It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Egypt: The distance between enthusiasm and reality

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:46 PM
Here's the deal. Mubarak wanted his own son, who has no military experience, to succeed him. The military objected. That's what has been going on for about the last year, an argument over the succession plan. Now "the people" have "risen up" so Mubarak said he would not run again and expected to step down in September, when the Egyptian constitution dictates. Instead "the people" preferred a military coup, so that's what they got. In a recent report by Stratfor this issue is explored in depth:

What we see is that while Mubarak is gone, the military regime in which he served has dramatically increased its power. This isn’t incompatible with democratic reform. Organizing elections, political parties and candidates is not something that can be done quickly. If the military is sincere in its intentions, it will have to do these things. The problem is that if the military is insincere it will do exactly the same things. Six months is a long time, passions can subside and promises can be forgotten.

One thing I noticed both in the MSM and here is that "million" protested. That's not really true. Stratfior addresses that, too:

Certainly, there was a large crowd concentrated in a square in Cairo, and there were demonstrations in other cities. But the crowd was limited. It never got to be more than 300,000 people or so in Tahrir Square, and while that’s a lot of people, it is nothing like the crowds that turned out during the 1989 risings in Eastern Europe or the 1979 revolution in Iran. Those were massive social convulsions in which millions came out onto the streets. The crowd in Cairo never swelled to the point that it involved a substantial portion of the city.

The The entire report is here.

I was just in Egypt a couple of months ago. I wouldn't say it is as prosperous as a place like Jordan, but is also not destitute either. The recession has hit Egypt. There are lots of resorts in the Sinai that are half built and have been abandoned. But there has been no Great Reason to cause a rebellion. In my view, the Egyptian military needed to stage a coup, so they encouraged "the people" to demonstrate. The military did not interfere with the small number who did and looked good on camera, so the military then had a reason to intervene.

Mubarak is out and, more importantly, so is his son. The military remains in power, as it has been since 1952. It remains to be seen what happens next, of course, but so far, nothing has really changed.

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 02:58 PM
The test will likely be when September rolls around and if they have truly open elections. That is not much time for multiple Parties to form and build a base.

Will the Military bow to Civilian Authority and answer to elected officials? It seems to me this is just starting and any outcome is possible depending on who controls the flow of information to the People of Egypt. For the People of Egypt to get what they want, the military must be brought under Civilian control.

They also have the issue of having to develop a new media, free of control by the government or the military. It's critical they have a Free Press and Free Speech for anything good to come from this. Ironically we now have Clinton out arguing for universal Internet Standards and censorship to limit speech. It would seem the control freaks from the Progressives side have their eyes set on controlling affairs in Egypt and other countries in the Middle East.

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 03:41 PM
reply to post by schuyler

Boy, you're just chasing your own ass for any and every opportunity to discredit and denigrate the Egyptians, aren't you? Every post, you change your conspiracy a little more, but it's always the same tune.

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:20 PM
reply to post by schuyler

"Mubarak is out and, more importantly, so is his son. The military remains in power, as it has been since 1952. It remains to be seen what happens next, of course, but so far, nothing has really changed."

Hi Schuyler!

It's been a while, my friend!

Here's my take on Egypt..

Mubarak is gone and his son won't take power. The military is still fully in power and will be for at least the immediate future. Actually the military has been the main power structure since back in the 60's 70's and 80's so not a lot has changed.

The military is responsible for the recent change in power, forcing Mubarek out, however, the demonstrations were simply the justification for the military to push Mubarek out.

The military has pledged to have elections, establish political parties quickly, however this will be difficult to accomplish.

The demonstrators were a few thousand, what the 80 million Egyptians actually wanted or would vote for is another thing! People are happy now but there is much to come.

Actually, not much has changed, the military is still in power as they have been, they have made promises which they are unlikely to fulfill in a timely manner.

We need to watch this situation closely!

posted on Feb, 15 2011 @ 10:38 PM
IMO they should not have been content with the military coup, the Egyptian military has extremely close ties to America and Israel and i personally think over the coming months this will fizzle down as backroom deals are made and once again the status quo is upheld, but not in such a blatant manner...but i hope the Muslim Brotherhood gains most support in all this and in the future elections.
edit on 15-2-2011 by Solomons because: (no reason given)


log in