If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Global Geopolitics)   Egypt's current ruling army chief, Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi™, was Made in America. Factual bonus: He also watched NFL games   (glblgeopolitics.wordpress.com) divider line 97
    More: Interesting, Made in America, Sissi(TM), U.S. Naval War College, Egypt, NFL, Enduring Freedom, Morsi, constitutional court  
•       •       •

861 clicks; posted to Politics » on 08 Jul 2013 at 9:30 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



97 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-07-08 09:31:40 AM
So you're saying The Shoepisser and John Madden made him catch teh crazys?
 
2013-07-08 09:33:17 AM
After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?
 
2013-07-08 09:34:13 AM
All the senior Egyptian officers are trained at the War College. This is only news to people who have no idea how the world works.
 
2013-07-08 09:42:27 AM
What, like how mobsters become Made men?
 
2013-07-08 09:44:29 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?


Unfortunately, yes.  They typically favor anything that makes Obama look bad.
 
2013-07-08 09:47:01 AM

Muta: Philip Francis Queeg: After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?

Unfortunately, yes.  They typically favor anything that makes Obama look bad.


What does Obama have to do with Egypt?
 
2013-07-08 09:47:35 AM

Muta: Philip Francis Queeg: After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?

Unfortunately, yes.  They typically favor anything that makes Obama look bad.


How does a popular uprising make Obama look bad?
 
2013-07-08 09:48:11 AM
Way to go Obooger.  Mitt would have fixed this problem.
 
2013-07-08 09:48:51 AM

Ned Stark: Muta: Philip Francis Queeg: After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?

Unfortunately, yes.  They typically favor anything that makes Obama look bad.

What does Obama have to do with Egypt?


It's, like, near Kenya or something.  Seekrit Muslim and all that.
 
2013-07-08 09:53:27 AM

WTF Indeed: All the senior Egyptian officers are trained at the War College. This is only news to people who have no idea how the world works.


You mean to tell me that we trained the same people who participated in joint operations with US? Next thing you know you will be telling me that we give them aid as well as access to NATO fighters like the F-16 C and D's or the French Mirage fighters in exchange for insurances that the Suez will stay open and to avoid a situation like the Yom Kippur War or the Libyan-Egyptian War.

/But that kinda speak is commie talk and commie talk gets you butt reckt around these parts.
 
2013-07-08 09:53:55 AM

Muta: Philip Francis Queeg: After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?

Unfortunately, yes.  They typically favor anything that makes Obama look bad.


It's nice to see two liberals embracing the core belief of the neo-conservative moment.
 
2013-07-08 09:54:04 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Muta: Philip Francis Queeg: After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?

Unfortunately, yes.  They typically favor anything that makes Obama look bad.

How does a popular uprising make Obama look bad?


It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.
 
2013-07-08 09:55:18 AM

WTF Indeed: Muta: Philip Francis Queeg: After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?

Unfortunately, yes.  They typically favor anything that makes Obama look bad.

It's nice to see two liberals embracing the core belief of the neo-conservative moment.


Huh?
 
2013-07-08 09:55:49 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.


I'm interested, why do you think the military just deposed Morsi?
 
2013-07-08 09:57:40 AM
Yes, and the 9/11 bombers learned how to fly in the U.S. I imagine this little tidbit will be about as useful.

It's unfortunate that Obama has managed to alienate pretty much every faction in Egypt. He is about as skilled in international diplomacy as my pet monkey.
 
2013-07-08 09:57:49 AM

WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.

I'm interested, why do you think the military just deposed Morsi?


Because they thought it would best safeguard their own position.

Tell me do you think they did it out of love and concern for the citizens of Egypt? You know the people they have been shooting.
 
2013-07-08 09:59:37 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: Huh?


That an elected democracy, no matter how ineffective, exclusionary, whose actions drastically undermined the very basis of a representative democracy, and whose elected leaders were actively stoking sectarian violence must remain intact.
 
2013-07-08 10:02:49 AM

WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: Huh?

That an elected democracy, no matter how ineffective, exclusionary, whose actions drastically undermined the very basis of a representative democracy, and whose elected leaders were actively stoking sectarian violence must remain intact.


You think that is a core tenet of neoconservatism?
 
2013-07-08 10:03:54 AM

WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: Huh?

That an elected democracy, no matter how ineffective, exclusionary, whose actions drastically undermined the very basis of a representative democracy, and whose elected leaders were actively stoking sectarian violence must remain intact.


So, I guess the answer to my question is : Yes, even after the military killed dozens of civilians overnight, Farkers are still singing the praises of the military coup.
 
2013-07-08 10:04:59 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Muta: Philip Francis Queeg: After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?

Unfortunately, yes.  They typically favor anything that makes Obama look bad.

How does a popular uprising make Obama look bad?

It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.


I guess all those people in Tahrir square supporting the military are actually IN the military?
 
