clearly in our interests. Promotion of democracies is one of the goals of military assistance, but hardly the promotion of government overthrow - how many governments would accept it if it were?

"Make no mistake the army would have been used if there was no danger of it breaking up and starting a civil war. "
Exactly! Enough officers, high enough up, were prepared to support the nation/the people to make it unreliable as a defender of Mubarak. That's all it takes: enough.

"This is Egypt; the place where police torture their prisoners; where the US sends its terror suspects to be tortured. This not “a professional army more devoted to the nation than to any one leader”; in fact far from it, ..."
In the end, it was clear where their sympathies ended up. And it is the police, not the army, that has been involved in the mistreatment of prisoners - the army managed to keep its hands and its reputation comparatively clean.


"... but the day-to-day cost of living plus other longstanding grievances was felt by the vast majority of people and these people have sons in the army and guess who their sympathy is with? Mom, dad, uncle, auntie or Mubarak? "
Yes, a conscript-based army is not nearly as reliable when called on to fire on protesting crowds. The role that living conditions played in provoking people to demonstrate illustrates why China is so desperate to keep its growth rate up.

"The officer corp was also starting to break ranks."
Yes, this probably made as much difference to the outcome as anything.

"China is something totally different."
It's made up of people, and as Martin Luther King said (and was quoted by Obama yesterday), "there's something in the human soul that cries out for freedom." We'll see how things work out in China.

(Amer, 12 February 2011 19:39)
The most sensible theory on Iran has only comes from a small quarter of the US intelligence services – read up on Robert Baer, former CIA, and his views on the subject. I have listen to this guy talk – he is an expert in the true sense of the word.
I hate to tell you that there is no Santa Clause and all of this business of NGOs is really a myth because most of the NGOs are staffed with foreign intelligence officers. They are there for two reasons – first is to put on a human face to the US and second is to undermine the government that is not democratic enough for your country.
In regard to film footage, as I work in Asia I will not use any of those countries, but is Australia democratic enough? Because they rarely played any of those demonstrations on their TV. The west does exactly the same as dictatorship – media censorship is nothing new, but it comes as a shock to people that believe their country doesn’t play that game.
Democracy only works if there is enough money to grease the wheels. I’m sorry to tell you that US citizens will find this out soon.
“…….Promoting democracy is one of the US' values….”
The US is only promoting itself interests; it’s not worried about people. The US maintained the Egyptian regime for its own ends; it allowed them to torture people and some were innocent of any crimes – this is not the modus operandi of a democratic up holder of human rights – please don’t get caught up in this spin. The Camp David agreement meant that largest Arab nation was taken out of play as the US wants to secure oil in the middle east. Israel is only being used to control the region; that’s all.
Forget about “….from the Soviet Union to the US” – this is old stuff where it was a game with the purpose of gaining control before the other guy does it.
The Egyptian regime would have used the army in the first 2 or 3 days to regain control if they were not worried it would fall apart and start a civil war. The officer corp in the army was starting to break ranks – separate into pro and anti Mubarak groups.
China is a phenomenon that has to be seen to be believed. The Communist government is well aware that it has to “let go” and believe it or not, it will at the right time; no questions about it. Remember that it was the Communist Government that moved to capitalism.
Here is something that’s already being discussed in some circles – The title of the paper is called “impending debt crisis in the US and its effects on social stability” – it deals with huge budget cuts and the consequences on society; it’s very scary reading.

No more of these treacherous colour revolutions.

Long live Mubarak! Long live Russia! Long live Serbia!

It's actually worse than that - the US are being blackmailed by the Saudis who say that they will step in to bankroll Mubarak's regime if Obama puts too much pressure on him. It's no bad thing to see US power ebbing but less happy when creatures like the Saudis move in to fill the vacuum.

Yes Serbs, America controls everyone and everything. It's clear to me now.

Are you people serious? The only reason why this gained moment is because of the US media coverage. America and it's citizens would prefer the proliferation of democracy; even in Egypt.

If America is a bad super-power why didn't your holy BRICS countries step in and help Egypt evolve? Where is China, the largest economy in the world? What about human rights in Egypt?

It's time to get serious and taking accountability of all your actions instead of pinning on America as the bad guy.




Thanks,

Here is the problem. Mubarek is supported by the US as he is their last stand because if he falls then the rest will follow. The US is caught in a bind; while supporting democracy that blows warm air up its proverbial backside it is afraid of what is evolving in Egypt and the people are saying that it’s all the fault of the US. Now the US is issues platitudes about orderly transfer to power blah blah to appear statesman like, but in actual fact it’s giving Mubarek total support via Saudi Arabia.
The US has become terrible at this – they real have.

