Tunisia and Egypt play dominoes?

[Monte Carlo]

So, what you are saying is that now is the time to invest in hunting rifles, tinned goods and wind-up radios?

[Hildegard]

If Mubarak were to fall, the big question is would it open the way for the Muslim Brotherhood to take over.

 

Yes, the best thing would be that Mubarak kills thousands of his people and restores his power grip to the pleasure of US foreign interests.

[Walsingham]

If Mubarak were to fall, the big question is would it open the way for the Muslim Brotherhood to take over.

 

Yes, the best thing would be that Mubarak kills thousands of his people and restores his power grip to the pleasure of US foreign interests.

 

*Zing*

 

And how do you see it panning out?

[Hildegard]

If Mubarak were to fall, the big question is would it open the way for the Muslim Brotherhood to take over.

 

Yes, the best thing would be that Mubarak kills thousands of his people and restores his power grip to the pleasure of US foreign interests.

 

*Zing*

 

And how do you see it panning out?

 

We have yet another Deja vu in ME, a country with a leader backed by US and the West, a dictator with a democracy that's a joke. And the majority of people with totally different mind and opinion on number of issues who want him out. If the Muslim brotherhood takes over, you'll have another Iran on your hands. Something the US and Israel would like to avoid at all cost. The key issue now is Mubarak and his followers strong enough to remain in power or not. We'll wait and see...

[Wrath of Dagon]

The chief sponsor of the Sunni Hamas is the Shiite Iran incidentally. Although I don't think Iran had much to do with the initial uprising, or MB either for that matter, it doesn't mean MB won't take advantage of the situation.

The chief sponsor of Hamas is who it always has been- radical Sunni Gulf States. Hamas gets a lot of their weapons off Iran but their other stuff- social programs/ education/ wages etc- is still overwhelmingly funded by countries that are theoretically US allies. In the end Iran and Hamas are allies for precisely as long as they are useful to each other and for precisely as long as they have a common enemy. The MB or similar having power in Egypt would almost instantly make Iran superfluous to Hamas as they could then simply get arms off them.

The Iran-Hizbollah-Hamas-MB axis is there so long as their mutual enemy, US, is in the Middle East. Sure they'd turn on each other eventually, but that's a ways off.

[Walsingham]

If Mubarak were to fall, the big question is would it open the way for the Muslim Brotherhood to take over.

 

Yes, the best thing would be that Mubarak kills thousands of his people and restores his power grip to the pleasure of US foreign interests.

 

*Zing*

 

And how do you see it panning out?

 

We have yet another Deja vu in ME, a country with a leader backed by US and the West, a dictator with a democracy that's a joke. And the majority of people with totally different mind and opinion on number of issues who want him out. If the Muslim brotherhood takes over, you'll have another Iran on your hands. Something the US and Israel would like to avoid at all cost. The key issue now is Mubarak and his followers strong enough to remain in power or not. We'll wait and see...

 

So what's your preferred outcome?

[HoonDing]

[Nepenthe]

:D

[Walsingham]

image

 

Took me ages to spot the fail.

W

T

F

!!!!!!!

[Gfted1]

I still dont get it. Is it because "SECY" could read like "SEXY" if you squint real hard?

[Nepenthe]

I still dont get it. Is it because "SECY" could read like "SEXY" if you squint real hard?

 

Hint: It's related to the positioning of Egypt on the map.

 

 

IT'S IN THE WRONG PLACE!!!!!!

 

[Malcador]

Took me a while to notice that too, was looking at the highlighted countries.

[Hurlshort]

Gah, that's crazy. I hope that is a photoshop job, it would be really depressing if Fox News actually put that map up.

[Tale]

My thought process on seeing that.

 

'But that's Iraq!'

'Wait, where's Egypt supposed to go?'

 

And then I felt dumb.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Tale

[Gfted1]

I still dont get it. Is it because "SECY" could read like "SEXY" if you squint real hard?

 

Hint: It's related to the positioning of Egypt on the map.

 

 

IT'S IN THE WRONG PLACE!!!!!!

 

 

Ahem, yes of course. I knew that, I was just testing everyone.

[Nightshape]

image

 

Took me ages to spot the fail.

W

T

F

!!!!!!!

 

Oh the joys, eh?

