'We Need to Find Out Who Was Behind' Egypt Protest

[nhboy]

Palin: 'We Need to Find Out Who Was Behind' Egypt Protests (VIDEO) | TPMDC

"Sarah Palin was interviewed by a conservative media outlet, David Brody of Christian Broadcasting Network, over the weekend, and talked about President Obama's handling of the political crisis in Egypt. And while it's clear that she herself doesn't have all the answers, she's also quite miffed at Obama, saying that he doesn't have the answers -- and he's not telling us the answers he knows, either.

"Mubarak, he's gone, one way or the other. He is not going to be the leader of Egypt. That's a given," Palin said. "So now the information needs to be gathered and understood as to who it will be that fills now the void in the government. Is it going to be the Muslim Brotherhood? We should not stand for that, or with that or by that. Any radical Islamists, no that is not who we should be supporting and standing by. So we need to find out who was behind all of the turmoil and the revolt and the protests so that good decisions can be made in terms of who we will stand by and support."

 

[CrashTest]

Well boy, some U.S. citizens were beaten and almost killed. That makes it U.S. business. If some Kenyans were beaten and almost killed, then our President would make it his business.

 

[aps45819]

Obama only seems to supports the radical Islam/anti Israel side of mid east protests.
Look at the difference in his response to the pro democracy protests in Iran and Egypt.

 

[Vince]

Obama only seems to supports the radical Islam/anti Israel side of mid east protests.
Look at the difference in his response to the pro democracy protests in Iran and Egypt.

Gotta love it. He dumps our longtime ally Israel and picks up any Islamic connection he can. And now France is our bestest new ally.

 

[Gilligan]

The full text of the pull quote makes perfect sense and describes exactly what the Obama State Department is doing at this very moment . Duh.

we need to find out who was behind all of the turmoil and the revolt and the protests so that good decisions can be made in terms of who we will stand by and support

 

[philibusters]

I think the smart thing to do is to watch from the sidelines.

 

[SamSpade]

I think the smart thing to do is to watch from the sidelines.

That's not far from what we did with the Shah, and well, that turned out great for us.

......

I think what has been proposed is a good start - find a way to get representatives from all factions to get together and work on a way to get fair and free elections. We don't want one despot replaced by another.

Doing nothing sends a couple bad signals - if you side with the U.S., don't bet on help when the tide turns against you. It also says to the side that wins that we were on the other side. Odd deduction, but that's the way it turns out - if you weren't on OUR side, you must have been on theirs.

And we WERE on Mubarak's side.

 

[MMDad]

We already know that the US Government took steps to facilitate communication among the protesters, even when Egypt tried to shut down the internet. We know that US organizations took part in "community organizing" to help make this happen.

Liberals hated Bush in part because of his overt imperialism. But what's happening in Egypt now seems to be covert imperialism, and the liberals are loving it.

Put a (D) behind the name, and the deeds are wrong to half of us and right to half of us. Change that to an (R), do the exact same thing, and everyone swaps opinions.

All Palin is asking for is the truth to come out. Why is the left so scared of that?

There are so many questions left to be answered - Why is Code Pink, a supposed anti-war group, actively promoting violent revolt and armed conflict? Why is the Obama administration overtly criticizing Egypt for stopping communications, covertly circumventing the blocks, and attempting to give that same power to our own President?

Why is it okay for Obama to be spreading his version of democracy but it was wrong for Bush to do it?

I say they were both wrong - it is just as wrong for us to promote or incite revolt as it is to fight a war for the goal of forcing our ideals onto another nation.

 

[Gilligan]

I think the smart thing to do is to watch from the sidelines.

That is exactly the advice that has been sent to our gummint from several different Egyptian constituencies; basically to just butt out because anything we do otherwise will only make a bad situation worse. With the exception of the Egyptian military and some in the current government, we are not liked by many over there.

Sounds like good advice, frankly.

 

[Matthew]

We all know who isn't behind it, though if successful, will claim credit for"encouraging "
the Egyptians.
Like the waterboy on a victorious football team, who claims it was his actions that brought victory.
Or claiming a congresswoman "opened"her eyes for the first time after he left.
The Wheels on the bus go round and round.

 

[EmptyTimCup]

Liberals hated Bush in part because of his overt imperialism. But what's happening in Egypt now seems to be covert imperialism, and the liberals are loving it.

Liberals love it, because they support Hamas, Hezbollah, The Muslim Brotherhood, anyone aligned against Israel

 

[philibusters]

We already know that the US Government took steps to facilitate communication among the protesters, even when Egypt tried to shut down the internet.

What did we do? I have not really followed this story too closely.

We know that US organizations took part in "community organizing" to help make this happen.

