The killers have the swagger of gangsters. "We know," they seem to say, "that we are breaking all the basic standards of civilised behaviour. We know people will hate us until the day we die for what we have done today. But do you know what? We don't care."
August 18, 2013
"When a state massacres 600 demonstrators, it is not just its own citizens it murders."
"It also kills the possibility of compromise. The perpetrators mean you to understand that there can be no going back. When they kill, they are well aware that they are shedding too much blood for normal politics to kick in and allow differences to be patched up and deals made."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
28 comments:
It's now war, which has no ethics, compromise or noble beliefs. There are only winners and losers.
We claim to be a nation of laws, and one of our laws is to not support a military coup. I am against the Muslim Brotherhood, but a law must be upheld.
Tough call. On the one hand, I certainly don't think a regime should be shooting protestors, even people protesting in favor of low-lifes like the Muslim Brotherhood. On the other hand, I can't help but think that history might have gone a different way if Kerensky had shot some of the right people in 1917.
But Israel is not to be concerned with the murders of it's citizens, and make nice with their murderers.
And I notice how ALL the casualties are now among the "protesters", the dead police, the dead Copts, other citizens killed by the "protesters" are defamed by this article.
Are we talking about the security forces in Egypt, or about the law enforcement professionals in the United States?
The Egyptian military published a video showing MB protesters who were armed and firing on them.
The NPR guys were baffled this morning by what happened to the Arab Spring. The PR guys labeling of Murdering Muslim Jihadists who arose to murder the pro USA autocrats that had restrained them from murdering every Christian and secularist among them for 40 years was never a Spring of Democratic Hope except to the terminally stupid. It was a start of the jihadists slaughters that the current US President lusts for so that he can come in and negotiate a peace.
Thirty three years ago, the Egyptians under a former Egyptian Airforce commander named Mubarak acted to imprision and otherwise restrain the Muslin SOBs who machine gunned President Sadat for the crime of making peace with Israel.
Mubarak became too old and sick to continue, so the USA manipulated the Muslim SOBs back into power in a 51% vote and the SOBs then announced they would follow no Egyptian Courts constitutional law limitations that let the Christians and secularists live un murdered in Egypt.
So the Egyptians had to rise up and fight them again last week. And boy are Obama and his cohorts scrambling to restart the SOBs conquest of Egypt for Obama's best friend Iran and AlQaeda's benefit Go figure.
Saudi Arabia is not baffled and they are supporting the real Egyptians against the murdering Muslim SOBs 100%.
The "protesters" have killed many and have burned dozens of Christian churches. The absence of this information makes the article propaganda. Which is more important, rule of law and protection of liberty or democracy? This is the question posed by the "Arab Spring."
Moderation in war is madness.
The Egyptian military has a 60-year-record of being bad but not terrible. The MB had a terrible record in one year. The author claims that the MB was not the Nazi Party because it hadn't yet got rid of democracy or suppressed its opponents. I think the one year of MB was enough. The Egyptian military is preferable.
Says the guy who doesn't live in Egypt. Who didn't live under the MB. Whose 600 massacred demonstrators are squarely in the past.
When the Muslim Brotherhood massacres and rapes hundreds of innocent Christians, it is not just its own citizens it murders. It also kills the possibility of compromise. The perpetrators mean you to understand that there can be no going back. When they kill, they are well aware that they are shedding too much blood for normal politics to kick in and allow differences to be patched up and deals made. The killers have the swagger of gangsters. "We know," they seem to say, "that we are breaking all the basic standards of civilised behaviour. We know people will hate us until the day we die for what we have done today. But do you know what? We don't care.
There, fixed it for you.
"The absence of this information makes the article propaganda."
Of course it's propaganda — it's the Guardian. "The enemies of the West are my friends" and all that.
You see, they understand that first you win the war, then you can be nice. You can't win a war being nice. All that does is give evil a chance to win.
This is why war is a terrible thing, but the evil makes it necessary.
