What Exactly Is Happening In the Arab/Persian World?

[Nicodemus]

I don't get the sense that who is in charge of the US has much to do with what's happening in Egypt, or what happened in Tunisia; this has been coming for a long time.

 

[humanino]

Again mheslep, I am sure you understand that I do not wish to argue at this time. I am stating an opinion which I believe it is not hard to conceive is shared by others. It is fine that you do not share it and let us leave it at that. Take the Nobel press release

Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting. Democracy and human rights are to be strengthened.

When they say "new" or "more constructive", it does refer to a comparison with what was before. That is their opinion, I have mine, you have yours, let us leave the moderators at PF enjoy their friday.

 

[OmCheeto]

Correct. And what happened today?? No violence, no Molotov cocktails, no knives, no guns, no fire – just dancing and cheering masses of peaceful people...

Have the pro-Mubarak goons given up already!? What happened??

I’m very curios on what is going to 'explain' this... "The Goons Day of Rest and Reloads"...??

They've not given up.

Tahrir Square is calm, compared to recent days. One of our correspondent says people are queuing on Kasr al-Nil bridge to get into the square. The army is manning checkpoints, searching bags and checking IDs, to make sure no "infiltrators" can get in.

Outside of the square is a different matter:

But sporadic clashes continue to rage downtown just 500 metres from the square, and Egyptian contacts say many other residential neighbourhoods are not safe for journalists - gangs operate unofficial checkpoints, and some foreigners have been dragged out of their cars and assaulted.

http://blogs.aljazeera.net/middle-east/2011/02/04/live-blog-feb-5-egypt-protests"

 

[Naty1]

Likely no one will ever know for sure what's happening in Egypt. All we are likely to see is the eventual outcome. One big reason is that some radical groups intentionally cloak their activity to hide it from the general public. Even if peaceful protesters, let's say mostly students, started the demonstrations, it's certainly possible that groups like the Muslim Brotherhood could gain control because they are better coordinated, have a plan and are better organized. If a radical group is successful we'll see the outcome; if not, likely we'll never know why.

Meantime, I have seen reports that various other terrorist groups are now traveling to Eqypt, ostensibly to take advantage of instability and unrest. The last time I remember a "popular" uprising, in Iran, a theocracy ensued and oppression relative to the Shah who was as brutal as Mubarak likely got worse when the mullahs took over Iran.

Let's just hope the majority of the Eqyptian people get something good out of all this.

 

[WhoWee]

Likely no one will ever know for sure what's happening in Egypt. All we are likely to see is the eventual outcome. One big reason is that some radical groups intentionally cloak their activity to hide it from the general public. Even if peaceful protesters, let's say mostly students, started the demonstrations, it's certainly possible that groups like the Muslim Brotherhood could gain control because they are better coordinated, have a plan and are better organized. If a radical group is successful we'll see the outcome; if not, likely we'll never know why.

Meantime, I have seen reports that various other terrorist groups are now traveling to Eqypt, ostensibly to take advantage of instability and unrest. The last time I remember a "popular" uprising, in Iran, a theocracy ensued and oppression relative to the Shah who was as brutal as Mubarak likely got worse when the mullahs took over Iran.

Let's just hope the majority of the Eqyptian people get something good out of all this.

I agree with your assessment. The question I've had since this began is what do they want - beyond Mubarak leaving. This is why I think President Obama and others should find a way to keep Mubarak in place until the 80 million people of Egypt can find a voice - not just the few thousand protesting in Cairo.

Perhaps reporters will begin to focus on a "needs analysis" of the 80 million people? The first step in problem solving is to identify the problems - beyond the sound bites of high unemployment and low pay. By focusing on needs and letting things cool down, reason will prevail.

Don't the radicals always win the the emotional - short term debate?

IMO -the correct thing to do now is find a way for the people of Egypt to make long term informed decisions about their future - not short term emotional decisions.

 

[AlephZero]

This is why I think President Obama and others should find a way to keep Mubarak in place until the 80 million people of Egypt can find a voice - not just the few thousand protesting in Cairo.

Why do you think the US has the divine right to tell the rest of the world how to organize itself?

Perhaps reporters will begin to focus on a "needs analysis" of the 80 million people? The first step in problem solving is to identify the problems - beyond the sound bites of high unemployment and low pay. By focusing on needs and letting things cool down, reason will prevail.

