-
Updated: NBC News: Holder Personally Approved Fox Reporter Warrant
May 24, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Obamacare is a Big and Growing Problem for Democrats
May 24, 2013 | 4 comments
-
Dismantling Networks, Preventing Footholds
May 23, 2013 | 3 comments
-
I Agree With Andy McCarthy: No Special Counsel
May 23, 2013 | 5 comments
-
Issa Recovers
May 22, 2013 | 4 comments
The Spectacle Blog
With protests (to put it mildly) from Tunisia to Egypt to Yemen, the Arab world is in turmoil. From the point of view of those who support a widening of democracy and freedom, the outcomes could range from disastrous (creating the next Afghanistan or Lebanon) to the tolerable (creating a relatively stable but essentially dictatorial situation, as Egypt has been), to something as close to good as you tend to see in that region (perhaps Jordan.)
[By the way, perhaps the most explicit recent demonstration and reminder of the risks which havens for Islamism pose to humanity is this news story, which I can barely read, much less watch any video of.]
Before getting to the events on the ground in North Africa and Yemen, it’s worth noting the reaction in U.S. markets: The dollar is up sharply against the Euro and the British Pound, which is a common occurrence as people flock to the much-maligned “safe haven” of the USD during times of uncertainty. While a strong dollar normally means weak commodity prices, we’re instead seeing gold up more than $20, or almost 7 percent, with silver also up more than 2 percent.
Most importantly, oil is up big, with March (the “front month”) futures up $3. Of note is the fact that May (the third month) is up about 80 cents less than March, much more than the usual difference between the moves in those months and implying a substantial fear of short-term disruption in oil supplies. The only way that makes sense is if traders fear — as I do — that the next place for an uprising is in Saudi Arabia. The market is accelerating downwards, with the S&P 500 down more than 1.7 percent, or 23 points, and the CBOE’s volatility index (VIX) up by more than 3 points, the biggest jump in months, showing increased fear of continued market declines.
In the meantime, despite the Egyptian government shutting down Internet and cell phone services, protests (or perhaps organized insurrection) are in full force in Cairo.
The dynamics in that large country are very interesting. The government’s response has not been as brutal as one might expect, despite the gripping footage coming from Egypt.
It’s interesting to read a comment attributed to someone from President Hosni Mubarak’s ruling party that the government might need to respond with, among other things, “more freedoms.”
On the other hand, it’s frightening to see images of protesters stopping in the street to pray. It gives an indication of one likely outcome of successful protests: the installation of an Islamic or at least more-Islamic-than-now government.
Current reports such as this one from CNBC earlier indicate that the Muslim Brotherhood is influencing the protests: “The early cheers were mostly against Mubarak. But as the clashes got more intense, the protests took on a more Islamic flavor. There were more shouts of “Allahu Akbar”…” Make no mistake, this is very bad news and is exactly the opening that Islamists are hoping to exploit.
Prior to these protests, it seemed that Hosni Mubarak’s son, Gamal, was a likely successor. This article by NPR discusses Gamal’s chances and his chief rival as well as the Madame DeFarge-like impact of the wives of of the presidents of Egypt and Tunisia.
Meanwhile, Mohammed ElBaradei, former head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, the group that so spectacularly failed to understand or deal with Iran’s nuclear plans has returned to his home country of Egypt, offering to head a resistance movement. While some cynicism regarding political opportunism is warranted, at the end of the day this is a guy well-steeped in Western traditions, operations, and values. A government including or run by him is perhaps the best currently visible outcome, even if no particular outcome is actually probable at this time. Perhaps not surprisingly, al Jazeera has published an article critical of ElBaradei as an elitist opportunist, but it lays out the issues for and against him within Egypt quite well.
Given the news of the Islamic turn in the tone of the protests, we should probably hope that ElBaradei has success in organizing a pro-democracy movement — and that he does a better job in Egypt than he did at IAEA.
In Yemen, street protesters are calling for the removal of that nation’s president/dictator who has been in power for 32 years. We’ve all heard the stories of Yemen as the base of operations for Al Qaeda in Yemen and the American-born terrorist “imam” (again, a great reason to hope for the extinction of Islamism over time) Anwar al-Awliki. A NY Times story from just a week ago describes Yemen has having sentenced al-Awliki in absentia for murder, but the chances of their bringing him to justice don’t seem much higher than the chances of Pakistan bringing in Osama bin Laden or Ayman al Zawahiri.
