Is civil war in Egypt averted? 90% yes for new Constitution.

[Human_Action]

@NotfooledbyW

I have no idea how you believe that you have a better handle on what was needed to ‘save the nation’.

I’m in the exact same boat you are.

@NotfooledbyW

I believe this reporter has it right.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/10160785/Egypt-crisis-Its-the-economy-stupid-why-Islamist-leaders-should-take-note-of-Morsis-fate.html

Key statement from the above is, “by the time the military intervened he was widely reviled by the majority of Egyptians, both religious and secular.” And that was perception I had of events when I started this thread.
Morsi did not deliver to the ‘will of the people’ when he sure as hell had the chance.

1. Any evidence that the majority of Egyptians opposed Morsi?

2. Any reason they couldn’t use that majority to win next election?

3. Any reason, if 1 and 2 above have answers, the impeachment process in the constitution couldn’t be used? Nowhere in that document is the military authorized to give the President 48 hours to “meet the demands of the people” and then remove him from office.

@NotfooledbyW

Further in the same report:

Another point that I fully agree with, “Arab uprisings that began in Tunisia at the end of 2010 was prompted by economic concerns, not Islamist ideology”
And in closing from the same report:

And that is so appropriate to

That Morsi - a Muslim Brotherhood member - was an Islamist wasn’t some kind of secret. Yet he got elected anyway.

Oh, and he was unpopular and the economy was having trouble? Why didn’t we remove Jimmy Carter in a coup, then? Seems like a missed opportunity.

[Human_Action]

Also, I’d really appreciate an answer to this:

What’s the long-term plan here that gets you to liberal democracy? Kill the Islamists? Ban their political parties and arrest their leaders? What do you do about all these people who want an Islamist government?

[NotfooledbyW]

Human Action 02-08-2014 06:36 PM Also, I’d really appreciate an answer to this: What’s the long-term plan here that gets you to liberal democracy? Kill the Islamists? Ban their political parties and arrest their leaders? What do you do about all these people who want an Islamist government? <“Cite”

The long term plan is totally up to the Egyptian people. The short term plan is as I have expressed it. Don’t rush it. Don’t put the cart before the horse.

I’ll cite an Egyptian who has fought for democracy all her life as well as better conditions for women:

Nawal El Saadawi writes at IslamiCommentary (translated by miriam cooke)

Every revolution in history has had its counter-revolution. Most recently, internal and external forces allied, as they did in Egypt, to abort the January 2011 revolution.

But the Muslim Brotherhood failed to abort this latest revolution on June 30, 2013, and they will continue to fail because those who have rebelled against them have learned the lessons of the past. Their consciousness has deepened with organization and unity.

Thirty-four million youth, men, and women went out into the streets and squares. They were determined to topple the religious government, under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as stand up to all who supported the Brotherhood them at home and abroad .

They wanted to expel all who would use religion for economic and political gain and to oust Morsi. The will of the people was and is more powerful than the military, the police, and any religious or economic weapons. Here is the lesson of human history: There is no principle higher than truth and sincerity in the quest for freedom, justice and dignity.

Egypt: A People’s Revolution, Not a Crisis or Coup (Nawal El Saadawi)

Nawal El Saadawi’s says that, “Democracy is about more than elections. Legitimacy means more than the ballot box, it means the power of the people.” Her immediate plan is to adopt a "new constitution that will realize the principles of the revolution: equality for all without distinction of sex, religion or class. This we must do first, not just rush to presidential and parliamentary elections. We should not put the cart before the horse. We must not repeat mistakes.

And I have no problem with that plan. And I do not believe General Abdel Fattah El Sisi would have a problem with it either. So the plan would be to get a constitution like that passed.

And I don’t see the Islamists rising up to challenge Sisi and Saadawi’s partnership of revolution ever again. They just don’t have much going for them in a non-violent approach. And if they deiced to go the violent route - they will be crushed as they should be. They will become the equivalent of the Pakistan Taliban if they go down the terrorist path.

So the plan is to pass a more air tight constitution - probably under tbe next elected President Abdel Fattah El Sisi but I can’t make that prediction just yet.

