PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Egypt military coup and ongoing discussion
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> News
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4280
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevecook172001 wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:
I have to agree that such shenanigans are within the realm of possibility for the US based on history but the present administration appears to be incompetent in this as well as many other things.
And then there is the question of why would the US want to install an Egyptian government under their control anyway. There is no oil to gain from it and the US has no workable answers to the countries problems. Better to let the Islamist be in charge of the impending failure and take the blame.
The USA’s only real interest is seeing that the impending civil wars don't spill over into KSA and Israel.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Egypt


Quote:
Following the peace treaty with Israel, between 1979 and 2003, the US has provided Egypt with about $19 billion in military aid, making Egypt the second largest non-NATO recipient of US military aid after Israel. Also, Egypt received about $30 billion in economic aid within the same time frame. In 2009, the US provided a military assistance of US$ 1.3 billion (inflation adjusted US$ 1.39 billion in 2013), and an economic assistance of US$ 250 million (inflation adjusted US$ 267.5 million in 2013).[25] In 1989 both Egypt and Israel became a Major non-NATO ally of the United States.

Military cooperation between the US and Egypt is probably the strongest aspect of their strategic partnership. General Anthony Zinni, the former Commandant of the US Central Command (CENTCOM), once said, "Egypt is the most important country in my area of responsibility because of the access it gives me to the region." Egypt was also described during the Clinton Administration as the most prominent player in the Arab world and a key US ally in the Middle East. US military assistance to Egypt was considered part of the administration's strategy to maintaining continued availability of Persian Gulf energy resources and to secure the Suez Canal, which serves both as an important international oil route and as critical route for US warships transiting between the Mediterranean and either the Indian Ocean or the Persian Gulf.


Egypt has, at the least, remained neutral during the USA's middle eastern adventures and has, at the most, actively aided and abetted the Americans. Secondly, there is always the security of Suez to consider.


That's the way it was. That time has past. Today Egypt is just a hole into which you could pour food, money, and military aid in unlimited amounts and receive no benefit for your efforts.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5667
Location: UK

PostPosted: Sun Jul 07, 2013 7:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

vtsnowedin wrote:
stevecook172001 wrote:
vtsnowedin wrote:
I have to agree that such shenanigans are within the realm of possibility for the US based on history but the present administration appears to be incompetent in this as well as many other things.
And then there is the question of why would the US want to install an Egyptian government under their control anyway. There is no oil to gain from it and the US has no workable answers to the countries problems. Better to let the Islamist be in charge of the impending failure and take the blame.
The USA’s only real interest is seeing that the impending civil wars don't spill over into KSA and Israel.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_relations_of_Egypt


Quote:
Following the peace treaty with Israel, between 1979 and 2003, the US has provided Egypt with about $19 billion in military aid, making Egypt the second largest non-NATO recipient of US military aid after Israel. Also, Egypt received about $30 billion in economic aid within the same time frame. In 2009, the US provided a military assistance of US$ 1.3 billion (inflation adjusted US$ 1.39 billion in 2013), and an economic assistance of US$ 250 million (inflation adjusted US$ 267.5 million in 2013).[25] In 1989 both Egypt and Israel became a Major non-NATO ally of the United States.

Military cooperation between the US and Egypt is probably the strongest aspect of their strategic partnership. General Anthony Zinni, the former Commandant of the US Central Command (CENTCOM), once said, "Egypt is the most important country in my area of responsibility because of the access it gives me to the region." Egypt was also described during the Clinton Administration as the most prominent player in the Arab world and a key US ally in the Middle East. US military assistance to Egypt was considered part of the administration's strategy to maintaining continued availability of Persian Gulf energy resources and to secure the Suez Canal, which serves both as an important international oil route and as critical route for US warships transiting between the Mediterranean and either the Indian Ocean or the Persian Gulf.


Egypt has, at the least, remained neutral during the USA's middle eastern adventures and has, at the most, actively aided and abetted the Americans. Secondly, there is always the security of Suez to consider.


That's the way it was. That time has past. Today Egypt is just a hole into which you could pour food, money, and military aid in unlimited amounts and receive no benefit for your efforts.
I refer you to my earlier response to UE:

Although much reduced in recent decades, 8% of the global oil supply still comes through Suez. That, in itself, is still a significant percentage. However, the Hormuz Strait carries about 35% of global supply and, if that ever closed down due to a conflict with Iran, Suez would be absolutely critical to re-routing the oil and keeping the black stuff flowing.

It's still important.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4280
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 2:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevecook172001 wrote:
[Although much reduced in recent decades, 8% of the global oil supply still comes through Suez. That, in itself, is still a significant percentage. However, the Hormuz Strait carries about 35% of global supply and, if that ever closed down due to a conflict with Iran, Suez would be absolutely critical to re-routing the oil and keeping the black stuff flowing.