If the Yemeni government falls, there is real risk of the nation becoming even more lawless and a petri dish for terrorists. It’s particularly true in a nation as poor as Yemen, with one news story saying “With one-third of Yemen’s 23 million people living and suffering from chronic hunger and soaring unemployment, and almost half of the population living on less than $2 a day, the population is struggling, according to the United Nations Development Program.” While it’s nice to think that anti-corruption forces would appeal to the rational mind of the population, rich westerners should not overestimate the amount that the desperately poor spend thinking about politics. They’re too busy just trying to survive, and probably have religion as a substantial force in their day-to-day lives. Therefore, it’s more likely that “populist” Islamic forces would have an upper hand than that any push for good government would gain a strong footing. I hope I’m wrong.
Tunisia has perhaps the best chance of a decent outcome, having been a less Islamic nation for many years. The protests, which reportedly started when a would-be street vendor lit himself on fire after being denied a permit to sell vegetables, have resulted in nearly 100 deaths, according to recent reports. This discussion by a Tunisian writer frames the situation well, and begs the critical question for all the current protests as well as potential future protests which much have leaders across the Arab world — not least in Saudi Arabia — scared to death:
Are these truly — as they appear to be at first glance — popular uprisings against corruption and in search of freedom and democracy? Or are the protesters witting or unwitting tools of Islamists who want to turn more of the Middle East into safe havens for their own purposes?
Only time will tell, but perhaps sooner than many people think. Until the meantime, we’re witnessing events which, unlike many world happenings, are utterly outside any possible control or even substantial influence by the US or the western world. We’re watching history in the making and watching time when many in the Arab world must make a decision which will impact the direction of their nations for generations to come. Will they support relative freedom — leading to relative prosperity, or will they be co-opted by forces of primitive backwardness and tyranny?
Perhaps above all, even though it’s not in the news yet, the world should keep its eye on the streets of Riyadh. If an insurrection contagion spreads to the world’s largest oil supplier, the economic and market impacts, in addition to the geopolitical ramifications for Iran and Iraq, could be extremely damaging.
View all comments (37) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Ross Kaminsky
http://spectator.org/blog/2011/01/28/the-arab-uprising
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
JmsA| 1.28.11 @ 5:33PM
Mubarak just asked his government to resign.
Floyd Looney| 1.28.11 @ 6:13PM
Iran might be fomenting this behind the scenes. Apparently the protests are erupting in Albania now.
Nick| 1.28.11 @ 6:50PM
Clearly these violent protests were fomented by the violent, divisive, extreme rhetoric used by Sarah Palin, the T.E.A. party, and Michele Bachmann.
Oh....yeah....and Mrs. Palin's target map too!
Dixie Pixie| 1.28.11 @ 8:35PM
Greetings Nick
You are a little early for the "Assignment Of Blame" part of the MSM cycle.
This is the MSM part where the Righteous Underdog Protesters march to overthrow the Corrupt American Controlled Evil Old Regime.
Next comes the MSM assignment of the Holy and Glorious New Leadership to lead the impoverished People to Freedom.
Don't worry the MSM will get around to blaming the TEA Party for instigating the Arab Uprisings in due time.
Nick| 1.28.11 @ 11:37PM
And salutations to you, Dixie Pixie.
You are waaaayyyy behind the times. That is sooooo Twenty Aughts. It's the second decade of the new millenium, for crying out loud. Trade in your horse and buggy already!
As the recent atrocity in Tucson showed us, it is never too early to put the blame of every bad event on the conservative right.
You are right, though, the MSM will follow the same template they followed 30 years ago with Iran and the Ayatollah. That was when they thought Khomeini was going to be a communist sympathizer.
Today, they would settle for the Moslem equivalent of Jimmah Carter, to take over Egypt.
Nick| 1.28.11 @ 11:40PM
Ha-ha!
I just read your comment, below.
I guess great minds think alike!
Dixie Pixie| 1.29.11 @ 12:15AM
Greetings Nick
It is good to hear from you again.
I am glad to bring some humor to these dark and troubled times.
I am honored you enjoyed my little jest.
Yes Great Minds do think alike.
