Cairo Protestors Say US Is Hedging Its Bets

Fwiw- I don’t credit the Cairo speech. It was just a speech. I think Obama needs to reevaluate the value of making speeches vs. having policies and contingency plans in place when events actually happen.

Skip, talmag,progressive mama-any of you reading this?

Obama did just what he should have done. You people that continually complain can spin any way you want but once again, it’s a country we interfered in and shouldn’t have. So what do you honestly expect Obama to do? Fabricate a reason for military force, go borrow even more from China to pay for it. Those days are over. He’s doing just what he needs to do, supporting human rights and letting EGYPT take care of EGYPT’S problem.

It didn’t take action to win the Nobel Peace Prize. It didn’t take action to come up with the State of the Union Address. There hasn’t been any action to lower unemployment or decrease spending. Anyone who expects action from the Government has a very long wait. The only thing Government knows how to do is spend and fatten their own wallets.

blip; The GOP doesn’t have to “hope” for failure. He’s doing that quite well without them “hoping”.

What Americans really care about, as with the Giffords shooting, is how this effects Sarah Palin’s chances to win in 2012.
Posted by: blip
——————————————
What Americans are really concerned with are, pot smoking Liberals, like the one in AZ, with guns.
Obama VS America

blip; The GOP doesn’t have to “hope” for failure. He’s doing that quite well without them “hoping”.
Posted by: LongT | Jan 31, 2011 2:41:09 PM
Obama hasn’t failed. He is actually done a great deal to turn things around since he took office. I wish him greater success.
But I suppose you have to tell yourself that he has already failed…. in order to justify the next two years of sabotage and vandalism. Anything to get those approval ratings down!
Gotta win in 2012! Pray that failure sweeps Palin into the White House!

“Obama will go down in history as the president who lost Egypt… ”
I didn’t realize that Egypt was a US territory.
Listen to you, crying for big government to fly around the world and impose order in another country.
Hypocrite.

Iran to showcase new rockets, satellites…
Pakistan’s nuclear arsenal tops 100…
Don’t worry Obama has it all under control
Obama VS America

ObamaCare 729 waviers granted to unions and “friends” of Obama
Congress to investigate
OBAMA VS AMERICA

First they complain that Obama is not “doing” enough… but then they ignore the immense activities being undertaken by the State Department.
Diplomatic action, by its very nature, is less apparent than speech or invasion. And, if you actually follow these things…. the State Dept is taking unprecedented steps w/ regards to Egypt.
========
Really? Unprecedented?
My complaint isn’t that I want Obama to DO SOMETHING, Although he sure knew exactly what needed to be done in 2002.
No, my complaint is that Obama, if he truly wanted Egypt to move toward a more democratic state, should have been more prepared when something like this happened.
He should have already had the conversation with Mubarek on how to transition to democracy.
He should already know who the democracy movement leaders are.
He should have picked up the phone on the first day to speak to Mubarek and other area leaders to find out what was going on.
The point is he can’t simultaneously say that he’s pushed for democracy in the Muslim world AND be so unprepared to deal with it when it looks like it’s starting to happen.
Or, in the case of Lebanon, let it slip away so quietly.

Why are they worried about what the US thinks? W esend them bilions! Now…get it together!

Maybee….
Ask anyone who knows anything about the region and they will tell you that Egypt was the last place they saw something like this coming.
On top of that, the US has a very delicate relationship with Israel. And Israel is very nervous about a revolution in Egypt. Egypt has a big army and is armed with US weapons.
I think the best thing to do is not to interfere with the protests and to do what Hillary Clinton has done….
Tell Mubarak hands off. And to communicate with the regime through diplomatic channels.
While a speech might have offered some encouragement. If Obama alienates Mubarak, the ruling party might feel as though they have no choice but to swiftly shut down the rebellion. If Obama signals unconditional support, then it might stifle the uprising.
Simply telly Mubarak to sit back and let the new government form seems like reasonable advice. We want to maintain every possible diplomatic tie that we can in Egypt.
If you really cared about this issue, you might look at what McCain has to say about it. He is on the same page as Obama, here.
I wish that American “patriots” of all stripes realized that we have an interest in Egypt…. and that failure could be bad for us. Could be bad for Egypt. Could be bad for Israel.
This sort of hasty attack on Obama is just knee-jerk GOP nonsense. It’s childish and irresponsible.

Skip, talmag,progressive mama-any of you reading this?
Posted by: Nephron | Jan 31, 2011 1:47:18 PM
Yes. What part of my reply to your prior question (on another thread) didn’t you understand? I’m aware of all this. What does it signify to you and what do you think this should mean to me? Do you think this is new and cutting edge reporting on what is happening? Really?

“You must maintain your power through consent, not coercion; you must respect the rights of minorities, and participate with a spirit of tolerance and compromise; you must place the interests of your people and the legitimate workings of the political process above your party.”
I wonder if Sarah Palin is going to give a speech about how this statement is Blood Libel against her and the Tea Party.

