Mubarak is not a dictator

[taxman]

I'm sure even today that both countries are still busily supplying arms to Israel and to all the other Arab countries

 

I was thinking about that today. Britain sells vast amounts of armaments to Saudi Arabia "for defence purposes". What would happen if there was a popular uprising in Saudia Arabia and those same weapons were used to massacre the protesters.......wouldn't successive British Governments, politicians, arms manufacturers and the Royal Family look pretty complicit in mass murder and oppression embarrassed

[Bounce]

Mohamed ElBaradei would as both a high profile international figure and leader of the National Association for Change make an ideal non-partisan interim leader. I don't know what the streets view of him is but he certainly fits the bill as an ideal interim leader until free elections could take place.

 

ElBaradei wont win in a free and fare election the Muslim brotherhood will as they are the most popular political party in Egypt. Main reason America has supported Mubarak all these years is to stop Egypt becoming pro palestinian under a Muslim Brotherhood government.

[donkey]

Britain and France have done very well in supplying military hardware to Israel so dont kid yourself. The Israeli army was equipped with British made tanks for decades and their air force armed with French built aircraft.

Were the politicians in London and Paris and the arms manufacturers very much concerned about the "bad behaviour of Israel?"

I'm sure even today that both countries are still busily supplying arms to Israel and to all the Arab countries

 

You seem to think that because I oppose US foreign policy, i support that of Britain and France. That is a strange assumption to make, and completely wrong, as numerous of my posts on here demonstrate.

 

BTW, have you forgotten that you yourself are British?

[taxman]

ElBaradei wont win in a free and fare election the Muslim brotherhood will as they are the most popular political party in Egypt. Main reason America has supported Mubarak all these years is to stop Egypt becoming pro palestinian under a Muslim Brotherhood government.

 

Well, as far as US foreign policy goes you can see why they've supported Mubarak. Realpolitik.

[Harleyman]

I don't doubt it. However, that happened in the past, and as such, we can't change it. What the US is doing now is something they have a choice about, and their bad choices in contiuing to prop up people like Mubarak and blindly support Israel can not be blamed on what Britain did 60 years ago.

 

It can be blamed on Britain no matter how long ago which oversaw the establishment of a country surrounded by millions of hostile Arabs with the US later taking on the hapless and thankless task of trying to maintain a balance of power between two potentially warring factions.

After the 1967 and 1973 wars the US found the one and only Arab leader who was willing to sit down at the table and come to an agreement with Israel. It was Mubarak It was hoped that after that agreement was reached that more Arab countries would follow suit but good intentions seldom materialize in that part of the world. Instead Syria, Iraq and Iran continued to stir up the pot for their own political ends while the stupendously rich oil kingdoms in that part of the world gave not a single penny in aid to the Palestinians, content instead to sit on the sidelines and see them become more and more embittered by their poverty, again for their own political interests and hopefully resulting in the destruction of Israel

The US on the other hand has given substantial aid to the Palestinians and has good relations with Abbas.

 

What Mubarak became as a leader is hardly the fault of the US. The Egyptians should have established a better system of democratic government which suited their particular needs long ago. Mubarak may be a friend of the US but Egypt has overall been master of it's own destiny for better or worse since the British left around 56 years ago.

[Harleyman]

You seem to think that because I oppose US foreign policy, i support that of Britain and France. That is a strange assumption to make, and completely wrong, as numerous of my posts on here demonstrate.

 

BTW, have you forgotten that you yourself are British?

 

No I haven't forgotten but I never thought much of the empire, it's greed and exploitation and the fact that most British people gained nothing from it either except 6 ft of earth by fighting to keep the rich exploters in power

 

 

I take issue with those who think that the US is always the bad dog on the block. They should look to their own history.

 

Of the three great powers that have existed in the last 100 years, Russia, Great Britain and the United States the US despite it's faults and imperfections has done more good for the world than either of the other two and I say that without reservation even if I am British.

[Harleyman]

ElBaradei wont win in a free and fare election the Muslim brotherhood will as they are the most popular political party in Egypt. Main reason America has supported Mubarak all these years is to stop Egypt becoming pro palestinian under a Muslim Brotherhood government.

 

And perhaps war resulting somewhere in the future or is that possibility beyond the realms of your imagination.

 

Maybe you're one of those dreamers who think that Israelis can be driven back into the sea. Israel is here to stay whether we like it or not. They'll nuke the rest of the middle east before they allow that to happen and that's not far fetched either

[andygardener]

ElBaradei wont win in a free and fare election the Muslim brotherhood will as they are the most popular political party in Egypt. Main reason America has supported Mubarak all these years is to stop Egypt becoming pro palestinian under a Muslim Brotherhood government.

 

If you would pay attention bounce, I said he would make an excellent caretaker leader while free and fair elections were called.

 

I have no idea whether he has any interest in forming a political party (the NAC is not a political party, but you knew that as an expert on Egypt, right?) to stand for formal election, or indeed if the MB is, I heard their spokesman on al jazeera earlier stating that they were not interested in standing for election and considered themselves a lobby group who would put islamic views to whoever was in power. I'm not of course convinced by this but as of around 2pm GMT it was their stated position.

 

So I suspect your definative "facts" are little more than what you would like to happen. You do remind me of those labour voters who kept on voting for blair as much as he shafted them, you'd vote for a gay drunken adulterous pig if the rossette pinned on it said islamic.

[Kaimani]

What interests? It wasn't the oil as so many in their ignorance like to claim.

The fact is the US imports very little middle east oil these days. It's Europe which has benefited from the the peace which has existed and the US which has maintained the balance of power by extending monetary aid to both Egypt and Israel.

Mubarak may be a dictator in the eyes of Egyptianss but beware of what you wish for.

Wait until some ranting anti-American replacement takes his place and see how it will rock your world down the road

 

no war, anywhere, has ever been fought for anything but the interests of those fighting.

could you let us know, then, why the war was fought, if it wasn't for oil and just basic 'that guy wanted to kill my dad George bush crap. besides, so what you're saying, or, at least how i understand you, is that as long as whoever replaces him is in support of Israel and/or America it's all good? should someone in support of America be in power in America and someone for the Israelis be in Israel. good world relation benefit everyone, but saying only those we get along should ever rule anywhere is smug and arrogant at best.

[Kaimani]

It can be blamed on Britain no matter how long ago which oversaw the establishment of a country surrounded by millions of hostile Arabs with the US later taking on the hapless and thankless task of trying to maintain a balance of power between two potentially warring factions.

After the 1967 and 1973 wars the US found the one and only Arab leader who was willing to sit down at the table and come to an agreement with Israel. It was Mubarak It was hoped that after that agreement was reached that more Arab countries would follow suit but good intentions seldom materialize in that part of the world. Instead Syria, Iraq and Iran continued to stir up the pot for their own political ends while the stupendously rich oil kingdoms in that part of the world gave not a single penny in aid to the Palestinians, content instead to sit on the sidelines and see them become more and more embittered by their poverty, again for their own political interests and hopefully resulting in the destruction of Israel

The US on the other hand has given substantial aid to the Palestinians and has good relations with Abbas.

 

What Mubarak became as a leader is hardly the fault of the US. The Egyptians should have established a better system of democratic government which suited their particular needs long ago. Mubarak may be a friend of the US but Egypt has overall been master of it's own destiny for better or worse since the British left around 56 years ago.

 

they are working on a system that works for them. but it'll take a lot longer than 56 years. countries with centuries of democracy still working on it. they'll get there, but the situation's not helped by outside interference.