The Arab Spring

Mubarak is 82. Just, someone, put a pillow on the bastard's face as he sleeps and end it.

We appear to be heading to a Spanish Civil War scenario. Except I do not hear of any considerable faction of the civilian population being on the side of the dictatorship. Perhaps more like a Spanish Second Republic? This government should go easily: even if the army splits, no popular support means no future for the loyalists. However, depending on how the new governments behave and if the army paralels any polarization in the populations, a civil war could be an option in the middle future. Maybe half a decade? However, the array of possibilities is so large right now, making any predictions becomes a matter of In Spite of a Nail.

edited 29th Jan '11 5:42:31 PM by Ardiente

A bit of awesomeness on the news today: Americans around the nation are joining in the protests as a show of solidarity for Egyptians. Many Americans carried signs that said things like "let there be peace for the middle East too!" and "no more corruption anywhere!"

Makes me a little anxious to see what Fox News will say about that.

Any one else watching the AJE live-stream?

I was watching the coverage last night on CNN. Hell of a thing to watch on Nyquil. Beats watching police chases.

Gaza/Egyptian border is now under Hamas control.

The Egyptian army pulled all of their forces out of the region into Cairo. This is very bad.

Yeah having the loons at the border is very bad. IF they want their border back they are likely going to have to fight for it.

That...is pretty bad.

Is that something third parties can do about?

Which third parties? Israel? The US? The Arab world would howl at the thought of Israel doing anything over such a situation. The Euros would be painting us as imperialist bastards or propping up an old dictatorship.

Realistically, there's no third powers who have the power and capability to intervene and not make a fuss.

I have calculated the top four most likely scenarios:

1) to avoid bloodshed in the middleeast and another Iran, Obama intervenes and defeats Hamas. Middle East erupts into wrathful howls. Might or might not be war between Iran and Israel.

2) Nothing is done. Hamas seizes control of the area and expands their influence into surrounding, previously Egyptian territories.

3) Israel takes out the Hamas forces advancing into the Egyptian territory, and as a result, another pathetic war happens.

4) Egypt and Hamas come to blows. Hamas suicide bombs Mubarak to death, and then more fighting as Hamas tries to seize control and the Egyptian citizens have none of it.

All possible but there are many more options there.

The situation is too fluid and complicated at this stage to predict.

Aren't Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood political allies? An Egypt/Hamas conflict might be the most desirable outcome for the U.S. and Israel.

True, but Hamas probably needs a stable power base larger than Gaza. They would probably just seize control, and besides, the Brotherhood is far from in control of the situation.

And yes, the situation is too fluid to predict, but it does not hurt to set up some outcomes based on the current situation.

Makes me a little anxious to see what Fox News will say about that.

Fox News is wanking on how the US can take advantage of this for "Democracy in the middle east".

The Egyptian army pulled all of their forces out of the region into Cairo. This is very bad.

I think that's very good, as Gaza can rebuild and get supplies from other countries and they dont have to send flotillas to run blockades and get boarded in international waters [i.e. a more religious Turkey won't threaten war with Israel like in the past].

Also I am anti-Israel to a point that some might consider 'anti-semitic' so be forewarned

Yeah having the loons at the border is very bad. IF they want their border back they are likely going to have to fight for it.

I doubt the soldiers would do that given the whole 'they're conscripts and sympathize with Palestine' etc etc.....and that the regime might collapse soon

edited 29th Jan '11 9:17:08 PM by BalloonFleet

I think that's very good, as Gaza can rebuild and get supplies from other countries and they dont have to send flotillas to run blockades and get boarded in international waters.

You do realize that allows Hamas to re-arm right? The whole point of the entire blockade and isolation of Gaza is to prevent just that.