It's still important.

Important yes. but would any government or dictator be able to rule Egypt without the revenue from the Suez canal? I think not, so any disruption should be short lived.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5667
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vtsnowedin wrote:
stevecook172001 wrote:
[Although much reduced in recent decades, 8% of the global oil supply still comes through Suez. That, in itself, is still a significant percentage. However, the Hormuz Strait carries about 35% of global supply and, if that ever closed down due to a conflict with Iran, Suez would be absolutely critical to re-routing the oil and keeping the black stuff flowing.

It's still important.

Important yes. but would any government or dictator be able to rule Egypt without the revenue from the Suez canal? I think not, so any disruption should be short lived.
No, they would not be able to rule without that revenue. Which is why the US government has paid the Egyptian military junta many billions of dollars over several decades to ensure that they remain as rulers of that country, It is also why it is perfectly plausible to countenance the possibility of a dirty tricks campaign conducted by the Egyptian generals and in which the Americans were either directly or indirectly complicit to undermine and eventually topple Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood in order that the Egyptian people welcome back the military with open arms.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5667
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Last night, in Cairo, a massacre happened.

42 Morsi-supporting sit-in protesters were shot dead and an estimated 500 others were seriously wounded, mostly by shots to the head. This was not a dispersal of a protest. This was a deliberate massacre.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/07/20137821320932698.html
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4280
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="stevecook172001"][No, they would not be able to rule without that revenue. Which is why the US government has paid the Egyptian military junta many billions of dollars over several decades to ensure that they remain as rulers of that country, .....quote]
The two parts of that contradict each other. Wink You really have an anti American government bias that needs no facts to drive it.
America’s involvement in Egypt goes back to when the UK withdrew from the region after WW2 and includes the cold war times when Russia helped Nasser built the Aswan high dam. Domino theory and all that. Then there was the defense of the newly created Israel which has always had the support of the worlds largest voting block of Jewish people which live in the US and can and do swing elections. We have been paying the Egyptian military and the rulers of the country billions for years in fulfillment of our side of the bargain from the Camp David accords. Should we stop paying that tribute when rulers change? Should we support new leaders that want to cancel that treaty and go to war with Israel?
Just what is the wise and benevolent policy the US and Europe should adopt for Egypt that will lead them forward into a peaceful and prosperous future?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5667
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

[quote="vtsnowedin"]
stevecook172001 wrote:
[No, they would not be able to rule without that revenue. Which is why the US government has paid the Egyptian military junta many billions of dollars over several decades to ensure that they remain as rulers of that country, .....quote]
The two parts of that contradict each other. Wink You really have an anti American government bias that needs no facts to drive it.
America’s involvement in Egypt goes back to when the UK withdrew from the region after WW2 and includes the cold war times when Russia helped Nasser built the Aswan high dam. Domino theory and all that. Then there was the defense of the newly created Israel which has always had the support of the worlds largest voting block of Jewish people which live in the US and can and do swing elections. We have been paying the Egyptian military and the rulers of the country billions for years in fulfillment of our side of the bargain from the Camp David accords. Should we stop paying that tribute when rulers change? Should we support new leaders that want to cancel that treaty and go to war with Israel?
Just what is the wise and benevolent policy the US and Europe should adopt for Egypt that will lead them forward into a peaceful and prosperous future?
As long as the world is run by psychopaths and as long a we have a global economy fashioned in their image and as long as we consequently require the economic lifeblood of oil to fuel that economic system and as long as a large proportion of that oil lies in that part of the world, the people who were unfortunate enough to be born there are condemned to their particular version of hell.

It will end when the oil runs out.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
Lord Beria3



Joined: 25 Feb 2009
Posts: 4104
Location: Moscow Russia

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

stevecook172001 wrote:
Last night, in Cairo, a massacre happened.

42 Morsi-supporting sit-in protesters were shot dead and an estimated 500 others were seriously wounded, mostly by shots to the head. This was not a dispersal of a protest. This was a deliberate massacre.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/07/20137821320932698.html


Jesus you are naïve! Although the Army do have a record of violence, this idea that the Muslim Brotherhood are wonderful democrats is a load of bullshit. The Brothers have a history of terrorism, violence and maintain links with extremist networks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/10167263/Cairo-clashes-I-saw-both-sides-shooting-at-each-other-from-my-balcony.html

Quote:

The police and army threw tear gas. Then the pro-Morsi people threw stones. There were running battles, right below my window. They were totally wild clashes. We couldn't stay on the balcony because the tear gas was too strong, so only came out for a moment to look, then went back inside again. I cried a lot last night!

Through the clouds of tear gas I saw pro-Morsi people shooting at the troops from the roof of the mosque. I saw it with my own eyes.

The troops ran away, but then came back not long after, and they fired at the pro-Morsi people. I didn't see any plain-clothed people among the army or police; it was just them, firing on the pro-Morsi crowd.