Nawal El Saadawi’s tells us why this is going to work. She says, "The revolutionaries turned to the national army and** the army responded. The police, also**, served the people and not the regime.

Toppling Morsi was (to paraphrase Jefferson again) it was … a good bit of ‘refreshing the tree of liberty’ when it had to. You know the tree of liberty that came when Mubarak was taken down. Unfortunately Morsi screwed up so badly the tree of liberty had to be refreshed within the first two years of the revolution.

[NotfooledbyW]

Originally Posted by NotfooledbyW (Post 17087818) I have no idea how you believe that you have a better handle on what was needed to ‘save the nation’. <“Cite”
(-Human Action 02-08-2014 06:25 PM) I’m in the exact same boat you are. <“Cite”
Except you are lecturing them from the comfort of your well established democracy and I am saying handle it the way you see fit.

[NotfooledbyW]

(-Human Action 02-08-2014 06:25 PM) 1. Any evidence that the majority of Egyptians opposed Morsi? 2. Any reason they couldn’t use that majority to win next election? 3. Any reason, if 1 and 2 above have answers, the impeachment process in the constitution couldn’t be used? Nowhere in that document is the military authorized to give the President 48 hours to “meet the demands of the people” and then remove him from office.

Regarding 1:

. Egypt: Poll - 28 Percent of Egyptians Support Mursi, 35 Percent Back Opposition 15 June 2013 A recent poll conducted by the Arab American Institute showed that only 28 percent of participants in the poll support President Mohamed Mursi, his cabinet and the Muslim Brotherhood, the Huffington Post reported.

Thirty-five percent of the participants expressed their support for the opposition (the National Salvation Front and April 6 Movement), institute founder and president James Zogby said on Saturday.

The rest of the participants expressed their lack of confidence in both the government and the opposition.

http://allafrica.com/stories/201306160069.html

And this comment in the Zogby Poll.

Seventy percent of those who took the poll believed that the Muslim Brotherhood intends to “Islamise” the state and take full control of executive power.

Regarding 2: Yes. Didn’t have Three years because A. The economy was on verge of collapse. B. Did not want the State Islamized and in three years their would be no turning back if the military and police had become Islamized.
Regarding 3: Didn’t have time… The crisis reached it’s breaking point. In February 2013 Mr ElBaradei was right:

‘Polarised’

Mr ElBaradei told the BBC’s Jim Muir: "We need to send a message loud and clear to the people here and outside of Egypt that this is not a democracy, that we have not participated in an uprising two years ago to end up with a recycling of the [Hosni] Mubarak regime.

“Torture is still there, abduction is still there, a lack of social justice is still there.”

He said elections should not be held in April in a society that was “completely polarised”.

To do so, he said, would risk setting the country on a “road to total chaos and instability” and that the intervention of the army might then be common sense, to stabilise the situation until the political process could be resumed.

He said: “If Egypt is on the brink of default, if law and order is absent, [the army] have a national duty to intervene.”

Mr ElBaradei said the basic problem was that Mr Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood had spent 80 years in opposition, and was now “intoxicated with power”.

Egypt elections: ElBaradei warns of chaos

.

[Marmite_Lover]

Sinai is a problem because the Camp David Treaty stops Egypt from allowing our military to cover Sinai.

Sinai is a huge area of bedouin tribes and Egypt should be allowed to be able to deploy their military in it.

Because of Camp David we now have the problems with Gaza tunnels, with Hamas, with Morsi and the ikhwan supporting the bedouin tribes causing militant hotspots in the North of Sinai, threats to the Suez Canal zone and Port Said and the North coast of Sinai, under Morsi the border at Rafah was opened for free traffic of arms from Libya through Sinai up through Gaza and now onto Syria.

The creation of that state of Israel has caused nothing but problems for the whole region and the world.

Make no mistake!!

IF the Westerners think that backing jihadists is a good move and their presidents back terrorist organisations like the MB and FSA rebels etc etc etc etc.

The day will come when their friendly rebels ( who will still have the same mentality and ideology of the global caliphate ) return home. If you think they are not being recruited from your own cities then you are in denial. Eventually when they are finished in Syria and Libya they will go back home to London and NY and Chicago and Paris for their next mission.