What could possibly be worse than the rule of the Shah of Iran?....Remember that meme. Saddam would never have declared war on the Shah. The Iran-Iraq war had casualties comparable to WWI in Europe.......There will be far more than six hundred deaths before this is over, but, however great the number, it will be magnitudes greater if the Muslim Brotherhood wins.
Perhaps these countries just cannot live and thrive in a democracy. Perhaps they did do better under secular kings, dictators and despots.
MB hasn't abolished Democracy as long as they won. Morsi has rewritten the Egyptian Constitution to suit the MB. His Egypt would be as democratic as Iran's. Only the MB approved candidates could run.
So Western leftists, stuff it. It's their country. Don't forget, it was after 17 million (?) people protesting against Morsi that the military stepped in to depose the Islamist dictator-wannabe who hijacked the Egyptian Arab Spring. Westerners cowered when the MB killed the people, but are so brave to speak up when the MB are killed.
Mubarak was vulnerable because the US has control of its purse string. But since Obama refused to pony up US money, the US has lost its leverage. The Egyptians are fighting for their lives, so Westerners shut up.
Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.
Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of that field, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.
We spent the first few decades fighting the British, The Barbary Pirates and consolidating ourselves. We didn't have time to work out the finer details.
Maybe this is what they're doing?
Morsi looked like he had it all in his grasp and moved too far too fast. He didn't play the long game.
I am rather puzzled by all this new-found admiration for "democracy" on the left and that it is being raised on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood, of all people.
There is something going on here; I do not know what it is yet, but all this propaganda does not smell right.
As usual, read The Belmont Club and the comments.
Everyone seems to believe that the Egyptian military will continue to favor the non-Islamists. Why? Why will the most influential in the military continue to support what is turning into a killing spree? Why do we even think we know who has influence? Who will actually be the future leaders of the Egyptian military. Who had heard of Nasser, before he took power?
Meanwhile, according to many reports, food supply is tight. How much disruption can the society stand before people begin to starve in large numbers?
Coup? What Coup?
(Paraphrase of President Obama, Secretary Kerry and various other dolts in Washington)
From Joshua Hersh, The New Yorker:
"Portrait of a Cairo Liberal as a Military Backer"
Link (copy and paste):
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/08/cairos-liberals-backing-the-military.html
- DEC (Jungle Trader)
Okay, I'll say it. If the "Palestinians" killed 600 Israelis, Al-Guardian would scarcely notice, or if it did, it would note it in a celebratory fashion ...
SJL wrote:
"We claim to be a nation of laws, and one of our laws is to not support a military coup. I am against the Muslim Brotherhood, but a law must be upheld."
"Are all the laws, but one, to go unexecuted, and the government itself go to pieces, lest that one be violated?"
IT was spoken in the context of the Civil war so not exactly applicable. But, if the Kurds for example staged a coup against Sadaam Hussein and succeeded in overthrowing him,we shouldn't support the Kurds?
When we passed the Iraq Liberation Act we were arming rebels who in effect we were expecting to overthrow the govt. But then we wouldn't support them if they carried out our wishes?
I agree that Mccain is right about Egypt and the coup and even the law. But there are plenty of instances in history where democracy was subverted by the very process that elected leaders? i.e. Hitler was democratically elected. How soon till he abandonded democratic principles. And we somehow would side with Hitler over those trying to over throw Hitler?
Good thing these sanctimonious morons weren't around for Gettysburg.
These demonstrators belong to the same group that is attacking Christians and burning churches in Egypt. If they were still in power, or if they ever regain power, the streets would still be flowing with blood, just not theirs. The Muslim Brotherhood are Islamists, not some group of non-violent Gandhis. They are not an endangered species to be coddled like spotted owls or snail darters. It may sound cold and heartless, but when bad people are killed, the world becomes a better place by their absence.
There is no compromise with Islamic Fundamentalists: either you are on their side, you are their slave, or you are an enemy to be defeated. The Muslim Brotherhood called the game, teh Egyptian military is simply responding in kind. The fact that they're better at it than the terrorist supporters is no crime.
The US can tolerate pro-Nazi "protesters". 1930s Germany would have done far better to machine-gun all of theirs. Happily, the Egyptian military appears to have learned that lesson.
Post a Comment