2013-07-08 10:05:19 AM

SpankMeJohnny: Yes, and the 9/11 bombers learned how to fly in the U.S. I imagine this little tidbit will be about as useful.

It's unfortunate that Obama has managed to alienate pretty much every faction in Egypt. He is about as skilled in international diplomacy as my pet monkey.


This.  If My Man Mitt was in charge, this whole problem would be fixed.  Way to go, Barack HUSSEIN Alabama.
 
2013-07-08 10:06:23 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: Huh?

That an elected democracy, no matter how ineffective, exclusionary, whose actions drastically undermined the very basis of a representative democracy, and whose elected leaders were actively stoking sectarian violence must remain intact.

So, I guess the answer to my question is : Yes, even after the military killed dozens of civilians overnight, Farkers are still singing the praises of the military coup.


Man, in 1775, I bet you would've been all like "No, we can't fight against the king! We must use non-violence against his usurpation of power! His government must remain intact!"
 
2013-07-08 10:06:31 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: Because they thought it would best safeguard their own position.

Tell me do you think they did it out of love and concern for the citizens of Egypt? You know the people they have been shooting.


That's a thought. Or it could be that the nation has limited power, water, and other basic services after a year of Mori's government. It's elected leaders were actively removing judges from office and declaring their rulings against changes to the Constitution as illegal.  Morsi claimed on several occasions that he was "above the law" and that 24 million Egyptians signed a petition(a basic expression of a democracy) to ask for new elections and Morsi refused saying he was in charge no matter what happened.
 
2013-07-08 10:08:11 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Muta: Philip Francis Queeg: After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?

Unfortunately, yes.  They typically favor anything that makes Obama look bad.

How does a popular uprising make Obama look bad?

It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.

I guess all those people in Tahrir square supporting the military are actually IN the military?


So any protest is a"popular uprising" now?

Tell us, is it "the people" who have been killing civilian protesters?
 
2013-07-08 10:09:54 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: Huh?

That an elected democracy, no matter how ineffective, exclusionary, whose actions drastically undermined the very basis of a representative democracy, and whose elected leaders were actively stoking sectarian violence must remain intact.

So, I guess the answer to my question is : Yes, even after the military killed dozens of civilians overnight, Farkers are still singing the praises of the military coup.

Man, in 1775, I bet you would've been all like "No, we can't fight against the king! We must use non-violence against his usurpation of power! His government must remain intact!"


And in 1775 you'd apparently have been supporting firing into crowds of civilian protesters.
 
2013-07-08 10:10:00 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: So any protest is a"popular uprising" now?


It's not just any protest. It's something like 30 million demonstrators. Or it was before they kicked Morsi out.

Philip Francis Queeg: Tell us, is it "the people" who have been killing civilian protesters?


It's the military, supported by the people. I don't remember anyone guaranteeing that a transition to democracy was ever supposed to be non-violent. How many people died in the US revolution?
 
2013-07-08 10:10:27 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.

I'm interested, why do you think the military just deposed Morsi?

Because they thought it would best safeguard their own position.

Tell me do you think they did it out of love and concern for the citizens of Egypt? You know the people they have been shooting.


I think internal Egyptian politics are much more complex than the simple caricature of a banana republic that you have reduced them to.
 
2013-07-08 10:11:31 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: And in 1775 you'd apparently have been supporting firing into crowds of civilian protesters


Lots of civilians died in the cause of freedom in 1775-1781. Many also were killed by the Continentals. Does that mean I should not have supported the Continental Army?
 
2013-07-08 10:11:32 AM

BMulligan: You think that is a core tenet of neoconservatism?


Well it's a Straussian argument for neo-conservatism.
 
2013-07-08 10:12:06 AM

Lost Thought 00: Philip Francis Queeg: WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.

I'm interested, why do you think the military just deposed Morsi?

Because they thought it would best safeguard their own position.

Tell me do you think they did it out of love and concern for the citizens of Egypt? You know the people they have been shooting.

I think internal Egyptian politics are much more complex than the simple caricature of a banana republic that you have reduced them to.


Don't you understand? People died! This automatically makes the cause unworthy of supporting. Apparently.
 
2013-07-08 10:17:55 AM

Lost Thought 00: Philip Francis Queeg: WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.

I'm interested, why do you think the military just deposed Morsi?

Because they thought it would best safeguard their own position.

Tell me do you think they did it out of love and concern for the citizens of Egypt? You know the people they have been shooting.

I think internal Egyptian politics are much more complex than the simple caricature of a banana republic that you have reduced them to.



Exactly, which is why it's important to remember the Egyptian military is not "for the people."   The Egyptian military is its own little centralized state.  They own lots of land, as well as heavy and domestic industry.  If you're employed making refrigerators in Egypt, most likely you're working for the Military.