You also must be asking why is the USA not backing the Egyptian army to fight the jihadist MB in Sinai???

[NotfooledbyW]

Question for Marmite Lover: is this report accurate?

2. The Sinai Peninsula is a hotbed of swarming Al Qaeda and Salafist forces which continue to plague Egypt’s armed forces, often in league with the Brotherhood underground. The major offensive he embarked on last year to root out the jihadist networks still needs to be finished.

Read More: http://app.debka.com/n/article/23631/As-Egypt’s-president-El-Sisi-shoulders-huge-security-challenges-Muslim-Brothers-Sinai-terror-Gaza-water
And this specifically:

3. One of the keys to this goal, the general believes, is the removal of Palestinian Hamas rule from the Gaza Strip. Hamas is the offspring of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. It provides both parent and Sinai jihadists with a support system. So long as Hamas rules the enclave, El-Sisi sees no prospect of the Egyptian military reasserting its authority in the Sinai Peninsula or containing the Muslim Brotherhood’s subversive activities. <“cite”

[NotfooledbyW]

@Human_Action

Oh, and he was unpopular and the economy was having trouble? Why didn’t we remove Jimmy Carter in a coup, then? Seems like a missed opportunity.

(A) Was Jimmy Carter elected as the first president following the overthrow of a dictator who ruled the Thirteen Colonies as a foreign-propped-up dictator and his army for thirty years?

(B) During Jimmy Carter’s term was the US Army and National Police the same as they were in Egypt under Mubarak, in full control of managing and dispersing as much as 40 percent of the national economy?

(C) Was Jimmy Carter a nember of a political/civic organization tied to religion-based terrorists operating on Federal soil causing international tensions that affected shipping through international waters and fifty year old treaties that kept two former at war nations in peaceful co-existence for the life of that peace deal. You know like the Camp David Accord that Carter put together for Egypt and Israel and peace.

[NotfooledbyW]

What about this? Marmite Lover, what about All this?

Eilat pays for Israel’s patchy security policy in Gaza and IDF’s quiet cooperation with Egypt

Israel’s southernmost town, the Eilat tourist resort of 70,000 inhabitants, is now being targeted for missile attack from Sinai every few days. No one has been hurt and nothing damaged – thus far. This time, Iron Dome caught the ball but no defense system is foolproof. The Red Sea tourist resort knows it must prepare for the worst, in the light of the short-sighted policy Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon have adopted i.e., security and intelligence cooperation with Egypt’s presidential candidate and strongman Gen. Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi, in place of direct action.

Read more: http://app.debka.com/n/article/23646/Eilat-pays-for-Israel’s-patchy-security-policy-in-Gaza-and-IDF’s-quiet-cooperation-with-Egypt
And from the same link:

. In the space of two years, Israel’s prime minister and defense minister agreed to place the handling of two dangerous terrorist threats in foreign hands.

One:** It caused Israel to secretly drop - or overlook - the fundamental Sinai demilitarization clause in its 1979 peace treaty with Egypt and allow Gen. El-Sisi to inject military forces into the peninsula to combat the Islamist terrorists** overrunning wide areas of northern and central regions and the borders of the Gaza Strip and Israel.
The peace treaty was ratified 35 years ago by the Knesset. Any changes should have – but were not – put before the House.

For years, the IDF, Israel’s military intelligence and air force consistently rejected all Cairo’s requests to permit Egyptian air force activity in Sinai – even during the Mubarak regime.

That restriction was waived last year. Egyptian aircraft and helicopters have taken to bombing terrorist targets and even penetrating Gaza Strip airspace for gathering intelligence.

The last Egyptian air strike Friday, Jan. 31 against Islamist terrorist targets in the peninsula was the heaviest ever. An estimated 60 missiles were dropped on the northern Sinai village of Al-Pitat near Sheikh Zuweid, killing at least 13 Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis fighters and destroying many buildings.
Al Qaeda undervalued as “global jihad”

Israeli official spokesmen never name this or any other jihadist organization, referring to “global Jihad” – apparently hoping a vague term will diminish the immediacy of the menace.

