Mubarak in Egypt has been a 30 year ally in the Middle East. BO has completely abandoned him in the current crisis. What does this say to the rest of our allies around the world? How can they trust that we will be there to support them in times of crisis?
Once again the lack of experience and depth in this president puts our national security at risk.
Glad you voted for him now?
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
Mubarak in Egypt has been a 30 year ally in the Middle East. BO has completely abandoned him in the current crisis. What does this say to the rest of our allies around the world? How can they trust that we will be there to support them in times of crisis?
Once again the lack of experience and depth in this president puts our national security at risk.
Glad you voted for him now?
Yes, I am still glad I voted for him. I have no issue with President Obama not supporting a dictator, and instead supporting a democracy in Egypt.
I can't imagine why anyone would have an issue with President Obama supporting the people of Egypt's right to have free and legitimate elections.
A number of republicans also support a democracy in Egypt, and side with President Obama on this issue.
Yes, I am still glad I voted for him. I have no issue with President Obama not supporting a dictator, and instead supporting a democracy in Egypt.
I can't imagine why anyone would have an issue with President Obama supporting the people of Egypt's right to have free and legitimate elections.
A number of republicans also support a democracy in Egypt, and side with President Obama on this issue.
President Obama was caught in a very difficult situation here. Mubarak was a dictator and had suppressed his people for years. He was an ally and many, many tax dollars went to him and his cronies. He was, however, in a treaty with Israel and did recognize them as a nation and recognized their right to exist.
We don't know who will step in now that he is gone and what kind of government will result. Many fear the same thing will happen in Egypt as what happened in Iran when the Shah (another dictator and friend of the U.S) stepped down. He was replaced by a religious and Islamist government. Many fear the same thing will happen in Egypt if the Muslim Brotherhood (a terrorist organization established in 1928 with a goal of a Caliphate of Islamist states covering the area of the old Ottoman empire) gets into power.
Actually, that may be the goal of the Obama government --to see the Muslim Brother hood in control in Egypt and to turn it into an Islamist state. President Obama has pushed Mubarak to leave because of the demonstrations but he did not push Ahmadinejad to leave when there were demonstrations in Iran. Perhaps because they already had an Islamist government in Iran?
When the people of Iran demonstrated in the streets against Ahmadinajhad, a man who is the biggest threat in the Middle East, BO was silent. He had an opportunity to throw his support behind a peaceful revolution that couldve overturned the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the world. Silent. Not a word of support. The revolution died along with thousands imprisoned or executed.
Mubarak is a dictator? Yes. Do I like all he's done? No. Do I think there's a greater chance that the US could pressure him to be kinder to his people rather than abandon him and Egypt to an uncertain future? Yes.
We stood by and allowed the Palestinians to conduct free elections and what did they do? They voted for Hamas. The situation worsened under them. More terror, more instability. At least with Fatah you could count on them to keep the radicals in check. With the BO administration unwilling to call the Islamic Brotherhood a terrorist organization, my fear, along with many others including Israel, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, is that under the guise of being a civic organization, a very radical, jihadist government could come in to play.
I say support Mubarak, encourage him to step down in Sept, allow free elections minus the Isalmic Brotherhood, allow parties to form and candidate to rise to top. But to throw Mubarak under the bus after 30 years of loyalty and stability in the Mid East is just abysmal foreign policy.
__________________
When a newspaper posed the question, "What's Wrong with the World?" G. K. Chesterton reputedly wrote a brief letter in response: "Dear Sirs: I am. Sincerely Yours, G. K. Chesterton." That is the attitude of someone who has grasped the message of Jesus.
One of the mandates that our current President was elected under included taking America out of the role of, "World Policeman".
I don't agree that this is the best idea, but we see him being true to his roots and his supporters in his handling of Iran, Egypt and other places where there has been instability-- where traditionally America might have taken a stronger public role.
As for Egypt, what would you want America to do?
This guy has lied repeatedly to his own people, broken his promises to his own people. His own people do not belive in him. This is not an example of some military coup. This is an example of his own countrymen losing confidence in Mubarrak's leadership and honesty.
If our President is privvy to knowledge that justifies the common Egyptian angst, morally, how could he continue to support Mubarrak?
He has refused to do better with the resources and support we have provided him. His own people are calling him on it, but there are some who want America to continue to support him?