After all it is not like we have never seen this show before.
These are the first acts of a well-worn Liberal Play.
Personally I would like to see a happy ending this time.
But I am not optimistic.
Hopefully you can come up with a better jest.
I await your reply.
Occam's Tool| 1.28.11 @ 6:56PM
This is why Israel finds it hard to negotiate with Arab countries---they are evil dictatorships whose word is worthless. Only Tim* likes them.
Clint| 1.28.11 @ 11:30PM
United States National Interests Trump All Those Sand Monkey Foreign Nations' Agendas And Yours Too Slandering Lyin' Creepy Twerp Tool Job.
Now Go It Tell it to Israel, Israel Firster Tool Job.
"Nine years after 9/11 sent US-Saudi relations crashing to a low point, bilateral ties have made a complete 180-degree turnaround with the Obama administration's plan to sell up to $60 billion worth of advanced aircraft to Saudi Arabia.
By the end of President Bush's term, Lippman says Riyadh became cozier with Washington, and Bush had softened his stance. In 2008, Bush visited Riyadh twice and also gave details of the aircraft sale that is now nearing completion. Then as now, arming Saudi Arabia was seen as a way to counter Iran.
Israeli concerns about the newest deal have been reportedly calmed by assurances that the jets will lack long-range weapons systems and be of a lower grade than those sold to Israel. Defense Minister Ehud Barak has reportedly discussed the deal with US officials and a US Defense Department official told Reuters that Israel is "fairly comfortable" with it overall. As an editorial in The Jerusalem Post recently highlighted, "If the US does not sell to the Gulf states, EU countries or even Russia, which are much less receptive to Israeli interests, might fill the vacuum."
Washington, Tel Aviv, and Riyadh today all share concerns about Tehran possessing a nuclear weapon. "In contrast [to the 1980s], today, the US, Israel and the Saudis are on the same page as far as Iran is concerned," The Jerusalem Post editorial declared. Lippman, in a 2008 policy brief for the Middle East Institute, argued that Riyadh would feel compelled to build or acquire its own nuclear arsenal in the case of Tehran going nuclear."
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.29.11 @ 9:45AM
Doctor,
Don't berate Clint. He just has a cloudy understanding of history.
Back during WWII, one of our great Generals called Great Briton "Our unsinkable aircraft carrier" in range of the NAZIS. Today, Israel is that aircraft carrier in the middle of the Muslim world.
Israel may be our "aircraft carrier" in the middle of what looks to be a Sharia caliphate forming from the Atlantic Ocean, (across North Africa), to the Indian Ocean.
Second, Israel has proven to be our very best intelligence gathering source in that part of the world. The value of that intelligence/espionage is literally priceless. (Think stux-net worm).
Third, the Suez canal may be now compromised, increasing oil prices to western Europe beyond repair.
Fourth, the caliphate cannot hope to engage the "Great Satan" until it has crushed the "Little Satan", (Israel).
We would be fools to not support and defend such a crucial strategic ally.
Clint| 1.29.11 @ 10:26AM
Oh Really Kenny,
Tell us about Israeli Spies Ben Ami Kadish & Johnny Pollard, who had the same Israeli Handler out of The Israeli Consulate in NYC.Then tell us about Illegal Israeli Sales of United States' Weapon Technology to The Red Chinese, jeopardizing our allies Taiwan & Japan.
The U.S. has intelligence operations and liaison arrangements throughout The Middle East.
Thom| 1.29.11 @ 2:43PM
Clint,
The US has intelligence operations and liaison arrangements throughout the world mostly based on satellite and signal intercept technology that does work as well as 6 million people living in the Middle East with a common goal of survival as a motivation. To us at this point at least it is just a business decision we make to be lightly engaged while for others with a proven track record it is a matter of life and death on a grand scale. You may not like that such a tiny nation of a mere 6 million souls can be competitive with our capabilities on some levels but note on 9/11 the Arabs came here to kill 3000 of us not the Israelis. It is us being subjected to soft porn abuses by our government and physically sexually assaulted not the Israelis in their country by their government. The Israelis have decades of proven track record on handling this matter that a nation of 306,000,000 can’t seem to grasp. Perhaps that’s because they can’t afford to not be serious people while we as a people are still just talk about being serious. Give them their due Clint, pound for pound they’ve earned the respect you can’t seem to honor. If you have Intel CPUs in our computer equipment, thank the Israelis. That’s where much of Intel’s design work comes from for the latest stuff. Most Israelis live with purpose because it is not optional as it is here (currently). I prefer AMDs and much of their support comes from the Arab world these days but I give credit where credit is due.
