Tunisian Revolution and the Middle East

[Predicto]

What do you think are their goals?

Well, they're Muslims. Duh.

[twa]

What do you think are their goals?

World peace and prosperity.....thru submission to Allah

sorry,I don't trust fundamentalists
http://www.mideastweb.org/Middle-Eas...rotherhood.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood
http://www.adl.org/terrorism/symbols...erhood_1.asp#7


n its March 2004 reform initiative, the Brotherhood declared: "Our only hope to achieve progress in all the aspects of life is by retuning to our religion and implementing our Sharia ... We have a clear mission-working to put in place Allah's law, on the basis of our belief that it is the real, effective way out of our problems-domestic or external, political, economic, social or cultural.

"This is to be achieved by forming the Muslim individual, the Muslim home, the Muslim government, and the state which will lead the Islamic states, reunite the scattered Muslims, restore their glory, retrieve for them their lost lands and stolen homelands, and carry the banner of the call to Allah in order to make the world happy with Islam’s blessings and instructions."
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/a...757654836.html

[JMS]

The Brotherhood has also renounced violence. The stuff you are citing was 30 or so years ago and even farther back from that (also Sadat wasn't killed by the Brotherhood it was an offshoot), a hell of a lot has changed since then. The Muslim Brotherhood is a social organization through and through there is no militant wing or terrorist wing or whatever. They are basically a political party that is banned in Egypt.

Basically the oldest and most influential Arab Nationalist politcal party, which conducted a string of murders in Egypt after WWII while the country was seeking independence from Britian and thus got itself banned in Egypt. Then their role in the assasination of Sadat also got them into more trouble in the 1980's. Then of coarse their is their open call for violence against Israel and that business in Syria the (Hama massacre).

They are a very controversial group. It's true they have renounced violnce since they were created in the 1920's. But it's also true they are associated with violence and violent groups over the years. Most consistantly against Israel.

Everything before the mid 1980's is pretty irrelevant because they took a major change in direction when the majority of their leadership was imprisoned.

Yeah imprisonment will do that to you. I think they also lost Kadafi in the 1980's who was one of their big supporters. When Reagan droped that bomb on his tent he too took a major turn of direction.

Overall you sound more knowlegeable and up to date on the brotherhood than I. If you are saying they have reenounced violence including against Israel; then I'll take your word on it.

---------- Post added January-27th-2011 at 12:51 PM ----------

What do you think are their goals?

They are the oldest and most influencial multi national arab nationalist party. Their stated goal is to instill the Qur'an and Sunnah as the (*)"sole reference point for ordering the life of the Muslim family, individual, community and state".

(*)The Moderate Muslim Brotherhood, Robert S. Leiken & Steven Brooke, Foreign Affairs Magazine

[Stadium-Armory]

any time you want to quote George Bush on history; check yourself before you wreck yourself.... This is basically a rip off of Immanuel Kant's Perpetual Peace, published in 1795. Now Kant was a smart guy, but kant had the problem that he lived in a time where their weren't many democracies to test his theory out on. Today we know better.

• The Mexico American War in 1848,
• the American Civil War,
• the Boer War
• World War I.

Overall I would applaud more democracies in the middle east. But I don't think they would be benificial for the United States near term. Democracies are stable, and they give the most rights to their people; all good things which in the long run would benifit everybody. In the short run however Democracies are messy and subject to being manipulated by charletons. In the short run a pan arab democratic movement could spell trouble for us interests and us allies in that region..

So while long term they are definantly adventagous; their will be challenges for us short term.

Hrmm... not sure what to say here other than I wasn't trying to rip off anyone. I think its pretty apparent that democracy for all is better for everyone (al be it maybe from a long term perspective), and that's all I was saying. Which is also what you seemed to say later on, so I think we're in agreement, no?

Its true that you can find an example of democracies that fight, but the point is about self determination in general. People(s) who have peaceful outlets for dissatisfaction are generally less likely to blow them selves up to make a political statment.

[Predicto]

Well, as a practical matter, the USA tends to support despots in the Middle East who support us and our goals (and Mubarak is one of those guys). Meanwhile, we tend to be afraid of democracy in many Middle East countries because we know that if they are allowed to vote freely, the people there are very likely to elect governments who are hostile to the USA (and Israel), or even elect hardline Muslim theocracies.

In the long run, democracy is a good thing, but in the short run, it's going to lead to a lot of countries run by guys like the Muslim Brotherhood. It's not an easy call from the USA point of view.

[DRSmith]

The moslem brotherhood was the organization which assasinated Anwar Sadat for the crime of making peace with Israel in 1981.
Ayman al-Zawahiri of the moslem brotherhood was imprisoned for 3 years and deported by Egypt for his role in that assasination, and subsequently became the #2 man in Al Quada behind Osama bin Laudin.

