Fascinating.
The liberals in the US and Europe were all over the story of the unrest in Egypt. They pushed hard for Mubarak to step down and refused to see the danger that his unplanned ouster would mean to the rest of the Middle East.
Now we have this drama going on not only in Bahrain but in the rest of the M.E. and all we hear is silence.
Why?
Graphic images...probably too strong for liberal stomachs.
not only silence, not a single comment here. Wow, how can there be nothing being reported in the news? Is it because of our nations stance to Bahrain?
ReplyDeleteThe Washington Post and the NY Times are. Qaddafi is now in the spotlight.
ReplyDeleteSol,
ReplyDeleteYea this is a whole game changer,in spite of the fact that the US is the biggest supplier of weapons and aid cash to Egypt two Iranian naval vessels are due to transit the Suez Canal in the next couple of days.
These are the first Iranian naval vessels to do so since the revolution.
Now this must have been done with the consent of the Army council now in control of Egypt so what does this mean for future relations with the US.
Also Israel is up in arms about these vessels and is no doubt in contact with the US regarding them.
This is going to cost the US a lot more than dollars if it really kicks off,what will the US stance be on propping up Israel then.
Will it be willing to do more than flying in weapons and supplies?
Pandora's box.
ReplyDeleteideas triumphed over practicality and the results still have to be harvested.
a destabilized M.E. will raise fuel prices, imperil the recovery and probably cost Obama the election.
as much as i hate his health care proposal it would seem that something as mundane as rioting in Egypt will start the end of his presidency...amazing.
@Solomon
ReplyDeleteIn Egypt and the rest of the Middle East, the protests and revolutions didn't happen due to the current administration's stance. Heck, they would have happened with or without American influence. Despite what Newsweek or Time may say, Obama didn't do all that much in making Mubarak step down. The heavy lifting was done by the Egyptian protesters, and that's the primary reason why Mubarak left.
The notion of unrest spreading to the rest of the Arab world is a valid one, but from the eyes of the people (or at least the majority) from the region, it's the people having the guts to stand up for themselves, not just mere unrest.
I've been following the news for the past few days and they have been indeed reporting on Bahrain and Libya (Libya is doing even worse than Bahrain in terms of the death toll right now), and the common liberal does support the movements in those countries.
Don't mistake these words as my own beliefs. I support the Libyan people rising up against Qaddafi, but I'm also afraid that in doing so, the region will further destabilize (even into a civil war). In Bahrain, I hope the ruling class understand what the protesters want and quickly compromise. Keep in mind that these aren't your run-of-the-mill college anarchists, this are the majority of the working population.
Lastly, I don't think Obama or the Democrats would lose because of the unrest in the Middle East. It'll cost him some points if things get worse, but the state of our economy will still be the biggest weapon the Republicans can use.
The US is not much better these days.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2011/02/19/opinion/19blowcht.html?ref=opinion
There's a saying that:
ReplyDelete"We can’t win the future by ceding the present and romanticizing the past."
Perhaps there's some truth in there.