Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Blank Expression]

That may be, but unlike the protesters, the hard-line Islamists are prepared to massacre their countrymen if needed. In the power vacuum that follows an event like this, there's nobody who's recognized as the leader, so anyone willing to kill for power has a huge edge over the rest.

If you think the rest of the populace will sit by after protesting for democratic reforms and let a bunch of theocrats take control...well, I forwarded your post to a good Egyptian friend of mine (currently residing in Canada) and he laughed like hell. "They aren't the only ones with guns. There's a reason that 'Suezian' is Arabic slang for 'tough as nails.'"

It's just that, in America, you say "Muslims" they answer "anti American terrorists".

I am an American. You are wrong.

(This is when you apologize for talking out your ass about a culture you don't actually know or understand, by the way.)

For the most part he is right though.
(I am also an American)

The entire Republican Party--and that's assuming that the lot of them are racist fuckbags, which can probably be said of the teabaggers but can't really be said of the entire party--isn't "most." Even conservative-leaning people, period, aren't "most." Your claim cannot be demonstrated.

As for Phmcw, his posting history reveals simplistic, reflexively anti-American stupidity, and I will call him on it when I see it.

the problem is in the apparent insinuation that all Americans think like that.

Precisely. Phmcw's posting history, however, reveals a reflexive and stupid anti-American jerking of the knees. I have no problem with slapping down that sort of shit, and I don't think you do either.

[Blank Expression]

Islamophobia in Europe is rampant, and it seems to be even worst in America. I know all Americans aren't alike, but you got to admit ... for god's sake, just think of the shitstorm over "ground zero mosque".

The mosque that is still getting built? You seriously compare a manufactured media shitstorm to Europe, where the Swiss are busying themselves with institutionalizing official discrimination by banning minarets, solely because Islamic structures traditionally use them, and the French are doing their damndest to stamp out religious expression wherever they can (oh!--but only when they're Muslim)?


Clean your own house before you cast aspersions.

[Sir Pseudonymous]

They're hurling molotovs and torching cars. Certainly sounds violent to me.

A government that has stood for decades has far more legitimacy than a bunch of rioters, whatever your idealism says.

You know what government stood for two decades? The Third fucking Reich. And save your "hurr Godwin!!11" shit.

They also had popular support until their idiocy/incompetence/insanity drove their country into the ground.

That you would even begin to suggest that a government that routinely falsifies elections and then cracks down on dissidents with physical violence is "legitimate," when the people who actually have to live there are telling them in fairly unambiguous terms to GTFO, is beyond the pale. Hell, not even the military is on Mubarak's side.

Calling them "rioters" is tantamount to equating it to the frigging Rodney King riots or something that, in the grand scheme of things, is a fairly minor spat--no matter how bad it may appear at the time. These aren't riots because people want to steal a few TVs. This is concentrated, near-universal agreement among the Egyptian people that Mubarak needs to go. You're a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian and if you want to continue this insane assertion, you'd best actually back them up with some actual reasoning rather than "durr, it's been here for a long time." What are you, Nikov?

Idealism does not legitimacy make. A petty tyrant is preferable to a burning city, and revolutions only beget more tyrants and bloodshed. A foundling nation, without an established power base, is all the more vulnerable to violent factions all too ready to seize power from the weakened state.

[Blank Expression]

Somebody really really wants to pull off the Machiavelli bit, but god he just can't do it.

This is funny.


"But the Nazis had popular support!!11" And guess what? Mubarak doesn't. Everybody fucking hates him and his government. It is entirely right and just that he be removed if his people deem it proper, and I really enjoy how, as soon as you realized your current position sucked, you wanted to shift the goalposts to "oh, no, but it's better to have a strong (tacit admission: illegitimate) nation instead of the one the people really want!"

You're outclassed. This is a good time to stop.

[G-Flex]

Idealism does not legitimacy make. A petty tyrant is preferable to a burning city, and revolutions only beget more tyrants and bloodshed. A foundling nation, without an established power base, is all the more vulnerable to violent factions all too ready to seize power from the weakened state.

Wait, so if a bloodthirsty dictator is in power, we should let their regime reign indefinitely? Is that what you're saying? That there should be no action ever taken at all against a corrupt authoritarian government by anyone, ever?


The purpose of government is to serve as a body for consensus and collective decision-making/action/organization in a social group too large to handle this organically (read: pretty much any group more than a few dozen people large). If the government does not serve this purpose, say by only being interested in its own self-preservation or the whims of a self-serving dictator, then it is not legitimate.

[Virex]

That may be, but unlike the protesters, the hard-line Islamists are prepared to massacre their countrymen if needed. In the power vacuum that follows an event like this, there's nobody who's recognized as the leader, so anyone willing to kill for power has a huge edge over the rest.

If you think the rest of the populace will sit by after protesting for democratic reforms and let a bunch of theocrats take control...well, I forwarded your post to a good Egyptian friend of mine (currently residing in Canada) and he laughed like hell. "They aren't the only ones with guns. There's a reason that 'Suezian' is Arabic slang for 'tough as nails.'"