Egypt just probably set the region up for another war inadvertently by doing that.

yes I do, note my spoiler. eh ill unspoiler it

I am anti-Israel to a point that some might consider 'anti-semitic' so I consider it a good thing that the Israelis can't starve out the Gazans and abuse them as they see fit [and the Gazans can defend themselves] - as it hasnt worked. The US doesnt like democracy when they elect anti-Iraeli politicians.

edited 29th Jan '11 9:20:02 PM by BalloonFleet

I think this might serve as an opportunity to make a strong alliance with a new Egyptian Government, by throwing down some peacekeepers to enforce the previous Egyptian border, should they need help.

Yeah, Hamas helps Palestine, but they are also pretty much a terrorist organization at this point, given their track record. Even if we had a free Palestine and all the blockades were lifted, Hamas wouldn't stop killing Israeli's, then the Israeli's would kill some Hamas guys back, and then it would all escalate and we would be right back where we started. Hamas needs to be neutered strategically.

^

Edit: We don't like it when they elect anti-Israeli politicians because that automatically makes them anti-US.

And even worse than that, we're willing to meddle extensively to keep radical Islamists out of power, and for good reason. Anti-Israel/Anti-US/Radical Islamist seem to eclipse fairly often.

edited 29th Jan '11 9:58:16 PM by Barkey

This is all very weird. I was in Egypt for a holiday just a couple of years ago and I look at all the pictures and I recognise those places. Weird indeed.

I wonder if I should email the tour-guide to check if he and his family are okay. But I'm not sure if the internet access is back up there yet.

Al Jazeera has had their press license revoked by the Egyptian government. Officials closed their bureau in Cairo. Despite this, the station is still filming live. They have, however, stopped referring to their correspondents by name for 'safety reasons'.

Strange helicopters with the Presidential Seal are circling Cairo.◊

US, Turkey, India and Iraq (!) have begun evacuating their citizens. Western resorts on the Red Sea are apparently still running, however.

Some protestors are setting themselves on fire.

The curfew has been spread to the entire country.

EDIT: Fighter jets are flying very low over the crowd in Tahrir Square.

edited 30th Jan '11 7:09:32 AM by Pentadragon

Your putting words where none were said. A protest is not always angry that is a false assumption. You can still be perfectly peaceful if you get kettled being kettled is not an excuse to be violent. The second any protester uses violence the protest loses all innocence.

If a protest isn't really angry then what the hell are they protesting about?

They're angry about something, or they wouldn't be there. I'm not talking violent rage, but there has to be an anger at something old and desire for something new that is too strong to be content with only the usual political channels.

You can be peaceful whilst being kettled, and being kettled is not an excuse to be violent. It is however very likely to produce violence. Thus it is a poor tactic, and a tactic designed to provoke and thus discredit protests in the eyes of the people. Contrary to your beliefs, I don't think the existence of a few people (or, as you said "any protester") who resort to violence in a crowd discredits the rest, however police forces recognise that many, many people do share your viewpoint, so they deliberately push protestors to be violent in the hopes that valid points will be ignored in the rush to condemn.

It's like if I think someone's had too much to drink, I can suggest we move on to a new place to give them a chance to calm down and sober up a little, tell them to their face they've had too much to drink and should probably be careful, or I can physically restrain them from going to the bar.

All three options involve someone who is, by their unnaturally heightened emotions, more likely to be violent than someone out of that situation. Only, the third is much more likely than the other two to make them be violent, and anyone who actually attempts it, we would assume, was either trying to start a fight or severely backwards/drunk. Since police forces don't tend to hire the severely backwards or the drunk, it would seem as though they were attempting to start shit.

Well, I think we've just seen the point of no return folks.

I never thought I'd say this.. But I'm pissed they took off Al Jazeera, they were right through with their noses in it since this situation started, and they covered it well, and the anchor snubbed a Muslim Brotherhood member who was being interviewed!

The Egyptian Government seems to be making a list of "What not to do when your citizens are really fucking pissed at you."

Agreed. I'm thinking how if I were an American diplomat, I'd be counting off these steps of rights we have in America that Mubarak has taken away in the last 3 days.

Speech.. Press.. Assembly..

Some protestors are setting themselves on fire.

Er.

^Like it isn't hot enough over there.