(Amer, 11 February 2011 18:24

Iran and China are different from Egypt as much as these two countries are different from one another. The government in Iran, believe it or not, has popular ground roots support despite what we are told in the media. You see Iranians that seek change listen to western music, wear western style cloths, but they are a minority in the country. It would take a lot for an “Egyptian style democracy” to take hold.
China is China. Late last year the Chinese communist party held a conference in Bejing during which a very senior party functionary stated that as the country becomes richer the people will seek greater participation in government (i.e. democracy) and that the ruling party will bow to those desires. However, he did say that any transition will be timely and orderly so that “our country continues to prosper”. The communist party will stand aside when the time is right and that time is approaching soon – say next 10 to maximum to 15 years. The one thing the Chinese fear is for democracy to take hold too soon and then their country disintegrates due to outside interference/manipulation.
The Egyptian “revolution” is not welcome news to the US as it fears that a real democracy would eliminate support for the US or maintain a friendly relationship towards Israel in the form of keeping Gaza closed. They also fear that other countries in the region will fall to this new idea of getting rid of their dictators.
Despite the US making noises about orderly transfers, democratic elections etc they are supporting Mubarek through Saudi Arabian money. It now academic as Mubarek has resigned.

Vice-President Omar Suleiman is a deranged piece of work he headed the national intelligence agency of Egypt equivalent of the CIA or KGB/FSB. The U.S. sent him the extra rindentions to torture and kill. The tortured put him at lot of those torture sessions and order his henchman to murder foreign nationals so others would talk. Thats not even including the Egyptians that were tortured and killed by the sicko. If he takes over it would be a equivalent of a Stalin the purges would start. That is what he is trying to do with all his shady manoeuvring to be the head God help the Egyptians.

(sj, 11 February 2011 22:32)

If the Iranian opposition were so insignificant, the government would not be blocking news of the events in Egypt (the BBC) or preventing a non-authorized demonstration in favor of the revolution there. (There will be a government-sponsored demonstration, where they will say - chant - that it was an uprising against US influence in Egypt, an Islamic revolution inspired by Iran's. The Iranian government is not big on allowing alternative points of view.) A popular demonstration there might have more of a chance now that subsidies for food and fuel have been cut, but the crucial factor, there and in China, is probably the willingness of the army to use force to maintain control. That's one thing the US got for its tens of billions of dollars to the Egyptian army over all these years - a professional army more devoted to the nation than to any one leader.

‘‘I will say once again that I have lived in this country and I have taken responsibility in relation to this country, and Egypt is going to stay above all until I hand over power. Egypt will remain the beginning of my existence and also the end.’‘

B92

Mubarak’s statement clearly indicates that he is oblivious of what is happening in Tahir Square.He came to believe that he is invincible. Bowing to protesters demands is inconceivable
to him. He really believes that, without him, Egypt would disintegrate into chaos. Now it seems,by clinging to power instead of his immediate and long overdue departure,he is dragging his country into chaos, real bloodshed.

The protesters in Egypt have been remarkably peaceful and patient so far, and most of them would have been happy just for Mubarak to go. No-one was calling for his head to be impaled on the palace railings. I suspect that after last night, however, all that could change.Mubarak looks every bit the 'dead man walking'.

Here is the problem. Mubarek is supported by the US as he is their last stand because if he falls then the rest will follow. The US is caught in a bind; while supporting democracy that blows warm air up its proverbial backside it is afraid of what is evolving in Egypt and the people are saying that it’s all the fault of the US. Now the US is issues platitudes about orderly transfer to power blah blah to appear statesman like, but in actual fact it’s giving Mubarek total support via Saudi Arabia.
The US has become terrible at this – they real have.
(sj, 11 February 2011 12:54)

You're right.The US isn't interested in seeing real, popular, democracy blossom in Egypt, for many reasons. If the US has to choose between 'interests' and democracy, they will choose the former, as they have.

If Obama was serious about democracy in Egypt and across the region, he would have said so and called for the dictatorship to end, but he hasn't done so. The US political establishment is afraid of change, because this would become a direct challenge to western interests. This is why Obama has been talking about a transition to a controlled and managed democracy, the dictatorship re-branded, so that things will more-or-less remain the same.

If the Egyptians succed in their demands and oust Mubarak and his regime the momentum will become unstoppable for the whole region.

"If the Egyptians succeed in their demands and oust Mubarak and his regime the momentum will become unstoppable for the whole region.
(Leonidas, 11 February 2011 14:31) "

Let us hope! In Iran, they've placed an opposition leader who had called for demonstrations in support of the people of Egypt under house arrest - a good sign they're nervous.

Who's current on what's happening in China?

Msr al-hara! Hurrah!

Long live Mubarak! Long live Russia! Long live Serbia!
(Patriota, 11 February 2011 14:48)

I think you spoke little to soon, since Mubarak is history.

Good riddance to Mubarak. Besides, being in power since 1981 or '82 is too long.