Inside the mosque I could see a lot of people stuck, and hear the women screaming. This went on and on, backwards and forwards with battles until about 9am.

It ended when the army arrested a lot of people – a lot. Only men were arrested; not any of the women.

I heard that one soldier and two policemen were killed, but I have no idea if that's true.

I'm really surprised at this because it was supposed to be a safe protest. I've been to the protests outside the Ittihadiya Presidential Palace and they were totally peaceful. But perhaps that is because previously it was the people versus the Muslim Brotherhood; this was the army and police versus the Brotherhood.

Most of my neighbours do not support Morsi, although some do.

But I don't think this is the end of it.

We are seeing the price of not wanting Morsi any more. It's really shameful that innocent people are being driven onto the streets to die – driven by both sides."


The Brothers had following Hitler in adopted a 'legalistic' approach to gaining power (after failing through armed struggle) but once they got to power they would use every means to gain total control over the State.

Luckily the Army could see through their plans (I presume the security forces were spying on the Brothers and their secret plans) and removed them before the Brotherhood could do even more damage. Of course, the they are now fighting back but these fanatics MUST be crushed if Egypt has any future as a secular progressive nation which treats ALL its citizens equally.

Sadly, I suspect that the real lesson from this is that democracy doesn't actually work in the Arab world without property rights, a strong judiciary and a separation of religion and the state. Until those conditions are created, a secular strongman is the least bad option.
_________________
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Lord Beria3



Joined: 25 Feb 2009
Posts: 4104
Location: Moscow Russia

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course, as usual the mainstream media miss the main story... that is Egypt was within months of running out of money to pay for imports of oil and wheat - leading to a total state collapse.

The Army moved to prevent a total collapse of the economy and the inevitable bloodshed caused by the extremist and sectarian policies of the Brotherhood.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/MID-01-080713.html

Quote:
Media accounts ignored the big picture, and focused instead on the irrelevant figure of Mohamed al-Baradei, the Nobel Peace Prize winner whose appointment as prime minister in the interim government was first announced and then withdrawn on Saturday. It doesn't matter who sits in the Presidential Palace if the country runs out of bread. Tiny Qatar had already expended a third of its foreign exchange reserves during the past year in loans to Egypt, which may explain why the eccentric emir was replaced in late June by his son. Only Saudi Arabia with its $630 billion of cash reserves has the wherewithal to bridge Egypt's $20 billion a year cash gap. With the country's energy supplies nearly exhausted and just two months' supply of imported wheat on hand, the victor in Cairo will be the Saudi party.

_________________
Peace always has been and always will be an intermittent flash of light in a dark history of warfare, violence, and destruction
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5667
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lord Beria3 wrote:
stevecook172001 wrote:
Last night, in Cairo, a massacre happened.

42 Morsi-supporting sit-in protesters were shot dead and an estimated 500 others were seriously wounded, mostly by shots to the head. This was not a dispersal of a protest. This was a deliberate massacre.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2013/07/20137821320932698.html


Jesus you are naïve! Although the Army do have a record of violence, this idea that the Muslim Brotherhood are wonderful democrats is a load of bullshit. The Brothers have a history of terrorism, violence and maintain links with extremist networks.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/egypt/10167263/Cairo-clashes-I-saw-both-sides-shooting-at-each-other-from-my-balcony.html

Quote:

The police and army threw tear gas. Then the pro-Morsi people threw stones. There were running battles, right below my window. They were totally wild clashes. We couldn't stay on the balcony because the tear gas was too strong, so only came out for a moment to look, then went back inside again. I cried a lot last night!

Through the clouds of tear gas I saw pro-Morsi people shooting at the troops from the roof of the mosque. I saw it with my own eyes.

The troops ran away, but then came back not long after, and they fired at the pro-Morsi people. I didn't see any plain-clothed people among the army or police; it was just them, firing on the pro-Morsi crowd.

Inside the mosque I could see a lot of people stuck, and hear the women screaming. This went on and on, backwards and forwards with battles until about 9am.

It ended when the army arrested a lot of people – a lot. Only men were arrested; not any of the women.

I heard that one soldier and two policemen were killed, but I have no idea if that's true.

I'm really surprised at this because it was supposed to be a safe protest. I've been to the protests outside the Ittihadiya Presidential Palace and they were totally peaceful. But perhaps that is because previously it was the people versus the Muslim Brotherhood; this was the army and police versus the Brotherhood.

Most of my neighbours do not support Morsi, although some do.

But I don't think this is the end of it.

We are seeing the price of not wanting Morsi any more. It's really shameful that innocent people are being driven onto the streets to die – driven by both sides."


The Brothers had following Hitler in adopted a 'legalistic' approach to gaining power (after failing through armed struggle) but once they got to power they would use every means to gain total control over the State.