[Nightshape]

Gah, that's crazy. I hope that is a photoshop job, it would be really depressing if Fox News actually put that map up.

 

Why would that be depressing, I figured it'd be expected!

[Walsingham]

Has to be a photoshop, I'm sure.

[Tale]

I doubt it. I looked around a few places and found various versions of the same image with minor differences (the ticker text showing different parts of that sentence). So either the originator created multiple versions or there are multiple independent confirmations.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Tale

[Enoch]

All in all, fascinating events unfolding.

 

I can guess with some confidence that all the diplomatic and espionage-based influence that can be exerted by the West and by the Saudis are working overtime to ensure that the new boss will be, as they say, same as the old boss with regard to Egypt's international relations. Fair elections, should they ever be conducted, will certainly allow hardline-islamist interests to gain more influence in Egypt than they had previously, but the likelihood of an outright takeover seems quite slim, and islamists with legitimate parliamentary representation tend to be less ornery and violent than islamists being oppressed by a U.S.-backed dictator.

 

 

Edit: The foxnews screwup is entertaining, but not all that surprising. When you produce news programming around the clock, sometimes you've got to come up with graphics on-the-fly. Production staff were probably trying to re-use an old graphic that had Iraq labeled, deleted that name, and didn't tab over to type in the field that would have put the new label over Egypt instead.

Edited January 31, 2011 by Enoch

[Wrath of Dagon]

, and islamists with legitimate parliamentary representation tend to be less ornery and violent than islamists being oppressed by a U.S.-backed dictator.

Really, you mean like the Iranians or Hizbollah that just took over Lebanon?

[Enoch]

, and islamists with legitimate parliamentary representation tend to be less ornery and violent than islamists being oppressed by a U.S.-backed dictator.

Really, you mean like the Iranians or Hizbollah that just took over Lebanon?

First, "tend to"

 

Second, it's tough to make that kind of comparison without getting into "what if" scenarios. Just how dangerous and violent would the Iranian mullahs and Hezbollah be as underground organizations? And how different would whatever other government in those countries be if these groups didn't have the influence that they do? (For example, I'd argue that current Iranian government is, in effect, a pretty secular oligarchy with islamist window-dressing-- the Revolutionary Guard actually runs the country, and gets the official stamp of approval from the clerics whenever they need it. Remove the islamist elements, and not much changes.)

 

My core point is that I think the risks of Egypt going hardcore-islamist are distant, easily overwhelmed by the overall benefits of democratic reform.

[Calax]

http://kotaku.com/5747480/two-words-helpin...rnment/gallery/

[Wrath of Dagon]

, and islamists with legitimate parliamentary representation tend to be less ornery and violent than islamists being oppressed by a U.S.-backed dictator.

Really, you mean like the Iranians or Hizbollah that just took over Lebanon?

First, "tend to"

 

Second, it's tough to make that kind of comparison without getting into "what if" scenarios. Just how dangerous and violent would the Iranian mullahs and Hezbollah be as underground organizations? And how different would whatever other government in those countries be if these groups didn't have the influence that they do? (For example, I'd argue that current Iranian government is, in effect, a pretty secular oligarchy with islamist window-dressing-- the Revolutionary Guard actually runs the country, and gets the official stamp of approval from the clerics whenever they need it. Remove the islamist elements, and not much changes.)

 

My core point is that I think the risks of Egypt going hardcore-islamist are distant, easily overwhelmed by the overall benefits of democratic reform.

Iranian government is the most dangerous in the world (well China is a lot more powerful so I suppose that's arguable) and it is because of their Islamist ideology. It is far from secular. Also there is no such thing as an islamist democracy, islamism is anti-democratic at its core. After reading various sources the last few days, there's virtually no doubt the MB will a major part of any coalition government. The only question that remains is how much and for how long the army and the other factions will be willing and able to restrain them.

[Gorth]

My core point is that I think the risks of Egypt going hardcore-islamist are distant, easily overwhelmed by the overall benefits of democratic reform.

Isn't the entire point of the unrest and the frustration of the people, that they are fed up with "Old Men" regimes?

 

You can suppress people for only so long and then corruption and nepotism will eventually create popular uprisings. The worst thing that could happen in Egypt right now is probably that Mohamed ElBaradei got into a position of power, because frankly, he seems like an oportunist that just wants Mubaraks job.