Egypt...
Posted: Mon Jan 31, 2011 4:58 pm
Obama will go down in history as the president who lost Egypt
Jimmy Carter will go down in American history as "the president who lost Iran," which during his term went from being a major strategic ally of the United States to being the revolutionary Islamic Republic. Barack Obama will be remembered as the president who "lost" Turkey, Lebanon and Egypt, and during whose tenure America's alliances in the Middle East crumbled.
The superficial circumstances are similar. In both cases, a United States in financial crisis and after failed wars loses global influence under a leftist president whose good intentions are interpreted abroad as expressions of weakness. The results are reflected in the fall of regimes that were dependent on their relationship with Washington for survival, or in a change in their orientation, as with Ankara.
America's general weakness clearly affects its friends. But unlike Carter, who preached human rights even when it hurt allies, Obama sat on the fence and exercised caution. He neither embraced despised leaders nor evangelized for political freedom, for fear of undermining stability.
Obama began his presidency with trips to Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and in speeches in Ankara and Cairo tried to forge new ties between the United States and the Muslim world. His message to Muslims was "I am one of you," and he backed it by quoting from the Koran. President Hosni Mubarak did not join him on the stage at Cairo University, and Obama did not mention his host. But he did not imitate his hated predecessor, President George W. Bush, with blunt calls for democracy and freedom.
Obama apparently believed the main problem of the Middle East was the Israeli occupation, and focused his policy on demanding the suspension of construction in the settlements and on the abortive attempt to renew the peace talks. That failure led him to back off from the peace process in favor of concentrating on heading off an Israeli-Iranian war.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/ne ... t-1.340057
*********************************************************
Analysts warned Obama: Don't end up on the wrong side of Egypt's revolution
As the demonstrations and clashes unfolded in Egypt over the last week, senior officials in the American administration tried – maniacally – to avoid taking a side in the conflict.
Essentially, the American pendulum swung between cautionary estimation that President Hosni Mubarak's regime was "stable" and U.S. Vice President Joe Biden's denial that he had referred to the Egyptian leader as a "dictator".
Simultaneously, the White House lapped criticism on the Egyptian regime in general and on the way Mubarak was handling the demonstrations in particular.
Washington's initial careful responses caused American analysts to take Barack Obama to task and warn him that by supporting the Egyptian president, he was likely to find himself on the wrong side of the revolution.
Despite Obama's cautionary approach, the British Daily Telegraph revealed that the pragmatic Americans had played a double game with Mubarak by secretly backing those responsible for the current uprising that spent three years planning a coup in Egypt.
A December 2008 cable dispatched to Washington by the U.S. ambassador in Cairo indicates that the Americans were well acquainted with the Egyptian opposition's plan to change the regime
http://www.haaretz.com/news/internation ... n-1.340005
*********************************************************
No surprise here..from the fellow known to vote "Present"....
Old Pudfark sez: " The difference between "Present" and "President" is? No "id"....probably cuz, he ain't got none...."
Jimmy Carter will go down in American history as "the president who lost Iran," which during his term went from being a major strategic ally of the United States to being the revolutionary Islamic Republic. Barack Obama will be remembered as the president who "lost" Turkey, Lebanon and Egypt, and during whose tenure America's alliances in the Middle East crumbled.
The superficial circumstances are similar. In both cases, a United States in financial crisis and after failed wars loses global influence under a leftist president whose good intentions are interpreted abroad as expressions of weakness. The results are reflected in the fall of regimes that were dependent on their relationship with Washington for survival, or in a change in their orientation, as with Ankara.
America's general weakness clearly affects its friends. But unlike Carter, who preached human rights even when it hurt allies, Obama sat on the fence and exercised caution. He neither embraced despised leaders nor evangelized for political freedom, for fear of undermining stability.
Obama began his presidency with trips to Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and in speeches in Ankara and Cairo tried to forge new ties between the United States and the Muslim world. His message to Muslims was "I am one of you," and he backed it by quoting from the Koran. President Hosni Mubarak did not join him on the stage at Cairo University, and Obama did not mention his host. But he did not imitate his hated predecessor, President George W. Bush, with blunt calls for democracy and freedom.
Obama apparently believed the main problem of the Middle East was the Israeli occupation, and focused his policy on demanding the suspension of construction in the settlements and on the abortive attempt to renew the peace talks. That failure led him to back off from the peace process in favor of concentrating on heading off an Israeli-Iranian war.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/ne ... t-1.340057
*********************************************************
Analysts warned Obama: Don't end up on the wrong side of Egypt's revolution
As the demonstrations and clashes unfolded in Egypt over the last week, senior officials in the American administration tried – maniacally – to avoid taking a side in the conflict.
Essentially, the American pendulum swung between cautionary estimation that President Hosni Mubarak's regime was "stable" and U.S. Vice President Joe Biden's denial that he had referred to the Egyptian leader as a "dictator".
Simultaneously, the White House lapped criticism on the Egyptian regime in general and on the way Mubarak was handling the demonstrations in particular.
Washington's initial careful responses caused American analysts to take Barack Obama to task and warn him that by supporting the Egyptian president, he was likely to find himself on the wrong side of the revolution.
Despite Obama's cautionary approach, the British Daily Telegraph revealed that the pragmatic Americans had played a double game with Mubarak by secretly backing those responsible for the current uprising that spent three years planning a coup in Egypt.
A December 2008 cable dispatched to Washington by the U.S. ambassador in Cairo indicates that the Americans were well acquainted with the Egyptian opposition's plan to change the regime
http://www.haaretz.com/news/internation ... n-1.340005
*********************************************************
No surprise here..from the fellow known to vote "Present"....
Old Pudfark sez: " The difference between "Present" and "President" is? No "id"....probably cuz, he ain't got none...."