It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jordan's powerful Muslim [Brotherhood] opposition warns that Arabs will topple US-allied Mideast le

page: 8
20
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 05:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by notsoperfect
reply to post by bigyin
 


It is a very simplistic view to say that the US is in the Middle East only for oil.


Sometimes the simple answer is the right one.


The US is in the Middle East to contain and manage the Islamic influence in the surrounding global strategic points including the Suez Canal


The united States has zero interest in Islamic influence one way or another. We're buddies with both the secular Turks and the Fundie Wahhabist Saudis. We sold arms both to the Fascist secular Saddam and the Revolutionary Shia Ayatollah.

The US has an interest in the Strait of Hormuz and the Suez canal because those are the two chokepoints that are between the oil of Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, and the west.


as well as to protect Israel from their aggression.


That's the boyscout answer. The US would ditch Israel the exact moment a better option shows up. The reason we keep our ties with Israel is because everyone else over there sees us (often rightly) as an enemy. if tomorrow Jordan or Bahrain or Oman or Egypt were to open their arms to the United States, Israel would get dumped like a bad habit - which it sort of is. Israel is simply the best option out of a bag of terrible options for us.


No one in the free world wants the Islamic power to overflow out of the Middle East. First of all, it is against the Vatican's vital interest. And the US happens to be the military super power that the Vatican needs to protect its own interest. What better excuse is there to make the US military to stay in the region than the "oil"?


The Vatican. Really.


The fallacy of this is in the fact that the US has more than enough oil for themselves in Alaska for the next 200 years of supply.


Quite untrue. That's industry propaganda; whenever Shell, or ExxonMobil wants to drill, they always claim that the result will be neverending oil forever and ever.
edit on 31-1-2011 by TheWalkingFox because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 05:32 PM
link   
reply to post by boroboy
 


"When there was rioting in Iran by the people for more democracy he never said a word,you never heard him tell the mullahs to step down"

Thats because it would have made the situation worse instead of better.

The only defence the regime claimed was that the demonstrations were all stirred up by the west (UK and USA in particular). Not true of course but credible sounding to the large section of the Iranian population that haven't forgiven the US and UK for our previous 100 years of self interested meddling. We have no credibility at all.

The more overt support the US/UK tried to give the more it would undermine the protestors. Yes, we are regarded that badly.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 


Although it seems illogical, the temple mount in Israel is going to be the center of the secular world government of the future(ruled by the second coming Christ) world, at least according to the belief system of the core of the Vatican members, and the Vatican is the de facto owner of the Federal Reserve of the US. If the Vatican sneezes, the US gets a flu. So, you see there is a fundamental illogic on top of every nonsenses going on in the world. But then, that is what is written in the Bible, so go figure.

And now you can see why Israel is at the center of the geographical significance, not the people. Vatican would care the least of the people of Israel.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by notsoperfect
 

One piece of land...three religions battling for it as mortal enemies while pretending to coexist and cooperate...well, for the most part. You're right. This isn't about religion at all. Not even close. Some days I almost wish terrible things.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by nightbringr
They are using the what started as a populist uprising and putting their own stamp on it. What if the military decided to back them? With them in charge, they could violently suppress the uprising and install themselves into power.


I'd say their chances are more along this line: If Mubarak is successful in getting the military to crack down hard and the bodies pile up in their thousands over the course of a week, it will be the fanatics that will continue to resist. They will be the only ones left carrying the banner of revolution when the dictator finally falls because the secular bunch will be hiding... bankers, lawyers, and shopkeepers will back out as quickly as they can leaving those, like the Brotherhood, in the vanguard.

When Mubarak leaves, the military will be left either to form their own government OR unite with the Brotherhood to bring peace back onto the streets. That's what happened in Iran and why the mullahs are so powerful there. The Egyptians will be trading a police state for the pleasure of prostrating before radical Islam.

Let's hope it doesn't go that way because 75% of the population would rather avoid the Brotherhood's ideology.


Would Obama and the French go in to put them down? Hard to say.


True. It would come down to control of the Suez Canal. That's the key.


I think the people the most worried about all these development would be the Jews in Israel. Wouldnt wanna be living there is Eqypt does go hardline Islamic.