That's one thing the US got for its tens of billions of dollars to the Egyptian army over all these years - a professional army more devoted to the nation than to any one leader.
(Amer, 12 February 2011 00:21

The Egyptian army is concript based and not professional as you claim.One would argue the US military aid to Egypt was Mubarak's reward for the peace agreement he signed with Israel.The Egyptian army was loyal to Mubarak for 30 years and not to Egyptian people.Don't forget that on the 10th of February the supreme commander of the Egyptian army made a public statement in support of Mubarak.

(Amer, 12 February 2011 00:21
Iran is a country surrounded by “enemies” and so its government tends to be paranoid and to allow the likes of the BBC to fill the airwaves would be dangerous as it’s a western government propaganda media outlet. I was told by an Iranian recently returned from holidays that Iran allows Al Jazera to air its news program in that country.
The opposition in Iran is not as large as you might think but it’s funded by the west – it’s funny to think that the US brought Ayatollah Khomeini back to Iran after the over throw of the Shah of Iran and the old cleric bite the hand that fed him. As far as demonstrations are concerned, there were plenty during the Bush days where up to 500 000 were protesting against the Iraqi war, but this TV footage rarely made it out of the US – if the US was in the same position as Iran it would deal with its opposition the same way. Don’t think your government would be any nicer if it was hanging by a thread. Let’s hope you never find this out.
When all of this started in Egypt the US was silent for 3 days and when it finally made a statement it was meaningless; two days later people were saying in the street that it’s the US that wanted the Egyptians to be kept in prison (not my words but the demonstrators). The US was not on top of this situation, but was lagging seriously behind as it was more interested in keeping Mubarak than deposing him – the US was prepared to keep this guy in power via Saudi Arabian funds.
The US is very concerned over the events in Egypt and you just have to look at the Israeli Prime Minster to see he has aged overnight. All of this started with the Egyptian police trying to stop an unlicensed street hawker from making a living – this guy was distraught as this was his only source of income he then set himself alight. Increase in the price of food and oil on a population already living in poverty built up tension so this poor guy was only the catalyst.
The Egyptian army was armed by the US not to transform Egyptian society from a dictatorship to a democracy but to keep the status quo. Make no mistake the army would have been used if there was no danger of it breaking up and starting a civil war. This is Egypt; the place where police torture their prisoners; where the US sends its terror suspects to be tortured. This not “a professional army more devoted to the nation than to any one leader”; in fact far from it, but the day-to-day cost of living plus other longstanding grievances was felt by the vast majority of people and these people have sons in the army and guess who their sympathy is with? Mom, dad, uncle, auntie or Mubarak? The officer corp was also starting to break ranks.
China is something totally different.

"The Egyptian army is concript based and not professional as you claim.One would argue the US military aid to Egypt was Mubarak's reward for the peace agreement he signed with Israel.The Egyptian army was loyal to Mubarak for 30 years and not to Egyptian people.Don't forget that on the 10th of February the supreme commander of the Egyptian army made a public statement in support of Mubarak.
(Leonidas, 12 February 2011 11:04) "

By "professional" I was referring to the training of its officer corps, not how it filled its ranks. These officers have attended US military schools, where they may have ignored the lessons on the role of the military in a democratic society, but were at least exposed to the ideas.

Of course the military aid was for the peace treaty Sadat signed with Israel - it was one of the conditions, that the US would support the Egyptian military. If we finally - when the chips were down - ended up with an officer corps that understands its role in a modern, professionally officered army in a democratic society - then I consider the money was well invested.

(sj, 12 February 2011 12:25)

"Iran is a country surrounded by “enemies” and so its government tends to be paranoid and to allow the likes of the BBC to fill the airwaves would be dangerous as it’s a western government propaganda media outlet. "

Yes, I can see how threatening to destroy one neighbor entirely and to overthrow the governments of others might tend to produce a situation where a country would find itself "surrounded by enemies."

"I was told by an Iranian recently returned from holidays that Iran allows Al Jazera to air its news program in that country.
The opposition in Iran is not as large as you might think but it’s funded by the west – it’s funny to think that the US brought Ayatollah Khomeini back to Iran after the over throw of the Shah of Iran and the old cleric bite the hand that fed him."

The problem with supporting NGO's and opposition groups is that it can be used by the government in power to discredit them as foreign stooges. On the other hand, with all the power of a state directed at efforts simply to obtain rights promised by the country's constitution and laws, is there an alternative?

"As far as demonstrations are concerned, there were plenty during the Bush days where up to 500 000 were protesting against the Iraqi war, but this TV footage rarely made it out of the US – if the US was in the same position as Iran it would deal with its opposition the same way."

If the footage rarely "made it out of the country," maybe it was because foreign governments had no interest in showing that many Americans were 1) against the war, and 2) had the right to say so. Or did you think that the US government could somehow embargo it?