Same comment as above, re "reporters".

IMO -the correct thing to do now is find a way for the people of Egypt to make long term informed decisions about their future - not short term emotional decisions.

I'm sure there are plenty of people who think that the world would be a much better place if the USA had absolute control of all of it. However I (and a few billion others) are not among them.

 

[OmCheeto]

Likely no one will ever know for sure what's happening in Egypt. All we are likely to see is the eventual outcome. One big reason is that some radical groups intentionally cloak their activity to hide it from the general public. Even if peaceful protesters, let's say mostly students, started the demonstrations, it's certainly possible that groups like the Muslim Brotherhood could gain control because they are better coordinated, have a plan and are better organized. If a radical group is successful we'll see the outcome; if not, likely we'll never know why.

Meantime, I have seen reports that various other terrorist groups are now traveling to Eqypt, ostensibly to take advantage of instability and unrest. The last time I remember a "popular" uprising, in Iran, a theocracy ensued and oppression relative to the Shah who was as brutal as Mubarak likely got worse when the mullahs took over Iran.

Let's just hope the majority of the Eqyptian people get something good out of all this.

I posted something similar to this on Facebook yesterday.

Nothing.

If that's what Egyptians want, then that's what they'll have. I would post a link to Al Jazeera where they reported that Iran has been hanging the political opposition over the last two weeks, but Al Jazeera is down at the moment.

Democracy is about choices. When the government executes any dissenting voices, what choice do you have? Iran under a theocracy is no different than Egypt under Mubarek. The people are stuck with what they've got.

Hopefully, the Egyptians will realize this, and not institute more of the same, under a different name.

So I'd say, show your support for the Egyptians, cross your fingers, and hope for the best.

was my response to "What do we do if the Muslim Brotherhood takes over?"

Fortunately, http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/01/201112514128271328.html" is back up.

 

[Nicodemus]

Why do you think the US has the divine right to tell the rest of the world how to organize itself?



Same comment as above, re "reporters".



I'm sure there are plenty of people who think that the world would be a much better place if the USA had absolute control of all of it. However I (and a few billion others) are not among them.

Where is all of this USA stuff coming from, as though we're not the reason Egypt has a military that can inhibit mass slaughter of civilians? I guess the answer to your question is the old one: no divine right, just guns and steel, money and diplomacy. You don't have to like it, but pretending that giving over a billion in aid to a country every year doesn't buy you influence is naive.

Would you downplay the ability of China to influence North Korea just because you don't like the message or the messanger?

 

[WhoWee]

Why do you think the US has the divine right to tell the rest of the world how to organize itself?

Same comment as above, re "reporters".

I'm sure there are plenty of people who think that the world would be a much better place if the USA had absolute control of all of it. However I (and a few billion others) are not among them.

Please note I said "President Obama and others " - meaning other world leaders. As for reporters - did I say US reporters? How else would 80 million people find out what is going on in their country (in a reasonable amount of time) - other than fair reporting?

As for the few billion people who want the US to go away - I agree! I'm tired of sending tax money to people who don't appreciate it.

 

[mugaliens]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_[URL="https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/when-did-mitochondria-evolve/"]mitochondria[/URL]l_DNA_haplogroups" , are basically 'cousins' since between 70,000 and 60,000 years ago.

I think B came to S. America via the S. Pacific route. But that's my opinion...

 

[mugaliens]

Although I don't have an opinion on what is happening in Egypt, nor do I really care. Imo the people of every country have the right to do what ever they want as long as it doesn't affect my country.

Agreed. Unfortunately, what's happening in the Middle East is affecting all nations, and will continue to affect all nations.

It was born of the enlightenment, when people were becoming aware of their natural rights and started to believe http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/" ...

Exactly.

According to my reading of history, the founders pleaded with their king many, many times before they resorted to throwing of the shackles and went about forming our own government. The ideas were born of studying the history of other governments and was planned and started to be implemented long before they ever started to rise up. They tried one form of republicanism, before and during the revolution, but when that form was found lacking shortly after, they changed it to the form of republicanism that we had for a while thereafter.

I think most people think the Founders were just some rich land-owners who threw some ideas around a room for a couple of weeks until everyone agreed on a form of government everyone could accept, then followed that with a Declaration of Independance and later, a Constitution, the latter of which needs radical reform to "keep up with the times."