It is therefore important to lay out clearly the true nature of Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis.
It is a coalition of Islamist groups and militias led by Abdallah Al-Ashqar which brings together Al Qaeda fighters from Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Sudan, Egypt and Sinai Salafist Bedouin.

Its command structure incorporates the military arms of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, the Palestinian Hamas and the pro-Iranian Jihad Islami.

Its most violent element is the virulent Al-Gama’a al-Islamiyya, a veteran Egyptian ultra-radical organization, that was responsible for the assassination of President Anwar Sadat in 1981 for signing peace with Israel.

Three years ago, Al-Gema’a terrorists stormed and torched the US and Israeli embassies in Cairo.

A year later, on Sept. 1, 2012, the same Egyptian jihadists took part in the attack on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and the murder of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and another three American officials.

Both Israel and Washington have systematically glossed over the presence of the deadly Al Gama’a al-Islmamiyya in Sinai, because it would then be revealed as the connecting link between the Egyptian Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis and the Al Qaeda cells operating in eastern Libya, mainly Benghazi and Darnah.

Those cells keep the various terrorist groups operating from the Gaza Strip and Sinai well supplied with arms.

Seen from the perspective of Israeli national security and strategic interests, a highly dangerous terrorist coalition has sprung up on its southwestern border. Al Qaeda’s affiliates have gained freedom of movement and action across a vast geographic area, ranging from Libya to the Gaza Strip, and furnished with unlimited sources of arms and funds.

Gaza ceasefire culminates in Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis

Two: On Nov. 21, 2012, the prime minister agreed to cut short the IDF’s operation against protracted Palestinian missile fire for the sake of giving US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton a lever for embarking on a complex diplomatic move.
The Obama administration was in the throes of assembling a pro-US regional alliance scraped together from a group of Sunni leaders: the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood’s President Mohamed Morsi (since overthrown), its Palestinian offspring Hamas, Turkish Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan (currently in league with Tehran) and Qatar’s ruler, Sheikh Hamad Khalifa al-Thani (since abdicated).

The deal Clinton negotiated was for Palestinian consent to stop shooting missiles at Israel as part of a ceasefire, in return for which the pro-US alliance would rebuild the Gaza Strip and its economy and shore up Hamas rule for contesting the Palestinian Authority in Ramallah and its head, Mahmoud Abbas

This ambitious master plan soon sank into oblivion because of two developments which neither the US nor Israel took into account:

Safely buttressed by this US-sponsored bloc, the Muslim Brotherhood immediately set about furtively molding Hamas and the Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis into an underground militant arm, ready to snap into action in the event of the Brothers’ ouster for a wave of terror against Egyptian military and government targets.
Since his coup against the Muslim Brotherhood last July, Gen. El-Sisi has made the destruction of this terrorist machine his army’s top priority.

The Netanyahu government’s proclivity for depending on outside forces to pull its terrorist irons out of the fire left a tempting hole in Israel’s deterrence, which the Islamist Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis terrorists were quick to grasp.

Last week, they released a communiqué warning that missiles and other terrorist operations would descend on the Israel enemy for every Egyptian military attack they suffered.

The missile fired against Eilat Friday night was the Ansar’s response to the massive Egyptian air strike on its hideouts early that day.

[NotfooledbyW]

The Sinai terrorist activities are critical to understanding why Morsi was tossed out of office. If the MB in any way shape or form is linked even remotely to the violence there, there should be no dispute that Morsi had to be removed and jailed. Knowing what is happening in the Sinai is critical to understand events in Egypt with a fully informed perspective.

Is this accurate for instance?

Safely buttressed by this US-sponsored bloc, the Muslim Brotherhood immediately set about furtively molding Hamas and the Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis into an underground militant arm, ready to snap into action in the event of the Brothers’ ouster for a wave of terror against Egyptian military and government targets.

From: http://app.debka.com/n/article/23646/Eilat-pays-for-Israel’s-patchy-security-policy-in-Gaza-and-IDF’s-quiet-cooperation-with-Egypt

[NotfooledbyW]

Morsi should not have been able to survive this weakness in dealing with terrorist who killed Egyptian police. No society should tolerate the killing of its soldiers doing the job under lawful orders.