Ben Ami Kadish & Johnny Pollard got caught because the Israelis depend on HUINT while we put most of our intelligence efforts into satellite imagery and signal intel. Hard to catch a satellite or stop signals from escaping a country but as history has shown the most decisive and damning intel work has always come from HUINT inside the target country. Did Johnny Walker work for the Israelis there Clint? I could name a handful more of “loyal” red blooded Americans that did great damage to this nation and worked for people dedicated to trying to kill us on many levels. Only a fool thinks that every nation does not spy on every other one, including so called Allies.
Thom| 1.29.11 @ 3:20PM
"that does not work as well "
Clint| 1.29.11 @ 8:24PM
Israeli Spies Ben Ami Kadish & Johnny Pollard got caught spying on The U.S. That's the point Israel Firster Thom.
Now, tell us all about The Illegal Israeli Sales Of U.S. Weapons Technology to The Red Chinese, jeopardizing Our Allies Taiwan & Japan.
Then tell us about The Israeli Company Checkpoint's Sourcefire Deal getting scotched by C.F.I.U.S. just like Dubai Ports.
Thom| 1.29.11 @ 12:30PM
Ken,
That “unsinkable aircraft carrier” concept is at the heart of our forward deployed basing concept and why we maintain “bases” in foreign countries despite the ignorant crowds’ belief that we have forces in Europe, Japan, South Korea and alike to protect those places. As a rule we don’t and since the ignorant crowd can’t fathom that the US Air Force has no meaningful conventional tactical capability outside the continental US and its territories (like Guam), that leaves just the 9 deployable Carrier Battle Groups to project power much beyond a few hundred miles from the continental US and territories.
The current Secretary of Defense has become one of the leading cheer leaders of the ignorant crowd since he thinks we have carrier battle groups to defeat our enemies’ carry battle groups. Given our Navy hasn’t had to face an enemy carrier battle group since 1944 and we deployed half our carrier battle groups to Korea, Vietnam, the first Gulf War and the last one it stands to reason that as things unravel in the Middle Kingdom, we are going to both see increased use of our sinkable carriers which are the only sovereign territory outside the continental US and our territory that we don’t have to ask foreign government’s permission to use for basing the primary force projection power we have (air power) and likely some shifts in our forces among all these bases some think we don’t need in Europe and Western Pacific.
You are right; Israel is one of those unsinkable bases and has been for decades. I don’t expect those ignorant of history to understand this. They are doomed by their own ignorance of how the world really works. Anyone that actually studies history and warfare in particular would already understand that the US can’t defend itself and our vital national interest from 3 miles off the coast. We’ve been a worldwide commerce trading people since before the Revolution and even Jefferson understood that external threats thousands of miles away in the early 1800s can have local impact if left to their own devices. We could see the beginning of some pretty nasty changes in the Middle Kingdom and our own Prince of Darkness is probably happy to see part of the world burn just because. He likes anarchy just like the Joker.
Clint| 1.29.11 @ 1:18PM
"In addition to Camp Arifjan, U.S. military facilities in Kuwait include Camps Buehring and Virginia, Kuwait Naval Base, Ali Al Salem Air Base, and Udairi Range, a training facility near the Iraqi border. The U.S. military’s work is also supported by a Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) distribution center in Kuwait, located not on a U.S. base but in the Mina Abdulla industrial zone about 30 miles south of Kuwait City.
The U.S. military also operates and utilizes bases and other facilities in the nearby Persian Gulf nations of Qatar, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, and Oman.
From 2001 to 2010, the U.S. military spent about $32 million on construction projects in Oman. In September, the Army upped the ante by awarding an $8.6 million contract to refurbish the Royal Air Force of Oman’s air field at Thumrait Air Base.
U.S. efforts in Bahrain are on a grander scale. This year, the U.S. Navy broke ground on a mega-construction project to develop 70 acres of waterfront at the port at Mina Salman. Scheduled for completion in 2015, the complex is slated to include new port facilities, barracks for troops, administrative buildings, a dining facility, and a recreation center, among other amenities, with a price tag of $580 million.