Nothing could be further from the truth. Most of the founders had been very well-read students of other governmental systems for decades, including what worked, what didn't, and why. Our Constitution is based on mankind himself, human nature, to preserve the "inalienable rights" spoken of in the Declaration of Independance, so as to provide for the needs of all citizens such that they can have "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

It's needed a couple of tweaks over the years, but it's stood in it's near-original form very well over the last quarter-millennia for one simple reason: They Got It Right.

However, the egyptians haven't even decided what form their new government is going to take, all they know is they want this one gone and will riot till it happens.

I agree that this is what the Egyptian masses may believe, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate" they're hoping to instill, one way or another, and they've been working towards it since 1924.

I think Egypts problems are only going to get worse, I hope I'm wrong. As I truly feel it is the Egyptian people's right to change their government if they wish to do so, I just think they are going about it the wrong way.

Agreed.

And I am sick of the comparisons with the US revolution, what is happening there and what happened here are nothing alike, so far.

I disagree. I see a lot of similarities between what most Egyptians are faced with and are trying to accomplish and what the American Colonists are faced with and are trying to accomplish:

American Colonists: Oppressed (via British military troops), over-taxed (King George became RICH off them), and desiring to throw off both the oppression and the taxation.

Egyptian Citizens: Oppressed (via Egypt's Police), over-taxed (Mubarak's net worth is $70 Billion), and desiring to throw off both the oppression and the taxation.

I also see a lot of differences, including one principle difference: The Colonists had a sincere desire to allow everyone to worship as they see fit. If anyone has any doubts that this is similar to what's going on in the Middle East, there's a lot of homework they haven't done.

 

[WhoWee]

This something I've been wondering - how much does Mubarak control financially? This places his holdings at a very substantial level - but doesn't indicate he controls the core Egyptian businesses. I suspected he might control the insurance and banking industries in Egypt?
http://www.newsmax.com/InsideCover/...h/2011/02/04/id/385057?s=al&promo_code=B9D5-1

"Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and his family have amassed a fortune estimated at $70 billion according to analysis by Middle East experts poll by the London Guardian. And very little of that stash is kept in his own country, they say. Much of his wealth is in British and Swiss banks or tied up in real estate in London, New York, Los Angeles and along expensive tracts of the Red Sea coast. "

 

[turbo]

This account might be instructive. The Egyptian secret police still have incredible power over domestic affairs, apparently, and detain foreigners with impunity.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/weekinreview/06held.html?_r=1&hp

 

[klimatos]

I also see a lot of differences, including one principle difference: The Colonists had a sincere desire to allow everyone to worship as they see fit. If anyone has any doubts that this is similar to what's going on in the Middle East, there's a lot of homework they haven't done.

That doesn't jibe with my own readings in American History. As far as I can tell, every American Colony except for Rhode Island was settled by religious bigots who forced their particlar beliefs on all who chose to settle there. At the time of the Revolution, there were many tolerant and well-educated citizens, but even a man as tolerant as Thomas Jefferson despised Catholicism. The common people were no more tolerant of religious differences than they are today--by all evidences a great deal less so.

By the way, there was a proposal by some of the framers of the Constitution to include a mention of God and Jesus in the document. It was put to a vote and defeated. Hence, no mention except in the date (Anno Domini, AD).

 

[Al68]

Oh Mr. Avocado... Please give that lady in your art work there a jacket please!

No jacket needed! The breasts of a goddess must be exempt from PF anti-nudity rules (assuming that's Lady Liberty being depicted). :!)

I think it was fairly common in the past to depict the Goddess Liberty topless. Wasn't such a depiction even on a coin at one time?

 

[russ_watters]

That doesn't jibe with my own readings in American History. As far as I can tell, every American Colony except for Rhode Island was settled by religious bigots who forced their particlar beliefs on all who chose to settle there.

I don't know about many of the colonies, but I do know it was not true of Pennsylvania:

William Penn as an English Quaker sought to construct a new type of society with religious toleration and a great deal of freedom.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_of_Government

 

[Werg22]

I agree that this is what the Egyptian masses may believe, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caliphate" they're hoping to instill, one way or another, and they've been working towards it since 1924.