At the same time, Morsi warned against heavy security crackdowns that fueled local outrage in the past, preferring negotiations and promises of development. Critics accused him of being reluctant to go after militants for fear of alienating ultraconservative allies, while locals say his government failed to improve the quality of life in Sinai.

The approach emerged in two major attacks the past year. Last Ramadan — in August — just weeks after Morsi took office, gunmen killed 16 Egyptian soldiers, stole armored vehicles and drove into Israel to attempt an attack there. The military responded with a major security operation in Sinai.

Soon after, Morsi said security forces had a chance to strike at suspects but did not in order to avoid killing civilians. The suspects have not been named and remain at large.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/egyptian-military-bombards-militant-towns-in-sinai/

[Human_Action]

@NotfooledbyW

The long term plan is totally up to the Egyptian people.

Which faction? They aren’t a hive mind, you know. For someone who’s convinced the coup will lead to democracy, it’s a bit disturbing that you can’t articulate how that’ll happen.

@NotfooledbyW

The short term plan is as I have expressed it. Don’t rush it. Don’t put the cart before the horse.

What’s that mean? Don’t hold elections for a while? These are empty platitudes.

@NotfooledbyW

I’ll cite an Egyptian who has fought for democracy all her life as well as better conditions for women:

Egypt: A People’s Revolution, Not a Crisis or Coup (Nawal El Saadawi)
Nawal El Saadawi’s says that, “Democracy is about more than elections. Legitimacy means more than the ballot box, it means the power of the people.” Her immediate plan is to adopt a "new constitution that will realize the principles of the revolution: equality for all without distinction of sex, religion or class. This we must do first, not just rush to presidential and parliamentary elections. We should not put the cart before the horse. We must not repeat mistakes.

And I have no problem with that plan. And I do not believe General Abdel Fattah El Sisi would have a problem with it either. So the plan would be to get a constitution like that passed.

The 2014 constitution doesn’t include that stuff. What makes you think a majority of Egyptians want a constitution that guarantees religious equality to all?

@NotfooledbyW

And I don’t see the Islamists rising up to challenge Sisi and Saadawi’s partnership of revolution ever again. They just don’t have much going for them in a non-violent approach.

Um…why not? Did the people who voted MB disappear? Change their minds? Or was brutally suppressing the MB effective enough, you think?

@NotfooledbyW

And if they deiced to go the violent route - they will be crushed as they should be. They will become the equivalent of the Pakistan Taliban if they go down the terrorist path.

Considering that their ability to engage in peaceful politics has been removed, I wouldn’t blame them.

@NotfooledbyW

So the plan is to pass a more air tight constitution - probably under tbe next elected President Abdel Fattah El Sisi but I can’t make that prediction just yet.

Yay, another rigged referendum, I trust?

@NotfooledbyW

Nawal El Saadawi’s tells us why this is going to work. She says, "The revolutionaries turned to the national army and** the army responded. The police, also**, served the people and not the regime.

Toppling Morsi was (to paraphrase Jefferson again) it was … a good bit of ‘refreshing the tree of liberty’ when it had to. You know the tree of liberty that came when Mubarak was taken down. Unfortunately Morsi screwed up so badly the tree of liberty had to be refreshed within the first two years of the revolution.

Yeah, to hell with the people, let the revolutionaries make the government!

[Human_Action]

@NotfooledbyW

Originally Posted by NotfooledbyW (Post 17087818) I have no idea how you believe that you have a better handle on what was needed to ‘save the nation’. <“Cite”
(-Human Action 02-08-2014 06:25 PM) I’m in the exact same boat you are. <“Cite”
Except you are lecturing them from the comfort of your well established democracy and I am saying handle it the way you see fit.

No, you’re not, you’re endorsing one faction over another. “Handle it as you see fit” is not what you’re telling MB supporters, now is it?

Treating Egyptians as a hive mind, is this bigotry or just limited thinking?