There are similar expenditures in neighboring Qatar. In 1996, lacking an air force of its own, Qatar still built Al Udeid Air Base at a cost of more than $1 billion with the goal of attracting the U.S. military. It succeeded. In September 2001, U.S. aircraft began to operate out of the facility. By 2002, the U.S. had tanks, armored vehicles, dozens of warehouses, communications and computing equipment, and thousands of troops at and around Al Udeid. In 2003, the U.S. moved its major regional combat air operations center out of Saudi Arabia and into neighboring Qatar where the government was ready to spend almost $400 million on that high-tech command complex.
From then on, Al Udeid Air Base has served as a major command and logistics hub for U.S. regional operations including its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. Last year, the Pentagon awarded a $52 million contract to further upgrade its airfield capabilities, a $44 million deal to upgrade other facilities there, and a $6 million contract for expanded warehousing capacity. Nor does the building boom there show any signs of abating. A report by the Congressional Research Service issued earlier this year noted:
“The Obama administration requested $60 million in FY2010 military construction funds for further upgrades to U.S. military facilities in Qatar as part of an ongoing expansion and modernization program that has been underway since 2003 at a cost of over $200 million. The administration’s FY2011 military construction request for Qatar is $64.3 million.”
Thom| 1.29.11 @ 3:57PM
All the modern port and military installations we used in the Gulf in 1990 were paid for by our Oil purchases prior to that time. We’ve been building up facilities in the Gulf, outside the Gulf and at Diego Garcia for decades. The facilities in Israel are already compatible with our stuff. Our vital national interest lies in not letting 40% of the world’s petroleum supplies be disrupted throwing the world into an instant economic crisis the likes of our Depression on steroids. That will remain true even if we didn’t get a drop of oil from the Gulf and we don’t get much now.
Ken (Old Texican)| 1.29.11 @ 4:14PM
Thom,
welcome to the conversations. It is delightful to read someone who has a grasp of realities.
We have several day to day name-callers here and a whole BUNCH of trolls. I never waste my time with them, but instead speak to ears that can hear...here...heh.
Clint| 1.29.11 @ 7:13PM
What's your point,Sport ?
We have bases all over The Middle East, just as I pointed out.
We don't need to stage anything out of Israel.
"Jordan was officially designated a combat zone for U.S. personnel on Sep. 19, 2001 and the country has not only provided "secret" basing of U.S. military and intelligence collection personnel, but also was a key anchor of U.S. western Iraqi operations to overthrow Saddam Hussein. This era of modern U.S.-Jordanian military relations goes back to March 1995, when almost 1,200 personnel and 34 American F-15s and F-16s set up camp at two airbases -- Shaheed Mwaffaq airbase (Muaffaq-as Salti) and H-5 (Prince Hassan) -- near Azraq for almost three months, partly to enforce the Iraqi southern no fly zone.
These bases eventually became part of the secret network of U.S. facilities in the Gulf region, and as the 2003 Iraq war neared, U.S., British and Australian special operations forces and intelligence operatives flooded into the country. On Jan. 30, 2003, Jordan granted blanket overflight rights, facilitating aircraft carrier strikes on Iraq from the eastern Mediterranean.
By the eve of the 2003 war, Florida national guardsmen were protecting U.S. bases and supporting special operations efforts at the Iraqi border, communicators of the Rhode Island air national guard had deployed to Jordan to enlarge the infrastructure, five U.S. Patriot missile fire units set up around the Jordanian capital, and Army intelligence aerial surveillance planes were flying along the Iraqi border. By the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom, over 5,000 U.S. and coalition troops were stationed in the country operating Joint Task Force-West under Maj. Gen. Jonathan S. Gration. The UK deployed Harrier Jump jets to support SAS operations in Western Iraq, and Australia deployed helicopters of its 5th Aviation Regiment. "
Nick| 1.29.11 @ 8:04PM
Thom,
I understand the unsinkable aircraft carrier concept, I think.
After WWII, with all the devastating D-Day landings in the Pacific and European theaters, and with the advent of nuclear weapons, no one wanted to mount large scale amphibious landings, if they didn't have to. Better to have established bases from which to launch attacks. They also served as a deterrent to the Soviets, especially in Western Europe. Have I got this right?