The coup was about the economy.  Not the people.  It's a safe bet, that at this point, anything that threatens the military's economic base will be removed in the name of the people.  That's what took down Mohamed Morsi.  The economy.

But it's really hard to see how Egypt's economy is going to improve if the military owns everything.
 
2013-07-08 10:18:43 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: And in 1775 you'd apparently have been supporting firing into crowds of civilian protesters

Lots of civilians died in the cause of freedom in 1775-1781. Many also were killed by the Continentals. Does that mean I should not have supported the Continental Army?


So yes, you would have supported firing into crowds of civilian protesters.
 
2013-07-08 10:19:49 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: And in 1775 you'd apparently have been supporting firing into crowds of civilian protesters

Lots of civilians died in the cause of freedom in 1775-1781. Many also were killed by the Continentals. Does that mean I should not have supported the Continental Army?



George Washington did not overthrow the Continental Congress nor the Congress of the Confederation no matter how dysfunctional they were.
 
2013-07-08 10:20:09 AM

Lost Thought 00: Philip Francis Queeg: WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.

I'm interested, why do you think the military just deposed Morsi?

Because they thought it would best safeguard their own position.

Tell me do you think they did it out of love and concern for the citizens of Egypt? You know the people they have been shooting.

I think internal Egyptian politics are much more complex than the simple caricature of a banana republic that you have reduced them to.


Do you think it's more complex than the caricature that those who support the coup as a "popular uprising" for freedom and liberty have reduced it to?
 
2013-07-08 10:20:29 AM
Last I heard, literally every Muslim national government bureaucracy is run by engineers of business grads from top tier American universities. How is this even news? Muslim expansion is planned based on marketing and sales tehcniques from up-to-date American grad schools, according to journalists and authors like V. S. Naipul.
 
2013-07-08 10:20:55 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: And in 1775 you'd apparently have been supporting firing into crowds of civilian protesters

Lots of civilians died in the cause of freedom in 1775-1781. Many also were killed by the Continentals. Does that mean I should not have supported the Continental Army?

So yes, you would have supported firing into crowds of civilian protesters.


No, I would have supported the Continental Army  even though I don't support some of the things they did.

Do you see how that works? You can be in support of a cause without supporting every single action taken in support of that cause. That's like saying we can't support the US involvement in the Pacific Theater in WWII because we used the two atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which killed orders of magnitude more than 42 people.
 
2013-07-08 10:21:36 AM

DarnoKonrad: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: And in 1775 you'd apparently have been supporting firing into crowds of civilian protesters

Lots of civilians died in the cause of freedom in 1775-1781. Many also were killed by the Continentals. Does that mean I should not have supported the Continental Army?


George Washington did not overthrow the Continental Congress nor the Congress of the Confederation no matter how dysfunctional they were.


No, but the Whiskey Rebellion and Shay's Rebellion certainly tried to, which lead eventually to the Constitution.
 
2013-07-08 10:23:21 AM
I hear he's a real Sissi.
 
2013-07-08 10:23:28 AM
It's just fantastic how uninformed some Americans are about their own damn history.
 
2013-07-08 10:26:48 AM

cameroncrazy1984: It's just fantastic how uninformed some Americans are about their own damn history.


It's almost as funny as people that don't know what government agencies actually do and how the law works the governs them.
 
2013-07-08 10:28:00 AM

cameroncrazy1984: DarnoKonrad: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: And in 1775 you'd apparently have been supporting firing into crowds of civilian protesters

Lots of civilians died in the cause of freedom in 1775-1781. Many also were killed by the Continentals. Does that mean I should not have supported the Continental Army?


George Washington did not overthrow the Continental Congress nor the Congress of the Confederation no matter how dysfunctional they were.

No, but the Whiskey Rebellion and Shay's Rebellion certainly tried to, which lead eventually to the Constitution.



And the military in both those cases sided with the civilian government.  The Egyptian military is doing the exact opposite.    It's flatly disturbing to see people cheer a military coup.  Make no mistake, this is a massive set back for democracy in Egypt.  It remains to be seen how much of a setback, but you can bet the 51% of the people who voted for Morsi aren't under any delusion their vote means anything at this point.  They have been disenfranchised.
 
2013-07-08 10:29:27 AM

DarnoKonrad: And the military in both those cases sided with the civilian government.  The Egyptian military is doing the exact opposite.


I don't see how that's relevant. You're more okay with the military putting down a popular rebellion than supporting one.
 
2013-07-08 10:29:44 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: And in 1775 you'd apparently have been supporting firing into crowds of civilian protesters

Lots of civilians died in the cause of freedom in 1775-1781. Many also were killed by the Continentals. Does that mean I should not have supported the Continental Army?

So yes, you would have supported firing into crowds of civilian protesters.

No, I would have supported the Continental Army  even though I don't support some of the things they did.