From what I've gathered, the Muslim Brotherhood is not behind the protests, but only a small part of it. Nothing warranting the title of "being behind the scenes". All noted experts I've heard speak on the subject have said that in a free and fair election, the MB would not win a majority of seats. Care to elaborate?

 

[Al68]

That doesn't jibe with my own readings in American History. As far as I can tell, every American Colony except for Rhode Island was settled by religious bigots who forced their particlar beliefs on all who chose to settle there...

Can you cite your source for that claim?

 

[Nicodemus]

The MB seems invovled in negotiations, but they clearly are not the force that's moving people in Egypt. I don't see how this call for better economic conditions and freedoms would jive with a theocracy. I guess Mubarak really sold that line well over these 30 years.

 

[WhoWee]

From what I've gathered, the Muslim Brotherhood is not behind the protests, but only a small part of it. Nothing warranting the title of "being behind the scenes". All noted experts I've heard speak on the subject have said that in a free and fair election, the MB would not win a majority of seats. Care to elaborate?

Again, the 80 million people of Egypt need time to make decisions based on reason and facts (actual solutions for need) - not the emotional decisions made by a very small (even one million is small in this context) crowd in the largest city.

By example - would all Americans be represented if 100,000 angry New Yorkers decided the best way to govern the US?

 

[OmCheeto]

Again, the 80 million people of Egypt need time to make decisions based on reason and facts (actual solutions for need) - not the emotional decisions made by a very small (even one million is small in this context) crowd in the largest city.

By example - would all Americans be represented if 100,000 angry New Yorkers decided the best way to govern the US?

I was thinking something similar yesterday. What if all 14,000,000 unemployed people showed up on Pennsylvania Avenue tomorrow demanding a "change".

What would the other 293,000,000 Americans think of that?

 

[Nicodemus]

If people could act in that concerted manner when it was in their best interests, we wouldn't be people.

 

[Char. Limit]

I was thinking something similar yesterday. What if all 14,000,000 unemployed people showed up on Pennsylvania Avenue tomorrow demanding a "change".

What would the other 293,000,000 Americans think of that?

We should totally try that, just to see what happens. And hey, they're unemployed. Do they have anything better to do? (Aside from all that stuff that people do, like looking for jobs)

 

[OmCheeto]

If people could act in that concerted manner when it was in their best interests, we wouldn't be people.

?

Would we be ants then?

 

[Werg22]

Again, the 80 million people of Egypt need time to make decisions based on reason and facts (actual solutions for need) - not the emotional decisions made by a very small (even one million is small in this context) crowd in the largest city.

By example - would all Americans be represented if 100,000 angry New Yorkers decided the best way to govern the US?

What does that have to do with what I asked?

 

[Nicodemus]

?

Would we be ants then?

We'd be acting in a fashion that's more consistant with insect behaviour, but it would be far too enlightened for that.

 

[WhoWee]

What does that have to do with what I asked?

To keep us on the same page - you poised the question:
"Originally Posted by Werg22
From what I've gathered, the Muslim Brotherhood is not behind the protests, but only a small part of it. Nothing warranting the title of "being behind the scenes". All noted experts I've heard speak on the subject have said that in a free and fair election, the MB would not win a majority of seats. Care to elaborate? "

And I responded with:
"Again, the 80 million people of Egypt need time to make decisions based on reason and facts (actual solutions for need) - not the emotional decisions made by a very small (even one million is small in this context) crowd in the largest city.

By example - would all Americans be represented if 100,000 angry New Yorkers decided the best way to govern the US? "

My point is the crowds observed in Cairo - estimates of tens of thousands to one million - are gathered in unity with one purpose - to rid the country of their leader. Beyond that goal - they don't appear to have an on-going strategy.

I think we all agree that emotions are running high in the crowd - correct? Do we also agree that people are engaged in emotion-based behavior that is not typical (in Cairo)?

In this heightened state of emotion, groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and other idealists will seek the opportunity to speak and organize the crowd - to win new supporters of their cause. This is not unique to the Cairo protests. In the short term, the support might be robust. Once the new recruits go home, think about their new relationships, and discuss their new ideology with family and friends - the emotional support might fade?

Does the Muslim Brotherhood control the crowd? I don't think so - but I'm sure they'd like an opportunity to be the voice - even though they would only be SHORT TERM voice of the relatively small part of the 80 million population.

