elticker said:
Kasz216 said:
elticker said:
Kasz216 said:
elticker said:
Kasz216 said:
elticker said:
Kasz216 said:
Sheeplord said:
Kasz216 said:
[Cut]
The problem with Libya is that it JUST recently entered the international community, actually due to the strongarm tactics of the Bush administration along with others factors. There is no way for the international community to intervene... they are fully willing to use full force and to go back in on themselves. They'll end up like the protestors in Iran.
[Cut]
Yemen... despite having little Western ties... was fragile before this started... and there are already some violent opposition groups... but even if they succeed... it probably would only lead to another dictator.
|
Firstly, I will say (although it's perhaps the only reddeming feature of the his admin.), Bush did try to have a mission to spread democracy set up in the area, it justwasn't done well and never got funding.
As to the second bit I've copied, that is the problem. Revolution tends to swap one form of corruption for another. It's a whole lot of blood and a whole lot of killing for nothing. Hopefully, they'll get somewhere but it looks like the government isn't after a peaceful transition like Egypt - the kind which does get somewhere.
|
It's why I think, despite the opposite of what it seems... that working with dictators is the best way to overthrow them.
The Egyptian Military wanted a peaceful transition because they saw themselves more as the protector of Egypt then working for their "President".
Unlike the rest of the armed forces in Egypt... why did they have this difference in opinion? Well look who trained them. With the right mindset and enough outside support you know a democracy will follow.
|
who trained them? i thought egypt trained there soldiers.
|
Actually, no. The officers of the Egyptian Army were trained by the US... officers are set to the US usually to the Army War College or the National Defesne University. They do get training in egypt too... but the finishing touches are almost always done in the USA.
Compaired to the police forces and paramilitary forces that were trained by Egyptians.
It's part of the US's general plan for promoting democracy. By hoping that informal contact in the USA will instill western values and democratic ideals... and that said soldiers will then shape the army and allow peaceful transitions to democracy.
The studies in the US college include things like basic human rights and the principle that the army works for the civilians and not the leader. Which was exactly the reason the armys officers were refusing to fire on the egyptians. See the Phillipines for another case of US trained officers.
|
oh wait so also in 1952 the army was trained by the US right cause back then i don't remember the army firing on protestors, the opposite they revolted and seized power so if you are hinting that the egyptain army didn't fire on protestors because they were trained by US soldiers then this is clearly wrong, We have always taken pride in our army, they would never fire at egyptains. Also with that comment do you say that in the course of over a century the egyptain army has never killed or injured civilains is because of the US army, get your facts straight the egyptain army has never and will never kill innocent civilains, US orders or not. If the US colleges were the reason why the egyptain army is with the people so why didn't the egyptain army do an uprising and take power as you say the army works for the people of egypt and when millions go out to protest then that lets in little doubt that the people want the president. Your post contradicts reality, you make the US sound like it is the creator of democracy in all your posts and how without the US there wouldn't have been a revolution and thousands of us would be killed, did the US army also train the libyan army cause they are now against the dictator alqazafi.
Please when the egyptain army came in we were chearing for them "the people and military are united" is that also stuff the US taught millions of egyptains.
|
Er, actually in 1952 they did fire on their own people. They fired at communist protestors at Kafr El Dawar they killed 9 people... after they gained power. Then they excuted the two leaders.
There were no protesters in general during the revolution because the coup was started by the military... so there were none to shoot. In their first act of the revolution they tried to assassnate someone in a public area with sub machineguns! They ended up killing an innocent person.
Then they spread out all the land they could grab between themselves... while beating murdering and raping along the way. Though to be fair they weren't considered "Egyptian people" even though they lived in Egypt.
They weren't exactly the most enlighted group... they just didn't like being the dogs of the British.
Once some communist protestors came out and talked about a communist path though..... yeah, they attacked on, fired and beat them leaving 9 dead.