Do you see how that works? You can be in support of a cause without supporting every single action taken in support of that cause. That's like saying we can't support the US involvement in the Pacific Theater in WWII because we used the two atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, which killed orders of magnitude more than 42 people.


So you support the cause of military control of the state. Got it.

You must be deeply saddened to live in a nation which doesn't have such blessings? Think how much better off we'd all be in this country id the military was superior to the civilian government,. not the other way around.
 
2013-07-08 10:31:17 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: So you support the cause of military control of the state. Got it.


Can you please show me where the military is planning on controlling the state? Thanks.
 
2013-07-08 10:33:25 AM

cameroncrazy1984: DarnoKonrad: And the military in both those cases sided with the civilian government.  The Egyptian military is doing the exact opposite.

I don't see how that's relevant. You're more okay with the military putting down a popular rebellion than supporting one.


You don't see how that's relevant?    You honestly think if George Washington had used his army to dissolve the continental congress we'd be the same nation we are today?  Are you nuts?  Can you not see the precedent this sets?
 
2013-07-08 10:33:54 AM
I mean, everything I'm seeing says the military is meeting with representatives of the political parties about planning elections, so if you have any information that says otherwise, I'd love to read it.
 
2013-07-08 10:33:57 AM
So is this blog reputable? I've noticed Fark has been linking to it a bunch and I'd never heard of it until recently.
 
2013-07-08 10:34:55 AM

DarnoKonrad: cameroncrazy1984: DarnoKonrad: And the military in both those cases sided with the civilian government.  The Egyptian military is doing the exact opposite.

I don't see how that's relevant. You're more okay with the military putting down a popular rebellion than supporting one.

You don't see how that's relevant?    You honestly think if George Washington had used his army to dissolve the continental congress we'd be the same nation we are today?  Are you nuts?  Can you not see the precedent this sets?


Oh god, it might mean that the next time Egypt elects a president he won't try to institute Sharia Law and consolidate power only to him! DEAR GOD THE HORROR!
 
2013-07-08 10:36:40 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Can you please show me where the military is planning on controlling the state? Thanks.


It already does. And it has for a very long time.  It removed both Mubarak and Morsi because they threaten their power in one way or another.
 
2013-07-08 10:37:30 AM

DarnoKonrad: And the military in both those cases sided with the civilian government. The Egyptian military is doing the exact opposite. It's flatly disturbing to see people cheer a military coup. Make no mistake, this is a massive set back for democracy in Egypt. It remains to be seen how much of a setback, but you can bet the 51% of the people who voted for Morsi aren't under any delusion their vote means anything at this point. They have been disenfranchised.


It is possible, in fact likely, that this is both a setback for democracy yet also a good thing for the general Egyptian population. Fact of the matter is, this is how leaders in Egypt (and many other countries) end their reigns. It's pretty much accepted and expected by the populace.
 
2013-07-08 10:37:36 AM
Look Fark Liberals who are against the coup, just look at it this way. The coup is throwing out a conservative government and putting in a liberal government. That should allow you to understand a very complex dynamic, with many grey-area arguments.
 
2013-07-08 10:38:22 AM

cameroncrazy1984: DarnoKonrad: cameroncrazy1984: DarnoKonrad: And the military in both those cases sided with the civilian government.  The Egyptian military is doing the exact opposite.

I don't see how that's relevant. You're more okay with the military putting down a popular rebellion than supporting one.

You don't see how that's relevant?    You honestly think if George Washington had used his army to dissolve the continental congress we'd be the same nation we are today?  Are you nuts?  Can you not see the precedent this sets?

Oh god, it might mean that the next time Egypt elects a president he won't try to institute Sharia Law and consolidate power only to him! DEAR GOD THE HORROR!


It's clear you're blinded by your own wishful thinking.  I too want Egypt to succeed, but this is not the way to do it.
 
2013-07-08 10:38:43 AM

DarnoKonrad: cameroncrazy1984: Can you please show me where the military is planning on controlling the state? Thanks.

It already does. And it has for a very long time.  It removed both Mubarak and Morsi because they threaten their power in one way or another.


Wait, you're saying the military would have thrown Morsi out whether there were protests or not? Citation please?
 
2013-07-08 10:39:51 AM

DarnoKonrad: cameroncrazy1984: DarnoKonrad: cameroncrazy1984: DarnoKonrad: And the military in both those cases sided with the civilian government.  The Egyptian military is doing the exact opposite.

I don't see how that's relevant. You're more okay with the military putting down a popular rebellion than supporting one.

You don't see how that's relevant?    You honestly think if George Washington had used his army to dissolve the continental congress we'd be the same nation we are today?  Are you nuts?  Can you not see the precedent this sets?

Oh god, it might mean that the next time Egypt elects a president he won't try to institute Sharia Law and consolidate power only to him! DEAR GOD THE HORROR!

It's clear you're blinded by your own wishful thinking.  I too want Egypt to succeed, but this is not the way to do it.


