Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wonder what the Egyptian women think of the Muslim Brotherhood or if anyone has asked them?
May I digress for a moment...
Did you know that under the Shah of Iran there was religious freedom for everyone and that when the Jews were escaping from the Nazis, Iran gave them Iranian travel papers?
I remember Iranian women walking around Iran in western type clothes under the Shah in the 1970s before the Ayatollah Khomeni came to power.
"The Pahlavi Shahs were the rulers of Iran between 1925 and 1979 and they introduced many reforms concerning women's rights. Women's involvement in society in general increased. Iranian women increasingly participated in the economy, the educations sector and in the workforce. Levels of literacy were also improved. Examples of women's involvement: women acquired high official positions, such as ministers, artists, judges, scientists, athletes, etc. Under Reza Shah's successor Mohammad Reza Shah many more significant reforms were introduced. For example in 1963, the Shah granted female suffrage and soon after women were elected to the Majlis (the parliament) and the upper house, and appointed as judges and ministers in the cabinet.'.[39] In 1967 Iranian family law was also reformed which improved the position of women in Iranian society. It was included in the civil code and was designed to protect wives, children and female divorcees. The general thrust of the reforms were to promote equality between men and women in society."
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
For starters, they weren't calling for democracy to begin with--we just went over there and went after Saddam on the context that we were sure he had weapons of mass destruction that he was going to use against us. We argued that we were going to free the Iraqi people from a dictator and put democracy in ourselves. It hasn't gone well. People don't like to be told what to do, or have foreign governments coming in to run their country.
Egypt has a groundswell of popular support for a democratic government. I don't think we should walk in there and run the show, but if they're asking for our help (or the UN's) to help make sure this doesn't fall apart, I think it's absolutely legit to help. The difference is going in and telling them what to do, vs. going in to mediate if we're asked.
Help HOW? Financially? Militarily?
Iraqis may not have been calling for democracy but they certainly took to the polls with enthusiasm, it still had no benefit to the US. Why should we, a country with more than enough domestic problems of our own to solve, get involved establishing a democracy that may well lead to an Anti-US theocracy?
1) You obviously don't have a clue where I stand politically
2) you didn't even read my post
Had you read my post, you will note the last sentence.
My question is why does actual policy centers suggest the Muslim Brotherhood is far more moderate than is presented in the press and media.
By the way, the first link was from an Israeli citizen now in the US suggesting that the Muslim Brotherhood is no Al Qaeda. So if an Israeli with family in Israel feels this way, why on earth are you so afraid?
Because I've read and heard the views of the MB.... their own words.
And why exactly does it seem the media and this administration have something vested in this government overthrow? They practically pushed and cheered it on. Yet they did nothing of the sort when Iranians protested. I am willing to bet they will be hypocrites again should Iranians try the same thing that just happened in Egypt.
Did you know that under the Shah of Iran there was religious freedom for everyone and that when the Jews were escaping from the Nazis, Iran gave them Iranian travel papers?
I remember Iranian women walking around Iran in western type clothes under the Shah in the 1970s before the Ayatollah Khomeni came to power...
There were two versions of the Shahs, in case you don't know it. One who ceased to exist and promote that progressive society in 1953 coup. The other, who became a puppet of the British and American corporate structure.
Had the original Shah remained in place, I doubt Khumeini would have been successful in making the majority religion a huge part of his movement... which basically guaranteed him the victory. If anything, many still haven't learned from the Iran debacle.
As for the Egyptian women, what is going to change? Fortunately, literacy has made its way in Egypt, with nearly 60% of women being classified as such.
Iraqis may not have been calling for democracy but they certainly took to the polls with enthusiasm, it still had no benefit to the US. Why should we, a country with more than enough domestic problems of our own to solve, get involved establishing a democracy that may well lead to an Anti-US theocracy?
How did so many of you propose we intervene to keep Mubarak in power?
I think it depends on what they need. It may mean UN peace keepers, but it's up to them, and it might not be necessary. I think our ace in this process is the close relationship that our military has to the Egyptian one--we've trained a good number of their leaders, and they have personal relationships with ours. If they want advice and support from us, it can be done as friends and allies.
As far as moving toward a theocracy, Egypt is a much more secular society than most of the middle east, and about the only way it looks like a radical could take power is if there's a leadership vacuum in the pro-democracy movement that lets them step in to take power--that's why there has to be a stable transition. Will they elect a small proportion of radical kooks if they have democratic elections? Probably. We do that in this country. It works as long as they're not the majority.
Unless we are just lying about our support of a Democratic Republic in Egypt we will just have to put up with whatever happens when the Egyptians can vote for a real government. If we are lying we can continue to support any and all thieving dictatorships the promise stability (stability to continue to keep the population broke and subservient) at the cost of real political freedom and egalitarian economic growth.
I would rather deal with the Muslim Brotherhood than the criminals running most of the Middle East.
The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in the 1930's as an ally to Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany. The leader at the time was made a general in the SS. Giving them any credibility is the same as negotiating with Adolf Hitler.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
How did so many of you propose we intervene to keep Mubarak in power?
Ya got me, I never proposed we intervene at all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
I think it depends on what they need. It may mean UN peace keepers, but it's up to them, and it might not be necessary. I think our ace in this process is the close relationship that our military has to the Egyptian one--we've trained a good number of their leaders, and they have personal relationships with ours. If they want advice and support from us, it can be done as friends and allies.
And if we end up aiding in the replacement of a Batista with a Castro we will accomplish what? Either way the people had the short end of the stick.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mb1547
As far as moving toward a theocracy, Egypt is a much more secular society than most of the middle east, and about the only way it looks like a radical could take power is if there's a leadership vacuum in the pro-democracy movement that lets them step in to take power--that's why there has to be a stable transition. Will they elect a small proportion of radical kooks if they have democratic elections? Probably. We do that in this country. It works as long as they're not the majority.
Iraq under Saddam was was a more secular society than much of the middle east. Now? Who knows? I just see nothing to indicate our expenditure of blood & $$$ was worth it.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinm
The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in the 1930's as an ally to Adolf Hitler and Nazi Germany. The leader at the time was made a general in the SS. Giving them any credibility is the same as negotiating with Adolf Hitler.
The US allied with Stalin in that era, does that make negotuating with the US the same as negotiating with that murderous pig?
The US allied with Stalin in that era, does that make negotuating with the US the same as negotiating with that murderous pig?
Stalin had the ability to keep rolling across Europe and taking what he wanted. We HAD to negotiate with him at the time. He is gone. The Muslim Brotherhood still exists.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