Luckily the Army could see through their plans (I presume the security forces were spying on the Brothers and their secret plans) and removed them before the Brotherhood could do even more damage. Of course, the they are now fighting back but these fanatics MUST be crushed if Egypt has any future as a secular progressive nation which treats ALL its citizens equally.

Sadly, I suspect that the real lesson from this is that democracy doesn't actually work in the Arab world without property rights, a strong judiciary and a separation of religion and the state. Until those conditions are created, a secular strongman is the least bad option.
I didn't say I liked the Muslim Brotherhood. I don't. Moreover, I detest all forms of radical religion, in particular, when it is mixed with politics. So, you can quit with the aunt sally bullshit. However, the reason the Muslim brotherhood were voted in last year is because they have been the sole effective welfare and health service for the poor of Egypt for the last several decades.

Whatever the faults of the brotherhood, and they are manifold and manifest, the real naivety is in idiot western liberals thinking that the Egyptian army generals were ever going to do anything other than violently return that country to pre-revolutionary business as usual since it's good for the yanks and it's good for the generals.

As for you, we both know you are no liberal. So, this faux display of liberal sensibilities is nothing more than a thin ruse to cover your true agenda.

So, whose shill are you then?


Last edited by Little John on Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:14 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
UndercoverElephant



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 8638
Location: south east England

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't know what happened last night in Cairo. I don't know who shot first. I also don't know anything about "secret plans".

What I do know is this: Islam (in its current form) and secular democracy are not compatible, even though it may look that way when Islam is not in overall control. I am not trying to justify the actions of the people who ordered this massacre (if that is what it was), but I have no doubt that the Muslim Brotherhood was in the process of consolidating power, and had no intention of relinquishing it. It suspect it was indeed an intentional massacre - or at least a very severe "over-reaction" to whatever provocation happened. It was done deliberately in order to intimidate the Islamists into submission.

I find it very difficult to take a moral side on this issue. I don't want to defend the massacre of peaceful protestors, but I despair at the way Islam continues to try to drag human civilisation back to the 7th century. What is worse - massacring a few tens of protestors or allowing Islamic extremists to determine the future of Egypt?

I hope that the motivation here is that by stamping down hard on pro-Islamic dissent at this point, much greater bloodshed further down the line can be avoided.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5667
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

UndercoverElephant wrote:
I don't know what happened last night in Cairo. I don't know who shot first. I also don't know anything about "secret plans".

What I do know is this: Islam (in its current form) and secular democracy are not compatible, even though it may look that way when Islam is not in overall control. I am not trying to justify the actions of the people who ordered this massacre (if that is what it was), but I have no doubt that the Muslim Brotherhood was in the process of consolidating power, and had no intention of relinquishing it. It suspect it was indeed an intentional massacre - or at least a very severe "over-reaction" to whatever provocation happened. It was done deliberately in order to intimidate the Islamists into submission.

I find it very difficult to take a moral side on this issue. I don't want to defend the massacre of peaceful protestors, but I despair at the way Islam continues to try to drag human civilisation back to the 7th century. What is worse - massacring a few tens of protestors or allowing Islamic extremists to determine the future of Egypt?

I hope that the motivation here is that by stamping down hard on pro-Islamic dissent at this point, much greater bloodshed further down the line can be avoided.
The motivation here of the billionaires (lets stop calling them generals and start calling them by their proper name) who sit atop the military junta of Egypt is to maintain their wealth and power. They gave up Mubarak in order to avoid a total collapse of their power base. Since then, they have simply bided their time and have now moved when the time was right or, at least, as right as it could be for them. There will be no democratic elections and this has got **** all to do with trying to maintain a secular and free Egypt. It is to do with maintaining power and wealth for the generals and maintaining a strategic interest for the Yanks.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
UndercoverElephant



Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 8638
Location: south east England

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You may well be right. I believe the military does not want to see the Islamists in control, but that doesn't mean they want freedom or aren't being motivated by greed.

Whatever is really going on, I can't see any happy ending for the Egyptian people.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Little John



Joined: 08 Mar 2008
Posts: 5667
Location: UK

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

UndercoverElephant wrote:
You may well be right. I believe the military does not want to see the Islamists in control, but that doesn't mean they want freedom or aren't being motivated by greed.

Whatever is really going on, I can't see any happy ending for the Egyptian people.
On that we can fully agree UE.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Yahoo Messenger
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4280
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:49 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Lord Beria3 wrote:
Of course, as usual the mainstream media miss the main story... that is Egypt was within months of running out of money to pay for imports of oil and wheat - leading to a total state collapse.

The Army moved to prevent a total collapse of the economy and the inevitable bloodshed caused by the extremist and sectarian policies of the Brotherhood.



Question! ? How does the army taking over improve the economic situation of the Egyptian people or the country as a whole?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> News All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 3 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group