• IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here.

    The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.

Obama is eating Egyptian Mutabak! When is he ordering Singaporean Prata?

obama.bin.laden

Alfrescian
Loyal
Joined
Nov 3, 2008
Messages
1,583
Points
48
http://www.nationalpost.com/news/world/talks+Mubarak+quit+immediately/4221602/story.html

U.S. in talks for Mubarak to quit immediately

Chris Hondros / Getty Images
4223752.bin

A wounded anti-government protester is carried off after being struck by a rock during clashes with pro-government supporters near a highway overpass on the edge of Tahrir Square the afternoon of February 3, 2011 in Cairo, Egypt
TwitterLinkedInDiggBuzzEmail
Sheldon Alberts, Postmedia News · Friday, Feb. 4, 2011

Just before Barack Obama spoke to Americans Tuesday night about the crisis in Egypt, veteran CNN political sage David Gergen issued a prescient warning to the U.S. President.

"I'm not sure what he can do to help in this situation," Mr. Gergen said. He was right.

Less than 12 hours after Mr. Obama announced Hosni Mubarak "recognizes" the need for dramatic change, the Egyptian President's supporters unleashed a wave of violence. The tumult and thuggery not only exposed the tactics Mr. Mubarak, 82, will use to maintain control, they have also shown the limits of U.S. power over an ally once considered its strongest in the Arab world.

"American influence over Mubarak is very weak at this point," said Clifford May, president of the Washington-based Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

"The results to date have been insufficient, to say the least."

Now, the White House is scrambling to tap more reliable contacts in the Egyptian power structure, particularly the military.

According to The New York Times the Obama administration is discussing with Egyptian officials a proposal for Mr. Mubarak to resign immediately, turning over power to a transitional government headed by Vice-President Omar Suleiman with the support of the Egyptian military.

The Times, relying on Obama administration officials and Arab diplomats, said even though Mr. Mubarak has balked at leaving officials from both governments are continuing talks about a plan in which, Mr. Suleiman, backed by Sami Enan, chief of the Egyptian armed forces, and Field Marshal Mohamed Tantawi, the Defence Minister, would immediately begin a process of constitutional reform.

The proposal also calls for the transitional government to invite members from a broad range of opposition groups, including the banned Muslim Brotherhood, to begin work to open up the country's electoral system.

Meanwhile, an element of mystery continues to surround Mr. Obama's 30-minute conversation with Mr. Mubarak after he pledged to step down following presidential elections in September.

Egyptian officials have left no doubt Mr. Mubarak was offended.

"The administration is trying to say that the transition mechanism, or process, needs to begin now -- not that Mubarak needs to be gone tomorrow morning," said Chester Crocker, a professor of strategic studies at Georgetown University and a former assistant U.S. secretary of state for African affairs.

"That may not be what Mubarak read into it."

There is no clear indication how the Egyptian military will respond to U.S. entreaties to act responsibly.

It has been the greatest beneficiary of U.S. largesse, receiving the lion's share of the yearly US$2-billion in U.S. foreign aid since 1979.

Mr. Obama made a point in his speech of praising the army's "patriotism" for showing restraint in the face of peaceful protest, only to see that morph into seeming indifference as camel-riding goons charged anti-Mubarak protesters in Cairo's Tahrir Square.

"My feeling also is that after all we have invested in Egypt, our influence over other officers -- in the military -- should be strong and needs to be exercised," Mr. May said.

"The U.S. needs now to say, 'You have a very important mission, and that is to keep order, to prevent anarchy, to prevent chaos, to safeguard the lives of the protesters and other Egyptians.' "

From the start of the crisis, foreign policy experts of all stripes have sympathized with Mr. Obama's predicament.

The long-time support of Mr. Mubarak has alienated anti-government protesters who see Mr. Obama's failure to demand the dictator's immediate resignation as a betrayal.

But the U.S. President risks alarming other Arab and Middle East allies -- who are worried about stability in their own countries -- if he pushes too hard for Mr. Mubarak's departure, Prof. Crocker said.

"I give [the administration] very high marks for trying to walk a very fine, difficult line," he said.

"It is not just with Egypt. It is with the Saudis, the Lebanese, Jordanians, Israelis."

He says the protests are a sign of how fractured the Egyptian power structure has become.

"I think what we are seeing is not a direct measure of American influence, but the not-surprising divisions within some of those institutions in Egypt. It is a test of strength of this point. It is like a turf war," he said.

Postmedia News
 
no protest, no death, no violent, why would obama intervent?
 
no protest, no death, no violent, why would obama intervent?

Yr logic is wrong.;)

The world had seen many protests and deaths and violence and US kept quite, Sudan Somalia Nepal & even Myanmar when monks marched. USA is a chicken.

Why they will appear to be intervening is actually a very simple logic, they will pretend to be doing it when they found out that power change already become inevitable - e.g. during Suharto's fall. They do it for several purposes:

1. To create false impression that the USA was powerful that under their intervention 3rd world regimes changed hands.

2. They hurry in to buy some friendship with the new regime by doing some redundant assistance.

3. The US need to stay on the GOOD side of the books of new 3rd world powers.

4. When there are several possible alternative powers that could replace a falling regime, the USA will then try to see if they can help the one faction that is most friendly with Washington to gain power. But they will do that if the cost is not too high to Washington.

When change is into the hands of those hostile against USA they will wash hands and run ASAP. USA is a lame bullshit, they will not want lose their lives and limbs and look for only very cheapo wins.
 
Back
Top