Hamas and the Islamic Brotherhood - two peas from the same pod. Not a good scene for Israel for sure. Let's hope it doesn't happen.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 07:19 PM
link   
reply to post by notsoperfect
 


What I'm seeing is that someone should up the lithium dosage, actually. You're admitting that everything you say is poor logic, while arguing that this lack of logic is what makes your position logical.



posted on Jan, 31 2011 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Please don't group the whole of Egypt with with the Muslam Brotherhood and really look into a topic before you spout off your biases. A good friend of mine whom is Egyptian, says the MBH will not be in charge because they are not popular in Egypt. However I don't blame you for your bias since our western media spins every little thing to get us to hate them and most likely hate them enough so wo go into another future war. This time, if we do go to war it will be a World War.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by MMPI2
reply to post by mayabong
 

uh...yeah. thank you for the update, captain obvious.

We're still waiting on the solid references that indicate the money the egyptians receive through USAID go to the police and the military.



At the very least we know who supplies the Egyptian military and police with crowd control devices:





posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 01:37 AM
link   
reply to post by MMPI2
 


You are all missing the point. This isn't a "Muslim" thing, it's an oppression thing.

Sure, they complain that the tear gas cannisters being lobbed at the protesters are made in the US.

Sure, they dislike that we have been paying more than $1,000,000,000,000.00 per year to Mubarak, propping up his regime for the last 30 years - all while 40% of Egyptians live below or near the poverty line and unemployment is much higher than even here.

Wow, we have tons of unemployment, yet we are sending 50% of our Federal budget on two wars that are pissing people in Iraq and Afghanistan off, we are sending money to dictators in Egypt and Yemen (can't spend it on schools or hospitals). And even though we send so much money to those nations, the regular people don't seem to be doing so well.

I suggest getting more perspectives than the unison of voices in the MSM.

Democracynow.org may be left-leaning, but they actually have news for 1/2 an hour. News being, here is the "who, what, where, when, why and how"...Not "I think that..." or "There are those who say..."

They actually have someone on the ground there. He self proclaims that his uncle is tied with the Muslim Brotherhood, but that the Muslim Brotherhood is not the main voice. He said that when the Muslim Brotherhood chanted "Alahu Akhbar", the rest of the protesters chanted louder

"Muslims, Christians, we are all Egyptians"

Women are participating in this protest. It's about dictatorship. They're not going to stop being Muslim just because it makes some of "us" uncomfortable. No one's talking about Tunis...in Tunis the rule was "no headscarfs for women" (according to an NPR guest tonight on "This is the story". Just because people want to have their traditions, who are we to say that it threatens us.

Do you live over there?

Do I?

They do.

Maybe it's time that our attentions be focused inward a bit on this great, free society of ours. It looks like it could use a little.


EDIT: I would also add that wasn't it back around Coptic Christmas (after the Western Christmas, if I'm not mistaken) that there was some violence and a bombing of a church? I think I recall that Muslims were coming to the aid of and defending the Christian minority where violence was occurring.

I wonder how all that has factored into the unity in this movement in Egypt...

edit on 1-2-2011 by Sphota because: explained in text



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 01:44 AM
link   
reply to post by FredT
 


Syria is playing a double game to both the USA and Iran. Don't think Syria is immune for one moment; they're not.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 02:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by masqua

Let's hope it doesn't go that way because 75% of the population would rather avoid the Brotherhood's ideology.


True, so then we can easily assume that the other 25% is not formed by the Muslim Brotherhood. Hardcore Democrats and Republicans in this country ebb and flow, but we could not assume that roughly 50% of the nation is one or the other.

I've heard people say that they are not as big as they are being made out to be. ElBeradei (Sp?) was interviewed on Fareed Zakariah's show on CNN. ElBeradei is the former head of the IAEA. He dissociated the Iranians from the Muslim Brotherhood. While he has been supported by the Muslim Brotherhood, I don't think it was mentioned that he asked for their support.

Another reporter said that there is also a Marxist group in Egypt, but that any opposition group is relative small in number because of the dictatorship, whether they be leftist or right-leaning.