If he had come out strong in support of this dictator, the President's critics would have jumped on that!
The President's call for Mubarrak to step aside in order to usher a peaceful transition is the best call he could have made, given these circumstances.
__________________
"The choices we make reveal the true nature of our character."
I'm skeptical either way. The people of Egypt have had enough. Personally I am inspired by them. Wonder the changes we would see if Americans were coordinated and driven enough to pull off such a large protest against government ?
Anyway. Mubarak has been a faithful ally, of course that alliance was paid for with American tourism and American military supplies. Egypt is a rich nation, unfortunatly the money doesn't seem to get past the upper levels of government to the people. Mubarak has had 30 years to be both an ally and a great leader for the people. He succeeded in the former and failed in the latter. If the people had settled for waiting until September then yes, we should have supported that, but the people want him out now, we are better to support the people than Mubarak. After Mubarak is gone, wiether now or Sept., we will still have to deal with the people and who they put in power. If we stand firm behind Mubarak,thus against the people, it would impower anti-american parties in the next elections.
I really had hope yesterday when the rumors were saying he was stepping down and turning power over to the military council. This is really the best solution at the moment. The military council is pro-american and they do not want to change that. If you have not noticed in the media coming from there,the equipment they are riding around in is american made. It is in the military councils best interest to remain pro-american and if given power they would ensure that the next leader felt the same. The Brotherhood has little to run on. They want Islamic law in Egypt and the people have spent the last 30 years enjoying the influence of western culture and tourism. The last thing the people want is to be thrown back to the dark ages.
As of now, he hasn't stepped down yet. So the story goes .........
__________________ You can't reach the world with your talents. People are sick and tired of religious talents. People need a Holy Ghost annointed church with real fruits to reach out and touch their lives. ~ Pastor Burrell Crabtree
In fact I think that the insinuation of "hateful" Pentecostals is coming mostly from the fertile imaginations of bitter, backslidden ex Apostolics who are constantly trying to find a way to justify their actions. ~ strait shooter
When the people of Iran demonstrated in the streets against Ahmadinajhad, a man who is the biggest threat in the Middle East, BO was silent. He had an opportunity to throw his support behind a peaceful revolution that couldve overturned the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the world. Silent. Not a word of support. The revolution died along with thousands imprisoned or executed.
...
You're correct about the Iranian protests but maybe BO learned something? I dunno, I'm just trying to be generous with that one. He definitely blew it by remaining silent over the Iranian protests. Another one is Burma.
President Bush spoke out and encouraged the Burmese people when they protested widely for freedom at about the time Bush's term was coming to a close (2007-2008). When President Obama took office he sat on his hands while the monks who led the protests were slaughtered and their bodies dumped in the Irrawaddy River.
Fact of the matter is, America was never beholden to support Mubarak. We did make a deal with his predecessor to buy Egypt off to gain peace in the Middle East. The "American Taxpayer" should have been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for that!
But just what dictator rules Egypt is really up to the Egyptians, in all fairness. They've never had a democracy - going back to Pharaonic times. The U.S. has been unfairly criticized by the world's press here, too. Many of the leaders and organizers of these protests were in fact trained either at the expense of the U.S. State Department - or the more radical ones, trained by Soros funded groups and their ilk Code Pink and and the American communists at International A.N.S.W.E.R.
In many ways, "We" started this whole thing and have encouraged it all along. There's a lot that we don't know and the situation is chaotic with many others involved as well; but in many ways this is shaping up to be another American "Regime Change." It's just far more subtle and involves parties that are notoriously Anti-American - even "Anti-American" Americans.
The presidents ambassador has made statements that directly conflict with things the president has stated concerning Mubarak.
The Vice President has stated Mubarak loves democracy.
The White House has itself has provided absolutely no clear message.
Yesterday the presidents CIA chief made statements about Mubarak resigning based on what he was seeing on TELEVISION!
Our other allies in the region are angry with the president over his handling of the situation.
The only people happy with what we are doing are the IRANIANS.
This president has proven yet again, that he has no depth to deal with complicated international issues. Obama is a national disgrace.
Further, those who are suggesting this is a democratic uprising are simply being premature. We don’t know what this is. It MAY be a real push for some kind of democracy. It may be the use of democracy (read mob rule) to drive out a totalitarian in favor of a theocratic dictatorship. AND it seems this last is the more likely.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
Hybrid Mode
