If The Muslim Brotherhood Takes Over Egypt Should The US Cut Economic and Military Aid? (Iran, Iraq)
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.
"Brotherhood power in Egypt 'would be calamitous for U.S. security,' counters Council on Foreign Relations President Emeritus Leslie Gelb. 'What's more, their current defenders don't really argue that point, as much as they seem to dismiss it as not important or something we can live with. The MB supports Hamas and other terrorist groups, makes friendly noises to Iranian dictators and torturers, would be uncertain landlords of the critical Suez Canal, and opposes the Egyptian-Israeli agreement of 1979, widely regarded as the foundation of peace in the Mideast. Above all, the MB would endanger counterterrorism efforts in the region and worldwide. That is a very big deal.'"
"Women and religious minorities, including Coptic Christians, would be prohibited from holding positions of power. And the group's opposition to violence has its limits. Israeli intelligence sources say the Brotherhood has been funneling money and facilitating the covert flow weapons to Hamas in Gaza. One of its most influential theologians, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, has repeatedly sanctioned suicide bombings by Palestinians and by Iraqis fighting American soldiers."
Emerson (a well-known authority on Islamic extremism, which is why I looked to see what he had to say on this matter) says our annual economic and military aid to Egypt is over $1 billion. So, if the Muslim Brotherhood takes over in Egypt do we cut off the US funding?
We should but we won't. Obama has a compunction to favor and stand behind any muslim cause he can. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if he promised them more money. A bigger initial worry than the cash are the weapons we've supplied them.
Here's what I see happening- Obama will smooth the way for ElBaradei to take charge of an interim govt within the next few days with the promise of elections in the next six months. Though the crowd is not 100% behind the Brotherhood, they are the best organized and can draw in others from various countries and thus will essentially become the rulers in Egypt under a democratic vote. Sharia with it's already established laws will become the law of the land.
Egypt under the Brotherhood, probably before an election, will immediately open the border to supply Gaza with advanced weapons and there will be a threat that if Israel doesn't concede every bit of territory claimed for the Bedoins there that they will commence a full blown war involving most if not all of the islamic countries surrounding Israel. We will believe their claims of a peaceful settlement. A Palestinian state will be declared and recognized by the intl community and the UN. The very next day these countries will invade what is left of tiny Israel and destroy it as that has been their intended purpose all along. I don't see a reasonable outcome.
Here's a better question. Instead of phrasing it as "takes over," how about we substitute the phrase "is elected?" After all, the end of Mubarak is likely to lead to free elections and the Brotherhood has a more than fighting chance of winning.
If the Muslim Brotherhood is elected in Egypt, should the US cut economic and military aid?
Ah, what a conundrum! For years, American policy has been to foster democracy around the world and, during the Bush years, the so-called "Bush Doctrine" for fighting Jihadism was adopted. That took it one step further and presumed to CREATE democracies in certain countries in the sure belief that to do so would end the threat of violent Jihad.
But, something strange has happened on the road to peace and freedom. Any Arab country with free elections has voted in the political arm of radical terrorist groups or has began a decided shift toward Islamacism, at the expense of western-style secular democracy.
First, they freely elected Fatah, the political arm of the violent PLO, in the Palestinian state. Next, it was Hamas in Gaza. Then, Turkish elections handed power to the primary Islamic party and they've been shifting Turkey away from westernism ever since, trying to position themselves as the premier Islamic country in the region, in league with Iran. Next up was Lebanon, where Hizbollah won a huge percentage of seats in Parliament and just recently flexed that muscle to bring down the government and install themselves as the dominant power. Elections in Egypt, Tunisia, Yemen and, perhaps next, Jordan are likely to follow the same course.
So, what then Mr. and Mrs. America? We can't refuse to recognize that great American value of allowing The People to decide their own government and refuse to deal with that freely elected government, can we? How could we do that without giving the lie to our own Declaration of Independence? On the other hand, if we support the choices of the Arab and Muslim people, aren't we then aiding and abetting the enemies of not only us, but Israel too?
See? Rhetoric has meaning, and we're about to be trapped in a web of our own creation, one from which we will not be able to extricate ourselves.
When the country is in a financial stink, we shouldn't be giving foreign aid to anyone.
I agree we ned to pull all aide until out finances are in order
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.