The brotherhood is among the oldest arab nationalistic groups which pioneered the use of terrorism as an instrument to further the organizations goals. Today Al Quada has made inroads into egypt and the Gaza strip because of the groups roots with the brotherhood.

---------- Post added January-27th-2011 at 10:28 AM ----------

Two think Israelis shot their own leader for making peace in 90's

In the 80's the US was helping the Taliban

Groups can change

[twa]

Groups can change

Aye...or be different that portrayed or self professed

none of which tells us much of how this will end

[visionary]

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa...ex.html?hpt=T1

Egypt protests expected to escalate on Friday

Cairo, Egypt (CNN) -- Mohamed ElBaradei, the Egyptian Nobel laureate and opposition leader, is now back in Cairo and plans to join what are expected to be a massive displays of anti-government ferment across the world's most populous Arab nation on Friday.

"The barrier of fear is broken," ElBaradei told reporters after he arrived in Egypt from Europe on Thursday. "And it will not come back."

The county has been bracing for a huge outpouring of protests after Friday prayers.

The Muslim Brotherhood has called for its followers to demonstrate after the weekly Muslim prayers -- the first time in the current round of unrest that the largest opposition bloc has told supporters to take to the streets.

Now ElBaradei has said he will take part in the protests and passed along "advice to the regime: It's now the time to listen to the people. Make an innocent collective change."

"We have been calling for the change for a year now. The regime has not listened to us. Therefore, the youth went on the street," he said.

The U.S. Embassy in Cairo issued a message Thursday telling Americans that "areas where people congregate after Friday prayers should be avoided."

"While many of the demonstrations have focused on the downtown Cairo/Tahrir Square area, violent confrontations have occurred at other locations both in the Cairo metropolitan area and in Alexandria, Suez, and other cities," it said.

At the same time, Egypt's ruling National Democratic Party made reference to the discontent on the streets. Secretary-General Safwat al-Sherif told reporters that the party wants to talk with the youths who have been at the forefront of the protests.

The protest movement in Egypt has been fueled by blogs and social media sites like Twitter and Facebook. ElBaradei, who is also the former head of the United Nations' nuclear watchdog agency, has been posting messages of support for the demonstrators on Twitter.

"We shall continue to exercise our right of peaceful demonstration and restore our freedom & dignity. Regime violence will backfire badly," he said in one of his latest tweets.

As he was waiting to leave Vienna, Austria, ElBaradei told reporters that he was going to Egypt to "make sure that things will be managed in a peaceful way."

"I have to give them as much support, political support, spiritual, moral support, whatever I can do, you know," he said. "I will be with them. They are my people, and I have to be there, and I'd like to see Egypt, a new Egypt."

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/africa...ex.html?hpt=T1

ElBaradei: The man to lead a 'free' Egypt?

(CNN) -- When thousands of angry protesters take to the streets of Egypt on Friday, one man many see as the country's next potential leader will be among them.

The Cairo-born former head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, Nobel Peace Prize winner Mohamed ElBaradei on Thursday returned to the country, despite death threats, to be with "his people."

"There was an edict against me a couple of weeks ago basically saying that my life should be dispensable because I am defying the rulers," ElBaradei told CNN on Tuesday.

He said he would have no official protection during his trip to Egypt, but felt the need to express solidarity with his people in person amid criticism he has kept a safe distance while all too subtly trying to encourage change.

"I have no security when I go to Egypt .... but, you know, you have to be with your people," ElBaradei said.

But one user asked: "Where were you when people were being beaten and arrested?"

ElBaradei has yet to form a political party but hundreds of thousands of Egyptians have set up Facebook groups supporting his candidacy. One "Elbaradei for Presidency of Egypt_ 2011" counts more than 200,000 members.

Asked whether he would run for president, ElBaradei said: "Whether I run or not, that is totally irrelevant. And I made it very clear; I will not run under the present conditions, when the deck is stacked completely."

"The priority for me is to -- is to shift Egypt into a democracy, is to catch up with the 21st century, to get Egypt to be a modern and moderate society and respecting human rights, respecting the basic freedoms of the people."

[Koala]

World peace and prosperity.....thru submission to Allah

sorry,I don't trust fundamentalists
http://www.mideastweb.org/Middle-Eas...rotherhood.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_Brotherhood
http://www.adl.org/terrorism/symbols...erhood_1.asp#7


n its March 2004 reform initiative, the Brotherhood declared: "Our only hope to achieve progress in all the aspects of life is by retuning to our religion and implementing our Sharia ... We have a clear mission-working to put in place Allah's law, on the basis of our belief that it is the real, effective way out of our problems-domestic or external, political, economic, social or cultural.

"This is to be achieved by forming the Muslim individual, the Muslim home, the Muslim government, and the state which will lead the Islamic states, reunite the scattered Muslims, restore their glory, retrieve for them their lost lands and stolen homelands, and carry the banner of the call to Allah in order to make the world happy with Islam’s blessings and instructions."
http://english.aljazeera.net/focus/a...757654836.html

If Egypt democratically elects Muslim Brotherhood into power, I say let em have it. If muslims want to be muslim in muslim countries, well let them. I fail to see why the fact that "you dont trust them" is a valid reason for suppressing democratic impulses.