@NotfooledbyW

Regarding 1:

So, “No”, then, no evidence that majority of Egyptians opposed Morsi.

http://allafrica.com/stories/201306160069.html

And this comment in the Zogby Poll.

@NotfooledbyW

Regarding 2: Yes. Didn’t have Three years because A. The economy was on verge of collapse. B. Did not want the State Islamized and in three years their would be no turning back if the military and police had become Islamized.
Regarding 3: Didn’t have time… The crisis reached it’s breaking point. In February 2013 Mr ElBaradei was right:

Egypt elections: ElBaradei warns of chaos - BBC News
.

Did you miss the part about parliamentary elections in April (as demanded by the constitution?) If the people were against Morsi, they could vote in anti-Morsi representatives to impeach him. Problem solved, no?

Unless, of course, the people weren’t sufficiently against Morsi. But hey, those elections were cancelled, and not by Morsi.

It’s hilarious to me that you hold out the guy demanding that elections not be held as the pro-democracy one. Oh, and he’s the opposition leader, so he’s not biased at all.

If the army has a “national duty” to remove the government, why isn’t that in the constitution?

@NotfooledbyW

(A) Was Jimmy Carter elected as the first president following the overthrow of a dictator who ruled the Thirteen Colonies as a foreign-propped-up dictator and his army for thirty years?

Nope! Not sure why that’s relevant, I don’t see any opt-outs in the Egyptian constitution to negate the first presidential election.

@NotfooledbyW

(B) During Jimmy Carter’s term was the US Army and National Police the same as they were in Egypt under Mubarak, in full control of managing and dispersing as much as 40 percent of the national economy?

Does this mean you’re starting the grasp that the military is trying to protects its powers and privileges? That they aren’t selfless patriots?

@NotfooledbyW

(C) Was Jimmy Carter a nember of a political/civic organization tied to religion-based terrorists operating on Federal soil causing international tensions that affected shipping through international waters and fifty year old treaties that kept two former at war nations in peaceful co-existence for the life of that peace deal. You know like the Camp David Accord that Carter put together for Egypt and Israel and peace.

“Tied to”, eh? Well, that’s conclusive! Throw the bastard out of office!

@NotfooledbyW

Morsi should not have been able to survive this weakness in dealing with terrorist who killed Egyptian police. No society should tolerate the killing of its soldiers doing the job under lawful orders.

That’s right, kill those civilians! To avoid civilian casualties is weakness!

And, still more irony, as you post an article about Islamist militant violence being on the rise since Morsi’s ouster, and claim Morsi needed to be removed to stop Islamist militant violence. Whoops! Guess that backfired on the military, didn’t it?

[NotfooledbyW]

@Human_Action

No, you’re not, you’re endorsing one faction over another. “Handle it as you see fit” is not what you’re telling MB supporters, now is it?

Not true. I am telling all factions the same thing. If your true intent is to create a modern democratic state based upon human rights and civil order regardless of religious beliefs then work for it peacefully and civilly. Do not resort to terrorism and or civil war. Democracy is the goal. An Islamic theocracy is not.

Morsi’s is out of the picture, renounce violence and terrorism, that is the first order of business. Do not promote or participate in violence against your fellow Muslims. That is the same message for all Egyptians from me.

The military has acted to avert civil chaos. That is the reality you must now deal with. Violent acts will never bring Morsi back to power to build an Islamist conrolled state. So all sides find a civil way to build this democracy that is available because of the younger generation’s revolution.

For God’s sake do it without a civil war.

[Human_Action]

@NotfooledbyW

Not true. I am telling all factions the same thing. If your true intent is to create a modern democratic state based upon human rights and civil order regardless of religious beliefs then work for it peacefully and civilly. Do not resort to terrorism and or civil war. Democracy is the goal. An Islamic theocracy is not.

A secular, liberal democracy is the goal…for some Egyptians. An Islamic theocracy is the goal…for some Egyptians. A government somewhere in between those two extremes is the goal…for some Egyptians. You really need to understand that. What you are telling all the factions is that one of them is right, and the others should just surrender any voice in government to them.