"Don’t think your government would be any nicer if it was hanging by a thread. Let’s hope you never find this out."
If a government in a democracy finds itself "hanging by a thread," it will probably lose the next election, unless it makes some changes.

"When all of this started in Egypt the US was silent for 3 days and when it finally made a statement it was meaningless; two days later people were saying in the street that it’s the US that wanted the Egyptians to be kept in prison (not my words but the demonstrators). The US was not on top of this situation, but was lagging seriously behind as it was more interested in keeping Mubarak than deposing him – the US was prepared to keep this guy in power via Saudi Arabian funds."
The response was not clear and simple, but then, neither was the situation. Promoting democracy is one of the US' values, but there is also the problem of ensuring the stability of the source of a large portion of the world's oil. It's not just the US economy that would be damaged by serious unrest there, but the entire world's.


"The US is very concerned over the events in Egypt and you just have to look at the Israeli Prime Minster to see he has aged overnight. All of this started with the Egyptian police trying to stop an unlicensed street hawker from making a living – this guy was distraught as this was his only source of income he then set himself alight. Increase in the price of food and oil on a population already living in poverty built up tension so this poor guy was only the catalyst."
That was in Tunisia.

"The Egyptian army was armed by the US not to transform Egyptian society from a dictatorship to a democracy but to keep the status quo."
Military support to Egypt from the US was part of the Camp David accords between Egypt and Israel. It made it possible for the Egyptians to switch their client-ship from the Soviet Union to the US, a move clearly in our interests. Promotion of democracies is one of the goals of military assistance, but hardly the promotion of government overthrow - how many governments would accept it if it were?

"Make no mistake the army would have been used if there was no danger of it breaking up and starting a civil war. "
Exactly! Enough officers, high enough up, were prepared to support the nation/the people to make it unreliable as a defender of Mubarak. That's all it takes: enough.

"This is Egypt; the place where police torture their prisoners; where the US sends its terror suspects to be tortured. This not “a professional army more devoted to the nation than to any one leader”; in fact far from it, ..."
In the end, it was clear where their sympathies ended up. And it is the police, not the army, that has been involved in the mistreatment of prisoners - the army managed to keep its hands and its reputation comparatively clean.


"... but the day-to-day cost of living plus other longstanding grievances was felt by the vast majority of people and these people have sons in the army and guess who their sympathy is with? Mom, dad, uncle, auntie or Mubarak? "
Yes, a conscript-based army is not nearly as reliable when called on to fire on protesting crowds. The role that living conditions played in provoking people to demonstrate illustrates why China is so desperate to keep its growth rate up.

"The officer corp was also starting to break ranks."
Yes, this probably made as much difference to the outcome as anything.

"China is something totally different."
It's made up of people, and as Martin Luther King said (and was quoted by Obama yesterday), "there's something in the human soul that cries out for freedom." We'll see how things work out in China.

(Amer, 12 February 2011 19:39)
The most sensible theory on Iran has only comes from a small quarter of the US intelligence services – read up on Robert Baer, former CIA, and his views on the subject. I have listen to this guy talk – he is an expert in the true sense of the word.
I hate to tell you that there is no Santa Clause and all of this business of NGOs is really a myth because most of the NGOs are staffed with foreign intelligence officers. They are there for two reasons – first is to put on a human face to the US and second is to undermine the government that is not democratic enough for your country.
In regard to film footage, as I work in Asia I will not use any of those countries, but is Australia democratic enough? Because they rarely played any of those demonstrations on their TV. The west does exactly the same as dictatorship – media censorship is nothing new, but it comes as a shock to people that believe their country doesn’t play that game.
Democracy only works if there is enough money to grease the wheels. I’m sorry to tell you that US citizens will find this out soon.
“…….Promoting democracy is one of the US' values….”
The US is only promoting itself interests; it’s not worried about people. The US maintained the Egyptian regime for its own ends; it allowed them to torture people and some were innocent of any crimes – this is not the modus operandi of a democratic up holder of human rights – please don’t get caught up in this spin. The Camp David agreement meant that largest Arab nation was taken out of play as the US wants to secure oil in the middle east. Israel is only being used to control the region; that’s all.
Forget about “….from the Soviet Union to the US” – this is old stuff where it was a game with the purpose of gaining control before the other guy does it.
The Egyptian regime would have used the army in the first 2 or 3 days to regain control if they were not worried it would fall apart and start a civil war. The officer corp in the army was starting to break ranks – separate into pro and anti Mubarak groups.
China is a phenomenon that has to be seen to be believed. The Communist government is well aware that it has to “let go” and believe it or not, it will at the right time; no questions about it. Remember that it was the Communist Government that moved to capitalism.
Here is something that’s already being discussed in some circles – The title of the paper is called “impending debt crisis in the US and its effects on social stability” – it deals with huge budget cuts and the consequences on society; it’s very scary reading.