Clearly, as armchair philosophers, none of us can predict the future. But, as I have found at least two sources in English (I have no idea how to say it in Arabic) that the crowds are screaming the loudest "Muslims, Christians, we are all Egyptians", I can assume that radical Islam is not a threat (backing up your stat that 75% of them do not want it as their law of the land).



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Mind you they could be another 'Taliban' or something. "Fighting against the Imperialist US" for the "elite" like Bin Laden.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 03:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Kratos40
 


We'll... We're screwed...



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Kratos40
 


Yeah. Most of us already know this, but in case you're interested...Who Profited From Arming Egypt?.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

And again, it's none of our business. Unless you're a corporation standing to lose billions

backatchya. In fact .. double it ...
It very much IS our business.

You don't understand basic economics ... if the middle east goes up in a flash of war, our ENTIRE economy will be effected in a VERY bad way. EVERYONE will suffer. EVERYONE. The entire planet. Not 'just' corporations. The corporations take big hits; so people become unemployed; so business' fail; so no one buys anything; so those other business' fail; so banks go under; so more people are out of work; so even less gets purchased; so the few left working now lose those jobs too; etc etc Corporations fail so old people living on pensions go without income - they go hungry and they go cold in the winter from lack of money. Costs of medical care go through the roof .. or we let the old people die. Without money the USA won't be giving aid anywhere. People who were helped through aid will not get it. More starvation and disease around the planet ...


Sounds like we may be on the edge of a monetary system collapse ... oh wait, we have been for some time now!

Yes, it is going to get ugly, but is there any other choice? Those that have financial wealth will not give it up or even share it equitably, so the only way to 'reset' this out of control, screwed up, social system based on finance, is to let it collapse first.

By the way, people may be starving because of lack of access to funds, but at the core, it's a direct consequence of our global economic system.

Bring it on, the sooner the better.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by MMPI2
I'm thinking that people in those countries need to pray to their god that they keep themselves in the good graces of the United States.

the last thing they need to do now is start poking at the "great satan".


Like Satan can afford anymore wars against even more populous, bigger and hotter members of the enemy B teams, lol I love your hubris.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:31 AM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


If it's what those people think is the right way to govern their countries it's up to them, I disagree but I'm not prepared to spend any money or effort stopping their quest for self determination.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by MMPI2

Originally posted by mayabong
reply to post by MMPI2
 


www.reuters.com...

I think with the made in USA teargas and bullets fired by police you can figure out the rest.
edit on 30-1-2011 by mayabong because: (no reason given)


anti-american hyperbole from a hackneyed, bought-and-paid for "wire service" is not proof.

it is more akin to propaganda.

try again.



Reuters= anti "American" 2nd laugh of the day off you, cheers mate,



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Quetzalcoatl12
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Please don't group the whole of Egypt with with the Muslam Brotherhood and really look into a topic before you spout off your biases. A good friend of mine whom is Egyptian, says the MBH will not be in charge because they are not popular in Egypt. However I don't blame you for your bias since our western media spins every little thing to get us to hate them and most likely hate them enough so wo go into another future war. This time, if we do go to war it will be a World War.


Looks like its a done deal to me - of course the MB is going to take over, they are organised, ruthless and prepared for this - all this 'democratisation' activism is just a smokescreen organised by Sorros.


Gamal Nasser, a spokesman for the Brotherhood, told DPA that his group was in talks with Mohammed ElBaradei - the former UN nuclear watchdog chief - to form a national unity government without the National Democratic Party of Mubarak. The group is also demanding an end to the draconian Emergency Laws, which grant police wide-ranging powers The laws have been used often to arrest and harass the Islamist group.



posted on Feb, 1 2011 @ 05:25 AM
link   
If you speak with Tunisians you will rapidly see that the women have fluctuated between wearing Burkhas and wearing western clothing. It is therefore clear to me that the social identity is fluid. At this moment the young are pro-western and are the vanguard. However the dying regime was also prowest hence there is a certain reactionary mandate to become anti western. Not from political or religious ideology but simple human nature.

I do not think it is a done deal. Obama's swift sending of an envoy may assist the western interests as he will be seen to have eased the transition in government.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 5  6  7    9 >>

log in

join