@NotfooledbyW

Morsi’s is out of the picture, renounce violence and terrorism, that is the first order of business. Do not promote or participate in violence against your fellow Muslims. That is the same message for all Egyptians from me.

Even the military government, busy using violence against the MB? I sure didn’t notice you condemning them.

@NotfooledbyW

The military has acted to avert civil chaos. That is the reality you must now deal with. Violent acts will never bring Morsi back to power to build an Islamist conrolled state. So all sides find a civil way to build this democracy that is available because of the younger generation’s revolution.

For God’s sake do it without a civil war.

Here’s the reality you must now deal with: when you deny people any peaceful way to be represented in their government, there’s a significant chance they will turn to violent ways. The solution is equal political representation…which you oppose.

Would you have lectured the American revolutionaries that, even though they had no political representation in Great Britain, war was an unacceptable way to resolve this problem?

[NotfooledbyW]

@Human_Action

That’s right, kill those civilians! To avoid civilian casualties is weakness!

No. If true that civilians were used as cover by killers of Egyptian soldiers - modern democracies have ways of dealing with situations like that. They don’t have to kill civilians at all. But there is no excuse to let the killers of soldiers get away and not be hunted down and killed or prosecuted in a real set law and order democracy as the one you seem to think Morsi was the leader.

The weakness was Morsi’s general desire to negotiate with soldier killing terrorists rather than deal with them as toughly and brutally as possible.

Are you in agreement that Morsi was right to negotiate with perpetrators of violence against the state?

[NotfooledbyW]

@Human_Action

A secular, liberal democracy is the goal…for some Egyptians. An Islamic theocracy is the goal…for some Egyptians. A government somewhere in between those two extremes is the goal…for some Egyptians. You really need to understand that. What you are telling all the factions is that one of them is right, and the others should just surrender any voice in government to them.

Even the military government, busy using violence against the MB? I sure didn’t notice you condemning them.

Here’s the reality you must now deal with: when you deny people any peaceful way to be represented in their government, there’s a significant chance they will turn to violent ways. The solution is equal political representation…which you oppose.

Would you have lectured the American revolutionaries that, even though they had no political representation in Great Britain, war was an unacceptable way to resolve this problem?

So you are not Pro-Democracy and civil liberty in Egypt… You are pro-majority-rule that leads to an Islamist theocracy. If it is true that fundamentalistic Islamists outnumber secular and moderate believers of Islam than it surely will be impossible for the minority to have or gain a voice in anything except what the Islamists allow.
The American Civil war is more analogous to this discussion about a civil war in Egypt than the American Revolution could ever be. And the issue was not secular vs Islamist in 1776. We were fortunate to have Madison, Jefferson and Paine as revolutionary leaders.

But your views that majority rule should reign supreme may have put the Keebosh on the founding of this great democracy of ours.

In rough terms in colonial America one third supported overthrowing the King, one third supported the King, the final third held off to see which side gained the upper hand.

[Human_Action]

@NotfooledbyW

No. If true that civilians were used as cover by killers of Egyptian soldiers - modern democracies have ways of dealing with situations like that.

The way they deal with it, generally, is not attacking when civilians will be killed. Which is what was done in this case.

@NotfooledbyW

They don’t have to kill civilians at all.

As you may or may not be aware, the military conducted sweeps of the Sinai during the May 2013 hostage crisis, looking for the captured men. They didn’t find them.

Know what they did do? Attack a funeral by mistake.

@NotfooledbyW

But there is no excuse to let the killers of soldiers get away and not be hunted down and killed or prosecuted in a real set law and order democracy as the one you seem to think Morsi was the leader.

Suspect in kidnapping of Egyptian security men arrested

You were saying?

I trust you’re busy condemning Obama for letting the Benghazi killers get away and not be hunted down and killed or prosecuted? Because as we all know, whether a criminal outfit hiding in a friendly region depends entirely upon whether the President wills it to occur, right?

@NotfooledbyW

The weakness was Morsi’s general desire to negotiate with soldier killing terrorists rather than deal with them as toughly and brutally as possible.