No, seriously, tell me why that's wrong. How is that wishful thinking? You're saying it's bad to throw out a guy who is consolidating power, attempting to institute religious law, and refusing to plan elections? In exactly what way is that wrong?
 
2013-07-08 10:40:51 AM
Heck, please explain to me why it's bad to use the most powerful tool in your arsenal (if you'll forgive the pun) to keep a government from becoming a dictatorship?
 
2013-07-08 10:42:00 AM

cameroncrazy1984: DarnoKonrad: cameroncrazy1984: DarnoKonrad: And the military in both those cases sided with the civilian government.  The Egyptian military is doing the exact opposite.

I don't see how that's relevant. You're more okay with the military putting down a popular rebellion than supporting one.

You don't see how that's relevant?    You honestly think if George Washington had used his army to dissolve the continental congress we'd be the same nation we are today?  Are you nuts?  Can you not see the precedent this sets?

Oh god, it might mean that the next time Egypt elects a president he won't try to institute Sharia Law and consolidate power only to him! DEAR GOD THE HORROR!


This is kind of my take on the situation. I don't like the idea of a military coup, but it seems like this is probably what's best. I will get worried when it starts to seem that the military isn't wanting to hold elections and hand control back over to a legitimately elected government. As it stands now, they seem to be planning on holding elections and I see no reason to think otherwise. I just don't get the outrage at this point.
 
2013-07-08 10:43:19 AM

runin800m: I will get worried when it starts to seem that the military isn't wanting to hold elections and hand control back over to a legitimately elected government. As it stands now, they seem to be planning on holding elections and I see no reason to think otherwise. I just don't get the outrage at this point.


I don't get it either. I doesn't seem like they (the Egyptian people) had too many options. It was let Morsi become a dictator, or ally with the military to prevent him from doing so.
 
2013-07-08 10:43:31 AM

Lost Thought 00: DarnoKonrad: And the military in both those cases sided with the civilian government. The Egyptian military is doing the exact opposite. It's flatly disturbing to see people cheer a military coup. Make no mistake, this is a massive set back for democracy in Egypt. It remains to be seen how much of a setback, but you can bet the 51% of the people who voted for Morsi aren't under any delusion their vote means anything at this point. They have been disenfranchised.

It is possible, in fact likely, that this is both a setback for democracy yet also a good thing for the general Egyptian population. Fact of the matter is, this is how leaders in Egypt (and many other countries) end their reigns. It's pretty much accepted and expected by the populace.



Here's the question.  Egypt's economy is tanking.  That's what really took down Morsi.  Not high ideals.  If people were employed and fed they wouldn't be throwing rocks at each other.

Now, how does the economy move forward if the military controls so much of the GDP with their factories and land deals?  It's a catch 22.  I  don't know how it's going to resolve; it's just clear they have major problems.

What I really worry about is this turning out like General Pinochet in the 70s.  A neocon dictatorship.  The military will consolidate their capital assets and crackdown on anyone that gets in their way.
 
2013-07-08 10:43:48 AM

Lost Thought 00: Philip Francis Queeg: WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.

I'm interested, why do you think the military just deposed Morsi?

Because they thought it would best safeguard their own position.

Tell me do you think they did it out of love and concern for the citizens of Egypt? You know the people they have been shooting.

I think internal Egyptian politics are much more complex than the simple caricature of a banana republic that you have reduced them to.


I'm certainly not taking any sides in this one.. because I can't even see for sure what the sides are.
 
2013-07-08 10:45:34 AM
img.youtube.com
 
2013-07-08 10:49:08 AM
Also Made in America.

encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
 
2013-07-08 10:50:51 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: So you support the cause of military control of the state. Got it.

Can you please show me where the military is planning on controlling the state? Thanks.


Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Let's also look at Egyptian history, shall we?

Leaders of Egypt:

1952- 1970 Col.Nassar.
1970-1981 Lt. Col. Sadat.
1981-2011 Chief Marshal Mubarak
 
2013-07-08 10:52:24 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.


Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?
 
2013-07-08 10:52:51 AM
Factual Bonus: Mohammed Morsi did his PhD at the University of Southern California and taught at Cal State Northridge.

//it's all a conspiracy AAAAAHHHH
 
2013-07-08 10:52:59 AM
I mean, unless you think that Mubarak is still in control of the military, or that Sissi is somehow akin to Mubarak.
 
2013-07-08 10:54:22 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?


Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.
 
2013-07-08 10:57:11 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.


So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.
 
2013-07-08 11:01:35 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Heck, please explain to me why it's bad to use the most powerful tool in your arsenal (if you'll forgive the pun) to keep a government from becoming a dictatorship?


The military should have done the correct thing and that is sit on their thumbs. Let the situation devolve into a civil war between the MB backers plus the private security force and the moderates/liberals.  Then after a few months of bloodshed, they squash the unrest and are hailed as heros for civilization leading to a military led govt for several years.
 
