What's the ALTERNATIVE to letting the Egyptian people overthrow Mubarak?

[Ken Burch]

No one could really think that any possible good could come of letting the guy survive.

No one could really believe that, if Mubarak hasn't allowed ANY democracy in thirty years, he'd start allowing it now.

No one could really think that the U.S. would ever be forgiven for saving Mubarak from the justified rage of his own people.

So what's the alternative to just standing aside and letting history happen?

[ananda]

1. LOL

Alternatives are not at play right now. Mubarak is toast.

[Ken Burch]

3. And let's hope that what replaces him is better

That involves having faith in the people, which some folks here DON'T have.

[upi402]

5. Hope v. history

I sure hope that democracy and a government that works for the people is the result.

I wonder what history reports about power vacuums and man's inhumanity to man though? Lets hold a good thought for the powerless.
:toast:

[HERVEPA]

17. Well said!

[Davis_X_Machina]

2. I don't think it's our call...

...and it's not really a case of our letting the Egyptians do anything, is it?

[houstonintc]

4. Well the concern is who comes next

Someone will have to lead Egypt, someone will be put in charge once Mubarak is gone.

Who is it? What will this persons policies be? Will they be any different from Mubaraks? Will this new government be theocratic or secular in the direction it goes? Also for the region and the area right next door, what will be the status of peace agreements between Israel and Egypt? Will this be a hurdle towards another war in the region?

Revolutions are messy and more often then not lead to further chaos.

[earthside]

6. "Letting"

Maybe that is not what you meant ... I don't think it really is up to us about "letting" the Egyptian people determine their own destiny.

If the outcome in Egypt is less than favorable for current U.S. foreign policy, well, that is the consequences of supporting an authoritarian regime for the past 30 years and funneling in hundred and hundreds of millions of dollars especially in military 'aid' to Mubarak.

When is the U.S. going to learn to start minding our own business and let other countries decide for themselves what is best for them?

[customerserviceguy]

7. The alternative is to have a face-saving way

for him to simply get out of the way of the election coming later this year. Maybe he decides to pull his son out of the race, or make sure that there are two or three other candidates besides his son.

I support whatever leads to the least bloodshed, and a continuation of the state of peace between Egypt and Israel. No, it's not some 'glorious' revolution that some here would like to see, but it keeps the prices of energy and food steadier than they would be in a speculator-driven panic, and that helps people over the whole world.

[Ken Burch]

9. You're assuming Mubarak would be willing to accept a "face-saving" way out

That would mean his acceptance of the reality this day is over. Tyrants NEVER willingly accept such things.

The U.S. should NEVER have backed Mubarak. He was a dictator from the start.

[customerserviceguy]

11. If I recall

He's already said that he wouldn't run for election again. All he's got to do is to stay in power until a peaceful transition to a new elected government, and he saves face. He even gets to live in Egypt without having to flee in exile.

And as the next government makes its mistakes, he starts to get regarded as an elder statesman. To a slight extent, that's even happened with Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and both Bushes.

[Ken Burch]

12. Mubarak would ALSO have to agree that his SON wouldn't be in the election

In fact, he might have to agree to disband the NDP entirely(there really isn't any reason to have a party that purports to be the SINGLE party of secular Egypt in the race, when there could easily be a switch to genuine multi-party politics.

Letting Mubarak's son stand wouldn't be a great deal different that trying to put one of the remaining Pahlevis back on the Peacock Throne in Tehran.

[customerserviceguy]

13. That's probably true

He could tell his son to hold off, wait to see if the new government screws things up, then run as a "return to the good old days" candidate in a future election. Of course, that only works if the military junta or the fundamentalist cabal allow free elections in the future.

[DearAbby]

8. It isnt up to us

It's up to the people of Egypt. Best we can do is hands off and hope for the best. It's time we stayed out of other people's business.

[bemildred]

10. Something like Vietnam or Iraq or Afghanistan I think.

Why would we want to know?

[Chan790]

19. Tienanmen, more likely.

If I had to guess.

I do not believe the US will let Mubarak pass from power under just about any condition where we don't handpick his successor. In fact, I think we did pick his successor in Suleiman and hope for a peaceful outcome. Now it is all about appearances and gamesmanship.

But I think the decision has already been made that this uprising will not succeed, any means necessary.

I hope I am wrong.

[HopeHoops]

14. Letting the Terminators do it.

[lonestarnot]

15. Anyone know the status of our troops re this situation? Are we on alert, standby or such?

[Ken Burch]

20. I keep hearing we've got troops in the Sinai.

What they're doing there hasn't been made clear yet.

[lonestarnot]

21. I would imagine that there is an elevated status of alert. Sinai you say.

[Lurks Often]

28. They've been there since 1982

From Wikipedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multinational_Force_and_Observers#States_involved

[Chan790]

16. If you have to ask, you really don't want to know. n/t

[malaise]

18. Imperialists never learn

which is why revolutions succeed.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

22. Isn't the question "What's the alternative to standing aside and letting Mubarak remain in power"

I think your assumption that this popular movement will unseat him is overoptimistic.

I also think it's quite probable that what would replace him if it did would be even worse, but that's a separate issue.

[blindpig]

23. Worse for who?

Israel and the US, that's for sure. As for the people of Egypt, it will only be worse if some other vindictive US toady maintains control of the army.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

24. No, that's absolutely not true.

It will also be worse for the people of Egypt if Islamic fundamentalists take over, as they did in e.g. Iran, which does not seem an unlikely outcome.

[blindpig]

26. Boogey Man

Boo!

A very unlikely outcome, this is very much a secular revolt and a very different country and time.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

27. A large majority of commentators seem to disagree with you.

I'm not an expert on Egypt's politics myself, but a large majority of the commentary from people who appear to have at least some idea what they're talking about suggests that there is a non-trivial chance of an Islamic fundamentalist takeover; whether there is any chance of the establishment of a succesful democracy seems much more widely doubted.

Now, it may be that you're right and everyone else is wrong, but I think I would be unwise to bet that way.


Also, the crucial thing about a boogey man is that the threat it presents is imaginary. Hardline Islamic regimes really do exist, in large numbers, many of them very close to Egypt, and are very bad, so whatever fear of them is it's not a boogey man.

[blindpig]

29. What commentators?

Those on TV? US and Israeli government yackers? Other capitalist lackeys?

It is of course a possibility but I believe it is being 'oversold' by those with an interest in continued American hegemony.

Capitalism is a much greater danger to us all.

[WinkyDink]

25. "letting"?