Come on man, this is your own countries history!
|
what source do you ahve here is my source
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egyptian_Revolution_of_1952
ftermath
The Revolution Command Council (RCC), made up of the previous 9-member command committee of the Free Officers in addition to five more members, including Mohamed Naguib, was formed. Ali Maher was asked to form a civilian government. When the Free Officers started isolating elements sympathizing with the Soviet Union, Communist Party cadres led workers riots in Kafr Dawar onAugust 12, 1952, which resulted in two death sentences. Ali Maher who still sympathized with the British resigned on 7 September following differences with the officers, principally over proposed land reform. Mohamed Naguib became prime minister. On 9 September, the Agrarian Reform Law was passed, which immediately seized any white owned, especially British owned property in Egypt. This was followed by signaling a major land redistribution programme among peasant farmers which gained most of the seized land. However, royal land as well as those of Jews, Greeks, and Copts, were in turn distributed amongst the Free Officers as well as common supporters of the regime. In a bid to stop concentration of land ownership, the regime placed a ceiling of 200 feddans on land ownership. On 9 December, the Revolutionary Command Council (RCC) without proper due process decreed that the 1923 Constitution of Egypt was abrogated "in the name of the people."
2 death sentences therefore the army still didn't fire on their own people they went to military court and had a death sentance, thats all it says about kafr el dawar, if there were 9 people killed it would be mentioned
|
Well, if we're using Wikipedia as a source. It was listed. Just not in the section you were reading.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gamal_Abdel_Nasser#Revolution_of_1952
Preceding the reform law, in August 1952, Communist-led riots broke out at textile factories in Kafr el-Dawwar leading to a confrontation with the army that left nine people dead. Most of the RCC, including Naguib, insisted on making an example of the riot's two ringleaders by executing them, but Nasser firmly opposed this. Nonetheless, the sentences were carried out. The Muslim Brotherhood supported the RCC and after Naguib's assumption of power, they demanded four ministerial portfolios in the new cabinet, but Nasser turned down the demand. Instead, he adopted a policy of divide and conquer by accepting two members of the Brotherhood who were willing to serve as independents, giving them minor posts.[47]
For the actual source.
http://www.amazon.com/Nasser-Last-Said-K-Aburish/dp/031228683X
|
your source is not trustworthy ar their was no official confirmation or even any acknowledgement by any generals of the army thus it may be made up, his wiki page doesn't even mention he went to egypt, or how did he know if it ever existed thus probably made up like alot of stuff that is by writers, not even a newspaper article to confirm so this source is pretty unreliable, I think you and i know it, your trying to find a single case of army killing egyptain civilains with a trust worthy source. I could make a book and claim alot of stuff, so would that be taken for granted like this guy who's works seem very controversail and have no evidentail backing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Said_Aburish
|
Man, your even worse that I thought you were. I used literally the same source you did as that's where most of the Egyptian Revolution info on Wiki is taken from.. Aside from that your denial knows no bounds.
He couldn't lie in a book so eaisly like that... and would have ZERO reason to do so, since his book is PRAISING him. It's like saying in a book where someone praised George W Bush they made up a story about him getting in a bar fight. Why would they do that?
It's not like this is the only place that lists it either... here is a soruce... from someone in Egypt.
And so did the DMNL, at least initially. But then the Free Officers, led by Nasser, killed workers at Kafr Al-Dawar. This happened only three weeks after the revolution. On the night of 12 August, 1952 some 500 workers at Misr Fine Spinning and Weaving began a sit-down strike and locked themselves inside the mill, writes Egyptian labour historian Joel Beinin. On 13 August, army troops arrived, shots were fired and four workers and one soldier were killed and many others wounded.
http://www.masress.com/en/ahramweekly/16304
Another source
http://www.amazon.com/Egyptian-Army-Politics-Pattern-Nations/dp/0837164737/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1298388463&sr=8-1
This is literally a known fact about your history that you simply seem to have not been aware of. It's been mentioned in the recent Egyptian coverage for hope that there wouldn't be a repeat of it.
This isn't even counting the violence used to confiscate land from non muslims.
