So tell us again how the Arab Spring was Democracy in Action.

[GostHacked]

I can see that, but Peeves made the point. If they want to be able to protest and toss out corrupt governments, why wouldn't they want the power to vote them out ?

There is no vote to oust them. Revolutions are needed to take down dictators. Ever try voting down a dictator? Morsi is doing what Mubarak did and give himself sweeping powers, no vote, no ballot. no checks, no balances. The Egyptians in a sense, democratically voted in the Muslim Brotherhood, but now Morsi is taking advantage of that and giving himself more powers.

How do you expect a democracy when whoever gets in power turns to a dictator soon after? The Egyptians definitely want a democracy, they want their voice heard. But they are not getting it. So they are taking to the streets for a second time.

[Boges]

There is no vote to oust them. Revolutions are needed to take down dictators. Ever try voting down a dictator? Morsi is doing what Mubarak did and give himself sweeping powers, no vote, no ballot. no checks, no balances. The Egyptians in a sense, democratically voted in the Muslim Brotherhood, but now Morsi is taking advantage of that and giving himself more powers.

How do you expect a democracy when whoever gets in power turns to a dictator soon after? The Egyptians definitely want a democracy, they want their voice heard. But they are not getting it. So they are taking to the streets for a second time.

Yeah the Muslim Brotherhood spitting in the face of democracy once elected is the least surprising thing ever. It's not like it's happened everywhere else in the Muslim world, oh wait it is!

[GostHacked]

Yeah the Muslim Brotherhood spitting in the face of democracy once elected is the least surprising thing ever. It's not like it's happened everywhere else in the Muslim world, oh wait it is!

And yet we also help take out a guy like Gaddafi who actually tried to do a lot of good for his people. Libya was stable before NATO went and f'ked it up. But now that they have a central bank tied into the rest of the worlds central banks they can be lent money at a high interest in order to rebuild a country in which NATO helped to destroy. The loans are designed so that the country will never get out of debt.

[Boges]

And yet we also help take out a guy like Gaddafi who actually tried to do a lot of good for his people. Libya was stable before NATO went and f'ked it up. But now that they have a central bank tied into the rest of the worlds central banks they can be lent money at a high interest in order to rebuild a country in which NATO helped to destroy. The loans are designed so that the country will never get out of debt.

I think taking out Gaddafi was more to do with the fact he was slaughtering civilians and rebels. Which makes me wonder why the West isn't acting against Syria, I guess there benefits to the West are far more negligible. Doesn't most of Europe gets its oil from Libya?

[GostHacked]

I think taking out Gaddafi was more to do with the fact he was slaughtering civilians and rebels. Which makes me wonder why the West isn't acting against Syria, I guess there benefits to the West are far more negligible. Doesn't most of Europe gets its oil from Libya?

Italy gets oil from Libya. Also NATO killed more people with the bombing runs than Gaddafi had ever done. Such a brutal dictator would not have built an aquifer system like Libya has. They were the top in literacy, standard of living and education in Africa. You tell me if that is 'killing it's civilians'. And I already established in other threads that Gaddafi was taken out by western back rebels that had elements of Al-queda among them. You know the same people that seemed to have killed Stevens in Benghazi.

Because if you believe Gaddafi was a brutal dictator, then you will believe that the Benghazi attack was all spontaneous and based on a movie released on the Internet months before.

Libya was also about to introduce a new oil trading market for Africa using the gold Dinar as a standard.This kicks out the need to use the petrodollar and the need to invest in US currency in order to trail oil on the global market. But we can believe that Gaddafi was killing civilians since it makes people feel better about the justification of destroying a country.

And the difference here is that Syria has big backers and a decent size military, .Libya did not.

[Boges]

Kay, this is about Egypt though. Are you saying the West should remove Morsi just to be consistent with their treatment of Libya?

Edited November 28, 2012 by Boges

[GostHacked]

No, that was merely to point out that what we are being told about this is not 100% accurate or based on reality.

The whole Arab spring, to me was a coordinated effort by outside influences in order to bring this change about. Because if you understand that the reasons for change in Libya are not what the officials claim it as, then I also call into question the methods and reasons in how Mubarak was taken out. This change is not coming from within. True change will come from within.Continuous meddling in these countries by foreign entities only spells more problems down the road.

[Boges]

So you're saying Western influences forced those people to protest in that square for days on end? Or Extremist muslim influences? as the obvious alternative to a strongman dictator appears to be a Muslim fundamentalist. As has happened in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya. Is fundamentalist Islam behind the Syria insurrection.

Edited November 28, 2012 by Boges

[bleeding heart]

I for one never thought any uprising in any Muslim country (other than the minor kerfufle in Iran) was about democracy. They are unlikely to get what we consider democracy. What they wanted was a say in government and human rights.

looks like that's becoming unlikely. Still, the uprisings aren't over yet, nor the blood shed.

????

The protests agaisnt Morsi are premised on the fact that he's betrayed the revolution for democracy.

That democratic revolutions sometimes fail does not impugn the motives of those who fight for it. Obviously.

Edited November 28, 2012 by bleeding heart

[Boges]

????

The protests agaisnt Morsi are premised on the fact that he's betrayed the revolution for democracy.