2013-07-08 11:04:43 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.


Do the people protesting in the street that the military is shooting in large numbers have any bearing at all?
 
2013-07-08 11:04:48 AM

Saiga410: cameroncrazy1984: Heck, please explain to me why it's bad to use the most powerful tool in your arsenal (if you'll forgive the pun) to keep a government from becoming a dictatorship?

The military should have done the correct thing and that is sit on their thumbs. Let the situation devolve into a civil war between the MB backers plus the private security force and the moderates/liberals.  Then after a few months of bloodshed, they squash the unrest and are hailed as heros for civilization leading to a military led govt for several years.


Yeah, that would've totally been a better option.
 
2013-07-08 11:05:43 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.

Do the people protesting in the street that the military is shooting in large numbers have any bearing at all?


Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.

Do the people protesting in the street that the military is shooting in large numbers have any bearing at all?


Sure, they definitely do. But don't pretend like this isn't a popular uprising just because the military supports the opposition.
 
2013-07-08 11:07:56 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.

Do the people protesting in the street that the military is shooting in large numbers have any bearing at all?

Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.

Do the people protesting in the street that the military is shooting in large numbers have any bearing at all?

Sure, they definitely do. But don't pretend like this isn't a popular uprising just because the military supports the opposition.


Don't pretend that this isn't a brutal and undemocratic military coup because it was preceded by protests.
 
2013-07-08 11:12:57 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: WTF Indeed: Philip Francis Queeg: Huh?

That an elected democracy, no matter how ineffective, exclusionary, whose actions drastically undermined the very basis of a representative democracy, and whose elected leaders were actively stoking sectarian violence must remain intact.

So, I guess the answer to my question is : Yes, even after the military killed dozens of civilians overnight, Farkers are still singing the praises of the military coup.

Man, in 1775, I bet you would've been all like "No, we can't fight against the king! We must use non-violence against his usurpation of power! His government must remain intact!"


I remember how in 1775 when we elected the king, people were in full support with parades in the street, then he implemented a brand-new agenda (minus the hookers and blackjack) and things went sideways.
 
2013-07-08 11:13:03 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: Don't pretend that this isn't a brutal and undemocratic military coup because it was preceded by protests.


Actually, isn't a revolution against a tyrannical government a democratic ideal? Don't pretend like Morsi was some sort of patron of democracy in Egypt.
 
2013-07-08 11:13:54 AM

Elzar: I remember how in 1775 when we elected the king, people were in full support with parades in the street, then he implemented a brand-new agenda (minus the hookers and blackjack) and things went sideways.


So it's okay to keep a guy in power, even though he's ruling by decree and not democratically, simply because he was elected?
 
2013-07-08 11:16:20 AM
The military stepped in to save the Muslim Brotherhood. They were about to get slaughtered in the streets.
 
2013-07-08 11:17:08 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.

Do the people protesting in the street that the military is shooting in large numbers have any bearing at all?

Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.

Do the people protesting in the street that the military is shooting in large numbers have any bearing at all?

Sure, they definitely do. But don't pretend like this isn't a popular uprising just because the military supports the opposition.

Don't pretend that this isn't a brutal and undemocratic military coup because it was preceded by protests.


So, do you think the military should have just stood by and done nothing while the situation continued to deteriorate and possibly eventually turn into an all out civil war? When you have 30 million people out in the streets, in a country with a population of only about 80 million people, things are getting serious. I know that people have been killed but it seems like that was about to start anyway. This may be the option that sees the least amount of bloodshed, and as long as they continue to move towards legitimate elections then I'm just not feeling the outrage. I don't like the idea of a military coup either, but I can't think of a solution for this situation that I think is better.
 
2013-07-08 11:20:16 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Don't pretend that this isn't a brutal and undemocratic military coup because it was preceded by protests.

Actually, isn't a revolution against a tyrannical government a democratic ideal? Don't pretend like Morsi was some sort of patron of democracy in Egypt.


How would you feel about a revolution against an undemocratic government that kills civilian protesters in the street?
 
2013-07-08 11:30:47 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Don't pretend that this isn't a brutal and undemocratic military coup because it was preceded by protests.

Actually, isn't a revolution against a tyrannical government a democratic ideal? Don't pretend like Morsi was some sort of patron of democracy in Egypt.

How would you feel about a revolution against an undemocratic government that kills civilian protesters in the street?


I'd be fine with that one too. The US has done that before, you know.
 
2013-07-08 11:32:44 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Don't pretend that this isn't a brutal and undemocratic military coup because it was preceded by protests.

Actually, isn't a revolution against a tyrannical government a democratic ideal? Don't pretend like Morsi was some sort of patron of democracy in Egypt.

How would you feel about a revolution against an undemocratic government that kills civilian protesters in the street?

I'd be fine with that one too. The US has done that before, you know.