But, as Operation Desert Shield/Storm proved, after WWII, the neighbors of aggressor nations are more than willing to let foreign troops use their soil as staging areas to defeat an aggressor.
WWII also showed that even though we had bases all over the Pacific, a powerful and determined enemy can overrun these outposts. Especially when you have a president and congress that slashed the military to the bone, as FDR and the democrats did in the '30s.
I guess this is my question: Is it worth the expense to have these bases all over the world, in terms of deterrent value, as well as their ability to project U.S. power when needed.
The cynic in me says that all of these bases are pushed by defense contractors, and all the other contractors that provide logistical support, and their cronies in the Pentagon, who retire and then serve on their boards of directors, to keep the contracts rolling in.
It may sound strange for a conservative to sound conspiratorial, a la the "military-industrial complex," but I have a healthy suspicion of government, even the military. Probably because I was in the Army, West Germany and Desert Storm ('88-'92.) I saw many abuses of taxpayer money, probably even committed some myself, if you count the times I went on sick-call when I was hungover!
It just seems to me that since the fall of the Soviet Union, the need for all these bases is a little suspect. I'm willing to change my mind if presented with the information. You appear to know much on this subject, so any light you can shed would be much appreciated. Thanks!
Chuck| 1.28.11 @ 7:50PM
Just like Sputnik what happened in Tunisia has shocked the world. The last Arab country one would think a revolution would occur has sparked a total transformation of the Middle East and then the world. The Arabs will unite and the revolutionary spirit will sweep the globe including the US. Standby for unprecedented hyperinflation, currency, economic and government collapse like dominoes.
wukong| 1.28.11 @ 11:45PM
"The Arabs will unite"
What are your smoking?
Dixie Pixie| 1.28.11 @ 8:19PM
Welcome to the rerun of Carter and the Shah of Iran show.
Tonight’s play will star the Wahhabi " Muslim Brotherhood" as the Ayatollah Khomeini.
Yes, those playful psychopaths who created Al Qaeda, Taliban and hundreds more Wahhabi front groups are back in the central role of destroyer of lives and nations.
M.H. Mubarak will be playing the part of the Shah and understudy Hillary will play the part of Jimmy Carter.
Obama willing gave up the role as it's his teleprompters night off.
More to come after a brief message from tonight's sponsors the Saudi Wahhabis.
Wayne | 1.29.11 @ 12:02AM
I see the risk, but I see it as an event whose time has come. The people all over the world are fed up with being ruled period. We now have the internet, instant access to anybody all over the world and have more in common with each other than the people who claim to be our bosses.
All Obama needs to do is welcome the new Democratic Spirit of Egypt as a sign of the maturing of the world and he would have them cheering Obama and he would be their hero. But how can he when he is so busy kow-towing to dictators everywhere.
We Can NOT keep Al Queda in check by supporting tyrants and dictators. It has failed as a policy. We can not fight over 1 billion Muslims. We must instead see them as humans who want to direct their own lifes.
Wayne | 1.29.11 @ 12:02AM
I see the risk, but I see it as an event whose time has come. The people all over the world are fed up with being ruled period. We now have the internet, instant access to anybody all over the world and have more in common with each other than the people who claim to be our bosses.
All Obama needs to do is welcome the new Democratic Spirit of Egypt as a sign of the maturing of the world and he would have them cheering Obama and he would be their hero. But how can he when he is so busy kow-towing to dictators everywhere.
We Can NOT keep Al Queda in check by supporting tyrants and dictators. It has failed as a policy. We can not fight over 1 billion Muslims. We must instead see them as humans who want to direct their own lifes.
Thom| 1.29.11 @ 3:39PM
"We can not fight over 1 billion Muslims."
Yes we can if we must. Those 1.5 billion Muslims are spread across the globe in dozens of different countries none of whom have an industrial base to produce the weapons the able bodied among them would need to conduct a sustained armed conflict against us. The Japanese wiped up the ground with over 10 million dead Chinese and would have continued to do so if we hadn't drawn off the bulk of their forces in 1942. How many times more populous was China than Japan in 1936?
You might be afraid or piss in your blanket thinking of having the Muslins of the world unit but those of use with a historical perspective before our birth year have a little insight you don’t seem to have.