That democratic revolutions sometimes fail does not impugn the motives of those who fight for it. Obviously.

If that was the case, then why did they vote for the Muslim Brotherhood?

[bleeding heart]

If that was the case, then why did they vote for the Muslim Brotherhood?

Because they took the Brotherhood at its word...abotu democratic reform. Obviously.

Hell, if I were an Egyptian, I woulda voted for one of the lefties...the very ones most outraged by the leader's power-grab; the very ones most concerned about religious conservatives' relationship to democracy in the region. But the voters chose otherwise.

Edited November 28, 2012 by bleeding heart

[Shady]

The so-called Arab Spring is/was the left's wet dream.

[Boges]

Because they took the Brotherhood at its word...abotu democratic reform. Obviously.

Hell, if I were an Egyptian, I woulda voted for one of the lefties...the very ones most outraged by the leader's power-grab; the very ones most concerned about religious conservatives' relationship to democracy in the region. But the voters chose otherwise.

As a lay person, here in Canada, even I could have predicted they were lying about that.

[BubberMiley]

The so-called Arab Spring is/was the left's wet dream.

That doesn't even make any sense.

[Boges]

In this part of the world people are either run by a Strongman Dictator or a Religious Leader, or in Iran's case both. I haven't seen an example of where a secular pluralistic democratically elected leader has received legitimate power.

[DogOnPorch]

Because they took the Brotherhood at its word...abotu democratic reform. Obviously.

These folks have NEVER tasted democracy but they want it? These folks have been living with the MB all their lives and were unaware they were anti-democracy? You can't seriously believe that, bh.

[DogOnPorch]

As a lay person, here in Canada, even I could have predicted they were lying about that.

Yup.

[jbg]

The so-called Arab Spring is/was the left's wet dream.

That doesn't even make any sense.

It makes all the sense in the world. Similar to the way the French Revolution is romanticized by the Left but the American Revolution (too calm and too establishment and freedom oriented) is not. Edited November 28, 2012 by jbg

[DogOnPorch]

It makes all the sense int he world. Similar to the way the French Revolution is romanticized by the Left but the American Revolution (too calm and too establishment and freedom oriented) is not.

Yeah...still waiting for a musical on the Revolutionary War. Nathan Hale starring Nathan Lane?

[bleeding heart]

As a lay person, here in Canada, even I could have predicted they were lying about that.

Well, sure...I have voted many times, and not once did I intentionally vote for Canada to support the overthrow of democratically-elected governments (Haiti) or for de facto support for mass-murdering state terrorism (Indonesia).

But by your calculations, all of us not only should have known we were being lied to about our (bipartisan) government's intentions.(which is probably true enough)...but also that no Canadian voter actually believes in democracy, since we have in effect voted to demolish it eslewhere.

That is, i think you're holding the Egyptians to a far higher standard than you're holding Canadians. I can't say I know quite why.

[bleeding heart]

These folks have NEVER tasted democracy but they want it? These folks have been living with the MB all their lives and were unaware they were anti-democracy? You can't seriously believe that, bh.

The current demonstrations are precisely because of the Brotherhood's anti-democratic behaviour.

On that note, have you ever voted for the Liberals or the Conservatives, federally?

Because if you have, do you not think you should have known that both parties are explicitly guilty of subverting democratic will elsewhere?

While they don't announce it, it's certainly no secret, and is uncontroversially the case; which begs your own question: you have been living with these parties in power all your life...so do you really expect us to believe you didn't know they were anti-democratic when it suits them?

Edited November 28, 2012 by bleeding heart

[Boges]

Egypt has the right to elect whoever they want. But I find it more than amusing they act shocked when they elect a party, or a group of people if you may, that has no history of being inclusive or pluralistic, when he doesn't act inclusive or pluralistic.

It would be akin to the NDP pledging to cutting taxes to get elected and when they get elected they end up actually raising taxes. Who would be surprised by that considering their record?

I don't have the informed opinion of the Egyptian electorate to know why they elected Morsi. I'm not sure if they would prefer to be ruled by Islamofascists over a Stongman propped up by the West, or if they actually believed Morsi's bunk. Either way it's a sad state they've find themselves in by electing the Muslim Brotherhood.

Edited November 28, 2012 by Boges

[bleeding heart]

Egypt has the right to elect whoever they want. But I find it more than amusing they act shocked when they elect a party, or a group of people if you may, that has no history of being inclusive or pluralistic, when he doesn't act inclusive or pluralistic.

Again: are you shocked when Canada supports the overthrow of an elected leader in favour of a non-elected one...or when it supports terrorist regimes over the regime"s victims?

If you are shocked, then why are you asking about the Egyptians a question that applies to yourself? And if you're not shocked, then the whole discussion is kinda pointless, isn't it?

[Boges]

How often does that happen? Cite examples of Canada or even NATO getting rid of a legit elected leader since perhaps in 1970's Iran. Ghadafi wasn't elected was he?

No one is saying Morsi should be overthrown .

[bleeding heart]

How often does that happen? Cite examples of Canada or even NATO getting rid of a legit elected leader since perhaps in 1970's Iran. Ghadafi wasn't elected was he?

Aristide, Haiti, 2004. Canada, the US, and France.