So then you support the protesters who are being killed by the military government in Egypt?
 
2013-07-08 11:32:55 AM

WTF Indeed: BMulligan: You think that is a core tenet of neoconservatism?

Well it's a Straussian argument for neo-conservatism.


I must say, your reading of Strauss and his progeny is very different from mine. I think of neoconservatism as being the intellectual heirs of the same people who brought us Pinochet and the Shah. If democratically elected governments stand in the way of the projection of American power in regions we perceive as strategically important, those governments are expendable.
 
2013-07-08 11:35:29 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: So then you support the protesters who are being killed by the military government in Egypt?


No, because they support an undemocratic government. Plus, one that's been ousted by a popular uprising. That doesn't mean I am happy they died, if that's what you're implying.
 
2013-07-08 11:39:18 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: So then you support the protesters who are being killed by the military government in Egypt?

No, because they support an undemocratic government. Plus, one that's been ousted by a popular uprising. That doesn't mean I am happy they died, if that's what you're implying.


They support the elected government that was ousted by a brutal military coup.

But hey, being honest makes it harder to support those people who are killing them in cold blood.
 
2013-07-08 11:40:57 AM

BMulligan: I must say, your reading of Strauss and his progeny is very different from mine. I think of neoconservatism as being the intellectual heirs of the same people who brought us Pinochet and the Shah. If democratically elected governments stand in the way of the projection of American power in regions we perceive as strategically important, those governments are expendable.


So you read Strauss and Irving Kristol, strong anti-communists/anti-dictatorship thinkers, and thought "Wow, these guys really love dictatorships!"?
 
2013-07-08 11:52:19 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: They support the elected government that was ousted by a brutal military coup.


Oh, so just by being elected, that makes all of Morsi's actions de facto legal, is that what it is?
 
2013-07-08 11:54:39 AM

WTF Indeed: So you read Strauss and Irving Kristol, strong anti-communists/anti-dictatorship thinkers, and thought "Wow, these guys really love dictatorships!"?


I am not sure how you can read Strauss and come away believing he was a fan of the common man and Democracy. I mean... really? Leo Strauss?
 
2013-07-08 11:59:30 AM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: They support the elected government that was ousted by a brutal military coup.

Oh, so just by being elected, that makes all of Morsi's actions de facto legal, is that what it is?


No. I didn't say that.

What do you believe makes the coup de facto legal? Is what is legal determined by who has the most guns?
 
2013-07-08 12:04:29 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: They support the elected government that was ousted by a brutal military coup.

Oh, so just by being elected, that makes all of Morsi's actions de facto legal, is that what it is?


Morsi's actions are a big part of how I look at this. I would understand the outrage if Morsi has simply been elected and then a year later people aren't really all that happy and protest a little and then the military came in and just took total control, deposing a legitimately elected president. The fact that Morsi was basically turning himself into a dictator and granting himself new powers and putting himself above the law means that his claim of being legitimately elected a lot more tenuous. When that is combined with the millions protesting you can't just pretend that this is anywhere near as simple as the military overthrowing a legitimately elected civilian government.

I don't think winning an election once means you can declare yourself president for live, give yourself broad new authority, and then act like everything you've done is obviously the will of the people because 51% voted for you, you know, when there were still elections.
 
2013-07-08 12:20:17 PM

cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.


You have a source for that number?  I ask because the estimated population of Egypt is just over 70 million, seems a rather high percentage.

Cheers.
 
2013-07-08 12:32:05 PM

Cubicle Jockey: WTF Indeed: So you read Strauss and Irving Kristol, strong anti-communists/anti-dictatorship thinkers, and thought "Wow, these guys really love dictatorships!"?

I am not sure how you can read Strauss and come away believing he was a fan of the common man and Democracy. I mean... really? Leo Strauss?


Yeah, I was having issues with that, too. Strauss, Kristol,  et al. were certainly anti-communist, but not anti-dictatorship. I don't recall Kristol having much to say about pro-Western authoritarian regimes in places such as Central America or Africa.
 
2013-07-08 01:01:47 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Muta: Philip Francis Queeg: After the dozens of dead overnight, are Farkers still singing the praises of the coup?

Unfortunately, yes.  They typically favor anything that makes Obama look bad.

How does a popular uprising make Obama look bad?

It's a military coup, not a popular uprising,.


It is both
 
2013-07-08 01:09:43 PM

Brian_of_Nazareth: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.

You have a source for that number?  I ask because the estimated population of Egypt is just over 70 million, seems a rather high percentage.

Cheers.