An all-out civil war between Islamists and Democrats is probably going to end in favor of the Islamists. The Democrats may be willing to fight now, but how willing are they when the war has been raging for several years? The Islamists are going to get funding, material and forces from all over the world (and not just guns and bullets, but also heavy stuff like RPG's. I wouldn't be surprised if "someone" donated several APC's to them as well), while the democratic movement has to be very happy if they get food packages from a philanthropic western government that has to get rid of an image problem.

Idealism does not legitimacy make. A petty tyrant is preferable to a burning city, and revolutions only beget more tyrants and bloodshed. A foundling nation, without an established power base, is all the more vulnerable to violent factions all too ready to seize power from the weakened state.

Wait, so if a bloodthirsty dictator is in power, we should let their regime reign indefinitely? Is that what you're saying? That there should be no action ever taken at all against a corrupt authoritarian government by anyone, ever?

Well, considering that rising up against a ruthless dictator creates situations such as Afghanistan and Cuba in many cases, I'm torn between yes and no here.

[Phmcw]

Herrm yes blank calm down, and Swiss isn't in Europe, except geographically. If I sure slapped down a lot of American misplaced pride, it's not to glorify my country.
Now If you want to discuss Belgium or France problem, feel free. (Make a thread first).
It's just that I never had the occasion to point out all the flaw and misdeed of Europeans government (and don't get me started on the European commission), given that we only discuss American's affairs.
If you want to discuss one of the claim I made, just send me a pm.

Now please stay civil.

[Blank Expression]

Your laughable excuses ("the Swiss aren't in Europe, except for all the ways they are!") are nonsensical. I looked at your posting history. This is what you do. You are bound and determined to drive back to shitting on my country because it's what you do.

If you want civility, bring it to the table. Apologize for your libel and retract your statement.

[olemars]

This thread blew up fast.

[lemon10]

You're slandering my country because you just can't help it. I looked at your posting history. This is what you do.

If you want civility, bring it to the table. Apologize for your intentional slandering and retract your statement.

Seriously dude, calm down. He was partially right (so it wasn't really slander), and stop with the ad hominem attacks.

[G-Flex]

Herrm yes blank calm down, and Swiss isn't in Europe, except geographically. If I sure slapped down a lot of American misplaced pride, it's not to glorify my country.

Personally? I wasn't offended out of "pride", I was offended because you made sweeping generalizations about an entire nation of people to which I belong.

Now If you want to discuss Belgium or France problem, feel free. (Make a thread first).

You brought this into the discussion yourself by saying that America is worse. Don't pretend you weren't comparing.

Well, considering that rising up against a ruthless dictator creates situations such as Afghanistan and Cuba in many cases, I'm torn between yes and no here.

This leads to a situation where as time approaches infinity, the proportion of illegitimate, authoritarian governments approaches 100%. More practically, never engaging in any action against such governments encourages them to become instated and to continue existing.

I'm not saying violent overthrow is the only possible solution, but we do need solutions.

Seriously dude, calm down. He was partially right (so it wasn't really slander), and stop with the ad hominem attacks.

By this logic, "everyone in your family is a man with a beard" wouldn't be slander. Partial truths are often the worst lies.

[Blank Expression]

You're slandering my country because you just can't help it. I looked at your posting history. This is what you do.

If you want civility, bring it to the table. Apologize for your intentional slandering and retract your statement.

Seriously dude, calm down. He was partially right (so it wasn't really slander), and stop with the ad hominem attacks.

He was as right as is the statement that black people are criminals, because some black people are criminals. That is an insane and plainly false statement, as is his. As G-Flex noted, it's not about "pride." If I said that black people (implication: all black people) are criminals, I'd be labeled a racist; Phmcw asserts that Americans (implication: all Americans) think that Muslims are "anti-American terrorists"), and you defend him. Fantastic.

I will drop the issue when he apologizes and retracts his malicious, libelous statement.

[Virex]

Well, considering that rising up against a ruthless dictator creates situations such as Afghanistan and Cuba in many cases, I'm torn between yes and no here.

This leads to a situation where as time approaches infinity, the proportion of illegitimate, authoritarian governments approaches 100%. More practically, never engaging in any action against such governments encourages them to become instated and to continue existing.

I'm not saying violent overthrow is the only possible solution, but we do need solutions.

How about solutions that don't involve throwing the country into disarray and creating a power vacuum?

[DJ]

The way I see it, these guys have a lot more legitimate reasons to revolt than the Americans had to secede from the British Empire. Would you say that the American Revolution was wrong, Pseudonymous?

[G-Flex]

Well, considering that rising up against a ruthless dictator creates situations such as Afghanistan and Cuba in many cases, I'm torn between yes and no here.

This leads to a situation where as time approaches infinity, the proportion of illegitimate, authoritarian governments approaches 100%. More practically, never engaging in any action against such governments encourages them to become instated and to continue existing.

I'm not saying violent overthrow is the only possible solution, but we do need solutions.

How about solutions that don't involve throwing the country into disarray and creating a power vacuum?

Sure. Now can you think of an example that the people of that particular nation could have used instead?