What do you mean by US organizations? Are these private or government organizations? What exactly did they do?

Liberals hated Bush in part because of his overt imperialism. But what's happening in Egypt now seems to be covert imperialism, and the liberals are loving it.

Thats human nature.

Put a (D) behind the name, and the deeds are wrong to half of us and right to half of us. Change that to an (R), do the exact same thing, and everyone swaps opinions.

Yes, that is unfortunate, but its easier to root for a side (liberal or conservative; Democrat vs. Republican) than to study the issues enough to have an in-depth opinion on each individual topic.

All Palin is asking for is the truth to come out. Why is the left so scared of that?

Palin is an attack dog so to speak. She may be asking for the truth to come out, but she also criticizing Obama. Every speech she gives is going to criticize the current administration.

There are so many questions left to be answered - Why is Code Pink, a supposed anti-war group, actively promoting violent revolt and armed conflict? Why is the Obama administration overtly criticizing Egypt for stopping communications, covertly circumventing the blocks, and attempting to give that same power to our own President?

I could care less about Code Pink and if it wasn't for this forum I would never have even heard of them. Obama is all over the place on Egypt because he is being pulled on by a lot of sides. On the one hand, he wants to support the people pushing for democracy. On the other hand, there is a risk that a change in power won't produce a democracy. And theres the second risk that a democracy in Egypt would be very anti-Israel in nature. So hes torn and takes steps then backtracks. There are tyrants in a lot of Middle East countries, but these tyrants are pretty stable and Israel can work with them.

Why is it okay for Obama to be spreading his version of democracy but it was wrong for Bush to do it?

Think you already answered that. Labels mean a lot, D and R. There are distinctions though. We have been in Iraq for almost 8 years. It has costs a fortune and lots of lives. That was a much heavier investment on our part.

I say they were both wrong - it is just as wrong for us to promote or incite revolt as it is to fight a war for the goal of forcing our ideals onto another nation.

I support promoting democracy and capitalism around the world, but especially capitalism. In another thread I used the McDonald's quote from Thomas Friedman's book, but I think its valid. Capitalism is a great conduit for international affairs because its perhaps the only pervasive medium of international affairs where everybody can win on a consistent basis.

 

[philibusters]

That is exactly the advice that has been sent to our gummint from several different Egyptian constituencies; basically to just butt out because anything we do otherwise will only make a bad situation worse. With the exception of the Egyptian military and some in the current government, we are not liked by many over there.

Sounds like good advice, frankly.

From our standpoint, if the powers that be in Egypt survive this by supporting the protesters we have damaged our relationship with them. If there is a regime change, some group like the Muslim Brotherhood is probably going to have a lot of power in the new regime and they are going to be anti-American whether we support the regime change or not. So getting involved is a no win.

 

[MMDad]

What did we do? I have not really followed this story too closely.



What do you mean by US organizations? Are these private or government organizations? What exactly did they do?



Thats human nature.



Yes, that is unfortunate, but its easier to root for a side (liberal or conservative; Democrat vs. Republican) than to study the issues enough to have an in-depth opinion on each individual topic.



Palin is an attack dog so to speak. She may be asking for the truth to come out, but she also criticizing Obama. Every speech she gives is going to criticize the current administration.



I could care less about Code Pink and if it wasn't for this forum I would never have even heard of them. Obama is all over the place on Egypt because he is being pulled on by a lot of sides. On the one hand, he wants to support the people pushing for democracy. On the other hand, there is a risk that a change in power won't produce a democracy. And theres the second risk that a democracy in Egypt would be very anti-Israel in nature. So hes torn and takes steps then backtracks. There are tyrants in a lot of Middle East countries, but these tyrants are pretty stable and Israel can work with them.



Think you already answered that. Labels mean a lot, D and R. There are distinctions though. We have been in Iraq for almost 8 years. It has costs a fortune and lots of lives. That was a much heavier investment on our part.



I support promoting democracy and capitalism around the world, but especially capitalism. In another thread I used the McDonald's quote from Thomas Friedman's book, but I think its valid. Capitalism is a great conduit for international affairs because its perhaps the only pervasive medium of international affairs where everybody can win on a consistent basis.

My god. You are all over the board on this. You just don't have any idea of what you believe, do you? In another thread you support raising the minimum wage by 38% because poor people need it, even if it will cause many to lose their jobs, inflation, and cause small businesses to fail. Yet here you claim to support capitalism. So, which is it? What do you support?

It's obvious that you have not followed the story, and do not know the facts. You admitted that you had never heard of the Muslim Brotherhood. Yet here you are spouting like some kind of authority.

I am not going to waste my time feeding you the information that is readily available. Learn the history, find the facts, and make conclusions based on reason instead of gut reactions and emotion.