Rush Limbaugh couldn’t have said it any better. Look, the military was allowed to do their thing for a week. It didn’t work, all they did was further alienate an already embittered and angry civilian populace that’s fed up with brutal security crackdowns. Negotiation freed all seven men alive, and then the government set about trying to apprehend their captors.

@NotfooledbyW

Are you in agreement that Morsi was right to negotiate with perpetrators of violence against the state?

Negotiation is just a tool. Sometimes it’s the right tool, sometimes it’s not. In this case, it worked out fine.

What would your plan have been? Keeping the military rampaging through Sinai, getting civilians and the hostages killed?
ETA: And you didn’t address that the militant problem is worse with Morsi gone, which is an odd outcome if he was letting them have their way, isn’t it? Any thoughts on that?

[Human_Action]

@NotfooledbyW

So you are not Pro-Democracy and civil liberty in Egypt… You are pro-majority-rule that leads to an Islamist theocracy.

Democracy is more important than liberalism, yes. I’ve been very clear about that. An illiberal democracy (e.g., Singapore, Russia) is better than a liberal authoritarian state. You may have noticed, however, that authoritarian states are virtually never liberal, because minority rule requires oppression. We’re seeing that right now in Egypt.

Liberal nations get that way only through majority support for liberalism. You can’t shortcut it by throwing the people who oppose it into prison, cancelling elections, overthrowing governments, arresting journalists, and all the other nasty business of authoritarian rule. How could you? “Equal rights for all!” is not something that can be instilled at the point of a gun, or in a kangaroo court.

Thus: You and I both would like Egypt to be a liberal democracy. The difference is that you support a method that cannot work to achieve that (minority authoritarian rule), and I’d rather have a democracy that can liberalize in the future than an authoritarian regime that can democratize.

Thanks for finally admitting that you’re opposed to majority rule for Egypt, though, that’s refreshingly honest.

@NotfooledbyW

If it is true that fundamentalistic Islamists outnumber secular and moderate believers of Islam than it surely will be impossible for the minority to have or gain a voice in anything except what the Islamists allow.

First off, the 2012 Constitution isn’t some Islamist manifesto, nor is the 2014 one the Declaration of the Rights of Man. Have you read them? They aren’t that different.

And, again: if a future Islamist government set about violating the Constitution, then you’d have grounds for a coup. Pre-emptive coups, because you don’t like the idea of what a guy might do later, and you don’t think you can win a Parliamentary election? Not even in the same league.

@NotfooledbyW

The American Civil war is more analogous to this discussion about a civil war in Egypt than the American Revolution could ever be.

Really? Why? Neither is particularly apt, as Egypt isn’t going through an independence movement, either as a breakaway nation or a breakaway region. They are trying to transition from dictatorship to democracy, which is its own kettle of fish.

And you know which side it is that’s the minority, violating the law to get their own way because they just lost an election, wish to retain their privileges, and are worried about losing them in the future, right? The Confederates…and the military in Egypt and their backers. Is that what you meant by this comparison?

@NotfooledbyW

And the issue was not secular vs Islamist in 1776. We were fortunate to have Madison, Jefferson and Paine as revolutionary leaders.

But your views that majority rule should reign supreme may have put the Keebosh on the founding of this great democracy of ours.

In rough terms in colonial America one third supported overthrowing the King, one third supported the King, the final third held off to see which side gained the upper hand.

If the American colonies had representation in Parliament, and elected MPs were opposed to independence, you’re absolutely right that the revolutionaries would be wrong to go to war anyway. But that’s not what happened: all colonists were denied political representation. There was thus no majority rule to speak of.

[NotfooledbyW]

@Human_Action

Here’s the reality you must now deal with: when you deny people any peaceful way to be represented in their government, there’s a significant chance they will turn to violent ways. The solution is equal political representation…which you oppose.

Can you assure the readers with indisputable confidence that the Muslim Brotherhood did not in any way support/finance the Islamic fundamentalists who were committing acts of terror in the Sinai and still are?

If not, the MB is not worthy of existence in a process leading to giving all Egyptians a peaceful way to be represented in their government. If one really wants to work for peaceful representation in government then start a peaceful organization with no record of ties to past or current violence.