Page 2 of 2
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 9:07 pm
by Monroe
Ugh of course they destroy exhibits in a museum.
These revolutions sweeping the Middle East remind me a bit of the 1848 revolutions. Hopefully they'll have an equally positive out come but I heard there is a risk of religious fanatics taking over in Yemen. That would really suck if that happened in Egypt, I can't imagine what people like the Taliban would destroy if given the opportunity in Egypt.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 9:14 pm
by Captain Picard's Hair
Reportedly, this is a broad, and non-ideological, movement going on in Egypt. Of course, there are no guarantees on how it turns out. It's possible that shutting down the internet might have just made the mobs angrier but it definitely limits what we know about what's going on in the streets there.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2011 9:39 pm
by Mikey
By all appearances this seems to be more of a secularly-rooted uprising, based on economic issues rather than religious ideology. Of course, one can't discount completely the role of religious ideology in that area but I don't think that, at the very least, faith is the root cause of the problems.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 5:11 am
by BigJKU316
Mikey wrote:By all appearances this seems to be more of a secularly-rooted uprising, based on economic issues rather than religious ideology. Of course, one can't discount completely the role of religious ideology in that area but I don't think that, at the very least, faith is the root cause of the problems.
The danger is really that the religious faction is probably the most organized in a period of chaos to emerge in a leadership role other than the military.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Sun Jan 30, 2011 2:09 pm
by Mikey
I was only talking about the causes. The dangers regarding the outcome are a completely different story.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 2:22 am
by Teaos
Posting from iPhone so can't link but shit just got real in Egypt. Leaders stepping down and military in control.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Sat Feb 12, 2011 3:32 pm
by Mikey
You need to get quicker updates.
The good news: Hamas, strong-armed big brothers of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (which stands to have a hefty presence in the new Egyptian government) has actually sent troops to quell any possible disturbance along the Gaza-Egypt border. Bad news: giving the Muslim Brotherhood any sort of influence in Egyptian government could mean a Palestinian free-for-all bum's rush across the Egyptian border.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:01 pm
by Tyyr
I seriously doubt the military is going to be relinquishing much control over anything. Their figurehead is going to get thrown out on his ear but the next guy is going to be well aware of what the score is. Namely the guys with guns are in charge so keep them happy.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:21 pm
by Mikey
That would be pretty good news for U.S. influence in Egypt. The Egyptian military machine has long known and respected which side its bread is buttered on - that is, the American side. Further, a secular authority with a controlling governmental interest would certainly help stabilize the area over the alternative, which would be a Hezbollah-Hamas-Muslim Brotherhood triumvirate.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:35 pm
by Tyyr
I honestly think the whole, "Al-Queda is going to take over!" scare mongering is born from a total lack of comprehension of how Egypt is run. Namely that its a very polite, mannered, and well dressed military dictatorship with the guy in office as really not much more than a figurehead. Like you said, the military likes all the support they get from the US. They have no interest in letting Muslim radicals take any kind of power. Hell, they've actively been suppressing the Muslim Brotherhood for decades. I don't see that changing.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 2:47 pm
by Mikey
Who said anything about Al-Qaeda?
Anyway, the idea of the Muslim Brotherhood gaining power isn't based on the fact that they're new, which they obviously aren't; it's based on the fact that Egypt's citizenry just demanded - and
got - an ouster and (presumably) an election. Yes, the old regime has kept the Muslim Brotherhood down for a long time... but the populace hasn't taken to the streets to fight for and win its will before, either.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:01 pm
by Tyyr
Fox News.
Remember it's not an election, it's an "election." They're still a military dictatorship. The figurehead stepped down and that's all. I seriously, seriously, doubt that the military will allow any hard core radicals to make it on the ballot. The Egyptian people will get to choose between a couple of candidates that the military approves of none of which will represent the Muslim Brotherhood on anything but a surface level. They know that if they put in thier own Ahmadinejad the US gravy train dries up and they won't stand for it. You'll get solid, moderate choices that will largely maintain the status quo. You'll get some reforms in domestic policy probably but Egypt isn't going to be going radical because of this.
Re: STRATFOR: The Strategic Implications of Instability in E
Posted: Mon Feb 14, 2011 3:34 pm
by Mikey
I'm not saying that it will. I said that if the Muslim Brotherhood were allowed more than a nominal role in the new government, it would be a destabilizing influence. Just the mass movement between Gaza and Egypt alone would be pandemonium.