According to Wikipedia, the 2013 estimated population is 85,550,000 people. That is still right at 35% of the population of a country protesting which, to me, seems quite high but I suppose not totally out of the question. I can't find any real source for the 30,000,000 number that I have seen thrown around quite a lot. Reuters said the military estimated 14,000,000 protesters in the country, but that was on June 30th and still a couple of days from the time Morsi was actually ousted so it's possible that the protests continued to grow larger over the next couple of days. I can't find any numbers from the last day or two of the protests, but while it's very likely that the numbers went up I find it unlikely that they doubled from the 30th. Even if it was only the 14,000,000-15,000,000 that I've seen in reputable news outlets that is still about 18% of the population, which I think is pretty impressive. It's hard to imagine getting  nearly 1 out of every 5 Americans out in the street protesting anything.
 
2013-07-08 01:25:20 PM
First, you're right, I accidentally took the 2006 census number as the more recent estimate.

Otherwise, I think I see it the same way you do.  14 - 15 million would have seemed extraordinary, but at least within reason.  30 million, not so much.

Cheers.
 
2013-07-08 01:26:37 PM

runin800m: Brian_of_Nazareth: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.

You have a source for that number?  I ask because the estimated population of Egypt is just over 70 million, seems a rather high percentage.

Cheers.

According to Wikipedia, the 2013 estimated population is 85,550,000 people. That is still right at 35% of the population of a country protesting which, to me, seems quite high but I suppose not totally out of the question. I can't find any real source for the 30,000,000 number that I have seen thrown around quite a lot. Reuters said the military estimated 14,000,000 protesters in the country, but that was on June 30th and still a couple of days from the time Morsi was actually ousted so it's possible that the protests continued to grow larger over the next couple of days. I can't find any numbers from the last day or two of the protests, but while it's very likely that the numbers went up I find it unlikely that they doubled from the 30th. Even if it was only the 14,000,000-15,000,000 that I've seen in reputable news outlets that is still about 18% of the population, which I think is pretty impressive. It's hard to imagine getting  nearly 1 out of every 5 Americans out in the street protesting anything.


Apparently, Fark decided I didn't really want to reply after all, just post a comment.  My previous was addresed to you, Fark's issues nothwithstanding.

Cheers.
 
2013-07-08 01:41:30 PM

Brian_of_Nazareth: Apparently, Fark decided I didn't really want to reply after all, just post a comment.  My previous was addresed to you, Fark's issues nothwithstanding.

Cheers.


No problem. 30 million in a country of 85 million would be insane and I would need some more reputable sources citing that number before I would just believe it. 15 million is impressive enough, though. Imagine what it would take to get one out of every 5 people out in the streets protesting here! Something really terrible would have to be happening to get that many people to care, much less care enough to leave their houses and be out in the streets. In the US with a population of about 316,000,000 people it would be the equivalent of nearly 60,000,000 people being out in the street protesting. It is even more staggering when you consider how many of the 316,000,000 million are younger children who aren't really going to be part of the protests or older people who aren't able to really be out protesting, meaning that the percentage of adults protesting is probably a bit higher than it would seem if you were looking at the entire population of the country.

The people of Egypt obviously really wanted something done. Hopefully this will bring them what they want.
 
2013-07-08 02:05:14 PM

runin800m: Brian_of_Nazareth: Apparently, Fark decided I didn't really want to reply after all, just post a comment.  My previous was addresed to you, Fark's issues nothwithstanding.

Cheers.

No problem. 30 million in a country of 85 million would be insane and I would need some more reputable sources citing that number before I would just believe it. 15 million is impressive enough, though. Imagine what it would take to get one out of every 5 people out in the streets protesting here! Something really terrible would have to be happening to get that many people to care, much less care enough to leave their houses and be out in the streets. In the US with a population of about 316,000,000 people it would be the equivalent of nearly 60,000,000 people being out in the street protesting. It is even more staggering when you consider how many of the 316,000,000 million are younger children who aren't really going to be part of the protests or older people who aren't able to really be out protesting, meaning that the percentage of adults protesting is probably a bit higher than it would seem if you were looking at the entire population of the country.

The people of Egypt obviously really wanted something done. Hopefully this will bring them what they want.


I'm with you on this.  What makes this even more difficult is that most Farkers are thinking about this from the perspective of western democracy.  These are Egyptians, they don't have the Western-Europe cultural tradition, and their perspective and choices don't really fit within that framework.  They've also been a going nation, in one form or another, since very near the beginning of human civilisation, so maybe we can be a little bit patient.  With luck, we're seeing the beginning of something resembling the Turkish system, but it's way too early to be certain how this will fall out.

Cheers.
 
2013-07-08 02:38:14 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: cameroncrazy1984: Philip Francis Queeg: Sure I can. They just removed the elected government.

Can you show me where they are planning on keeping control, i.e. are not planning elections?

Can you show me where they intend to not to remove any government that displeases them?

Elections don't mean shiat if the military removes the government at their pleasure.

So the 30 million people in the street have no bearing on the situation at all.

Do the people protesting in the street that the military is shooting in large numbers have any bearing at all?



Only as target practice.
 
Displayed 97 of 97 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report