If Egypt will move forward as a democracy - all 80 million people should be represented. I'm not certain the group of people throwing rocks in the streets truly speak for the entire populace - are you?

 

[klimatos]

I don't know about many of the colonies, but I do know it was not true of Pennsylvania: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_of_Government

I stand corrected on Pennsylvania. For the rest, just google on "religious persecution in American colonies". In some areas, being a Quaker carried the death penalty, and Baptists were treated just as badly. Jail terms, fines, and whippings were common fare for dissenters. The histories of Roger Williams and Anne Hutchinson are examples. By the time of the drafting of the Constitution, things had improved significantly. Many of the laws remained on the books, but were not enforced as often.

 

[klimatos]

If Egypt will move forward as a democracy - all 80 million people should be represented. I'm not certain the group of people throwing rocks in the streets truly speak for the entire populace - are you?

Nobody speaks for the "entire" populace--most certainly not the present ruling class of Egypt. I lived in Egypt for three years and have been back many times since. I do believe that the sentiments you see being expressed by the demonstrators on TV truly represent the sentiments of those parts of the Egyptian people that bother to think about such things; i. e., the educated elements.

The Muslim Brotherhood ("Ikhwan") is not monolithic. The beliefs of the members range from extreme religious fundamentalism to tolerant liberalism. I agree that fundamentalism is dangerous; but I thinks all fundamentalist groups have a poor grasp of reality. That goes for Muslim fundamentalists and Christian fundamentalists and Jewish fundamentalists and any other group that believes that a return to the (supposedly pure) beliefs or practices of the past is workable today.

 

[WhoWee]

Nobody speaks for the "entire" populace--most certainly not the present ruling class of Egypt. I lived in Egypt for three years and have been back many times since. I do believe that the sentiments you see being expressed by the demonstrators on TV truly represent the sentiments of those parts of the Egyptian people that bother to think about such things; i. e., the educated elements.

The Muslim Brotherhood ("Ikhwan") is not monolithic. The beliefs of the members range from extreme religious fundamentalism to tolerant liberalism. I agree that fundamentalism is dangerous; but I thinks all fundamentalist groups have a poor grasp of reality. That goes for Muslim fundamentalists and Christian fundamentalists and Jewish fundamentalists and any other group that believes that a return to the (supposedly pure) beliefs or practices of the past is workable today.

Aside from wanting Mubarak out - what do they want? What are the specific needs of the people? What is the business climate?

 

[Char. Limit]

Aside from wanting Mubarak out - what do they want? What are the specific needs of the people? What is the business climate?

They don't know what they want. They've basically united on a message of "Get the hell out, we don't care how."

 

[WhoWee]

They don't know what they want. They've basically united on a message of "Get the hell out, we don't care how."

That is the great concern isn't it? Klimatos actually lived in Egypt - I'd like to hear what he thinks needs to be done moving forward. We know that unemployment is high and wages are low - but how might Egypt attract higher paying jobs?

 

[mheslep]

I stand corrected on Pennsylvania. For the rest, just google on "religious persecution in American colonies". ...

Of course there was religious persecution, one could argue it still exists, but the existence of persecution is a far cry from your original claim, https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=3122510&postcount=470"

 

[Proton Soup]

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/02/01/jordan.government/"

http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/n....-mubarak-to-heed-calls-for-change-2011-02-01"

Frank G. Wisner is sent to Egypt by US President Obama to negotiate a resolution.

interesting guy that Wisner. seems he was already bought and paid for.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...us-envoys-business-link-to-egypt-2206329.html

Frank Wisner, President Barack Obama's envoy to Cairo who infuriated the White House this weekend by urging Hosni Mubarak to remain President of Egypt, works for a New York and Washington law firm which works for the dictator's own Egyptian government.

Mr Wisner's astonishing remarks – "President Mubarak's continued leadership is critical: it's his opportunity to write his own legacy" – shocked the democratic opposition in Egypt and called into question Mr Obama's judgement, as well as that of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

 

[WhoWee]

interesting guy that Wisner. seems he was already bought and paid for.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...us-envoys-business-link-to-egypt-2206329.html

I expect the President's inexperience is to be exploited from time to time. However, I don't know what to think about Secretary of State Hillary Clinton? It appears she is not in charge. Her progressive policies aside, she is much more capable than results indicate - IMO.