If said muslim governments are hostile, be hostile in return. And since they would be in power, it would be a lot easier to hold the hostile nation and its government accountable. Notice how Hamas has largely cleaned up its act (compared to previous days, its still far from perfect) since it got into power? Think thats a coincidence?

I dont see anything in the muslim brotherhood's agenda that indicates forcing sharia law onto other non-muslim countries. Really, i dont think they give a **** about your freedom, they're just sick of your insecurities costing them THEIR freedom.

Let 'em in power I say. Easier to hold them accountable that way.

**Edit: I dont mean "you" specifically twa. I mean the outside world, non-egyptians. I think the egyptian people are sick of both westerners and other arab countries meddling and helping prop up mubarak. Its not really even a west v. islam thing, its an egypt v. mubarak and the world sort of thing. If that makes sense

[JMS]

Hrmm... not sure what to say here other than I wasn't trying to rip off anyone.

Sorry I wasn't implying you were. George W. Bush famously made that claim as a justification for the Iraq invasion. GW was ripping off Immanuel Kant, who first proposed that democracies would never fight each other in 1795. Problem was Kant lived in a time when there was only one democracy/ ( really a republic) that was the United States. So Kant's work was very theoretical.

I think its pretty apparent that democracy for all is better for everyone (al be it maybe from a long term perspective), and that's all I was saying. Which is also what you seemed to say later on, so I think we're in agreement, no?

My caviot is with the claim that democracies don't go to war with each other. Democracies are very good at going to war with each other if the people want war. Which is a short term problem with democracies in the middle east. I would not make that an insurmountable problem or a argument against a ME wide democratization project; mostly because democracies are more stable and are better allies too.

I'm just noting that when all the attrocities occured in france with the french revolution; they were a republic. And that their very well might be short term bumps for the US and our allies in such a democratic wave

Its true that you can find an example of democracies that fight, but the point is about self determination in general. People(s) who have peaceful outlets for dissatisfaction are generally less likely to blow them selves up to make a political statment.

Yes, but such suicide bombers are not a major issue in Egypt or Tunisia. The big issue for Egypt is while they currently enjoy a long lasting and benificial peace treaty with ISrael; that treaty is not all that popular with the Egyptian people. A more representative form of government could cause problems there and really across the ME; where Israel has been traditionally used as a whipping boy to stir up nationalism benifiting the dictaros and despots in control of these countries.... Anyway just saying.

---------- Post added January-27th-2011 at 02:58 PM ----------

Two think Israelis shot their own leader for making peace in 90's

In the 80's the US was helping the Taliban

Groups can change

(1) I don't think the groups which shot the Israeli prime minister have changed much. They are a big part of the problem too.
(2) America never supported the Taliban, we supported the Mujahadine; which was a broader coelition than the taliban.
(3) Yes groups can change. But I have not heard the Moslem brotherhood renounce violence specifically towards Israel; which is where they have directed violence in the passed. As such they very likely could become part of the problem rather than part of a solution if gaining power.

Again I'm not arguing against a democratic movement anywhere. I'm just saying Americans should have their eyes open when it happens. Long term it's very much in everybodies favor. Short term it presents some real challenges.

[twa]

If Egypt democratically elects Muslim Brotherhood into power, I say let em have it. If muslims want to be muslim in muslim countries, well let them. I fail to see why the fact that "you dont trust them" is a valid reason for suppressing democratic impulses.

I

Thanks for the edit,I'm fine with democratic impulses and individual rights and support more of them in the Muslim world

Not too sure the Brotherhood is though,and I'll be watching.

[JMS]

Well, as a practical matter, the USA tends to support despots in the Middle East who support us and our goals (and Mubarak is one of those guys). Meanwhile, we tend to be afraid of democracy in many Middle East countries because we know that if they are allowed to vote freely, the people there are very likely to elect governments who are hostile to the USA (and Israel), or even elect hardline Muslim theocracies.

Exactly right. Not just in the ME too. Also in Central and south America and Africa. Depots are more predictable and much easier to deal with. Very short sited of us, but it's also been something we have done consistantly over decades.

In the long run, democracy is a good thing, but in the short run, it's going to lead to a lot of countries run by guys like the Muslim Brotherhood. It's not an easy call from the USA point of view.

Yep, significant near term challenges.

[Hubbs]

Chris Matthews just said that Egypt has the Panama Canal.

[luckydevil]

God our networks are awful

Al Jazeera is bringing it

http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/

[The Brave Little Toaster Oven]

Chris Matthews just said that Egypt has the Panama Canal.

Those ****ing Panamanians sold the rights to the canal to Egypt after we turned it over to them?!