I think he is showing good judgment, Maybee.
What would be enough to please you in your incessant concern-trolling? You want an invasion? You want another speech?
Why not diplomacy?
This could go over much like the revolution went in the Philippines. It’s remarkably similar. Nobody suggests that Reagan’s policy in 1986 was a failure, though it is quite parallel to Obama’s.
That’s the problem with conservatives. They see Obama, and they assume the worst. This is a bi-partisan issue and we need to get it right. We cannot really afford to use this as a campaign issue.
Obama is level-headed. That’s a good thing.

It’s always the same pattern. Whatever the issue, Egypt, unemployement, global warming, the comments focus on one thing one thing only: arguments against Obama.
This is not about Obama, it’s about the US and americans. Obama will be gone may be in 2years, maybe in 6years, but then whatever the stand he takes on the Egyptian crisis, it will be in our name. We will either have to “enjoy quality time” with an ally, whose dictatorship is against our own principles, but “who” cares, we feel safe, and will feel safe for another 30 years until the dictator turns 80yo. Or the choice of the egyptians would be a muslim based party, which in this case would further increase our paranoia against muslim, and sharpen our fantasm of the chock of culture. Another possibility is a multiparty democracy (that’s a bit of a dream for this relatively young country (how long did it take for European countries to get their democracy rights…this is a long process. how long did it take us for to allow women and black people to vote)
For the afficionados of the Anti-Obama at any cost, on the flags that people burn there is no mention of a political party or a president, it’s the flag of the country.

I thought it was bad when Carter’s progressive foreign policy cost us an ally in Iran, but is apparently going to be dwarfed by teh fact that while Carter lost iran, obama is going to lose Egypt, Turkey and Israel.. Lets see how much you guys love his “diplomacy” when Egypt is controlled by the Islamic Brotherhood and control of the Suez canal is lost… the progressives want to “go green”.. lets see how well that works when we have to either drill everywhere we can posibly drill for domestic oil, or pay about $10 a galon for gs at teh pumps…

“Egypt is controlled by the Islamic Brotherhood and control of the Suez canal is lost… the progressives want to “go green”.. lets see how well that works when we have to either drill everywhere we can posibly drill for domestic oil, or pay about $10 a galon for gs at teh pumps…”
And, like I said…. here comes the new Fox News opinion!
Obama did not do enough to STOP the revolution.
Earlier today, y’all were saying he wasn’t encouraging it. This afternoon, he’s not doing enough to repress it!
Typical.
Someday, you kids might get what you want: Our President might actually fail in a significant way.
There is something perverse on the right these days. They wish for disaster. And when their dreams come to fulfillment, they cannot accept that they got what they wished for.
You asked for second amendment remedies, and you got them. But you quickly distanced yourself from them once they were acheived.
Today, you hope that Egypt will go down in history as a disaster of US foreign policy.
You gotta get over the incessant campaign mentality. 2012 might make you feel happy. But if America has to fail in order for you to win…. I guess I don’t want you to be happy. Sorry about that.

“What do you think of the difference between Obama in 2002 and Obama now?”
Actually, read the speech. There’s not much difference.
What’s your point? He said we shouldn’t go to war with Iraq, but should try to use diplomatic means to steer Iraq to a more democratic future. Isn’t this what he is doing in Egypt?
Thanks for making me re-read the speech (and reminding everyone else, too). I had forgotten about it. But it really reminded me that his foreign policy is true to his principles. I am so glad we have Obama in the White House. With Clinton in the State Department, we really have a good team on foreign policy matters.
Though I am glad he has toned down some of his rhetoric. Everyone knows that Iraq was a sham….. but no need to rub it in. He was right in 2002, before the invasion. No need to belabor the point that conservatives were as abysmally wrong then as they remain today.
Read the speech:
“I don’t oppose all wars. And I know that in this crowd today, there is no shortage of patriots, or of patriotism. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other arm-chair, weekend warriors in this Administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
“What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.
“That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
“Now let me be clear — I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.
“He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.
“But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.
“I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.
“I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.
“So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president today. You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.
“You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that the UN inspectors can do their work, and that we vigorously enforce a non-proliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.
“You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

There’s a profound and fundamental difference between the 2002 speech and Obama’s actions this week. Whereas then he was forcefully opposed to the Mubarak regime, during this crisis he has been at pains to make clear he is not “taking sides”
In Iran and in Egypt, he has been disgracefully unwilling to make a simple, Reaganesque statement placing the US squarely on the side of those seeking freedom from despotic regimes. He will be remembered for this–here and in Egypt, and elsewhere–and the memories will not be fond.
We can now better understand his earlier, utterly shameful policy toward Honduras.

“We can now better understand his earlier, utterly shameful policy toward Honduras.”
Of course, Obama has not done enough to restore the rightful president. But there are mitigating factors…. Honduras is at risk of total collapse into a narco-terrorist state without US aid. But if we say the government is illegitimate, then we cannot send aid to combat the expansion of the cartels in Honduras. Add to that near unanimous Republican opposition to restoring Zelaya to power.
This is actually a very serious matter. And I am glad that conservatives are suddenly anxious to support the rightful leader of the Honduran people, even though he is a communist.
It sure wasn’t the case the coup was taking place. Republican lawmakers were strong supporters of the coup, publicly opposed to Obama’s support for the protesters.
But, I suppose, regardless of what you believe…. you gotta win that 2012 election.