Africa

Hell No, We Won't Fire

|

When the troops won't shoot, the game's just about over:

The Egyptian army has said it will not use force against protesters calling for the removal of President Hosni Mubarak ahead of a "million people" march.

The military said it considers the people's demands "legitimate".

NEXT: Governors Highway Safety Association: Deaths Don't Matter, Only Safety Regs

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. That is f*cking awesome.

    1. That whole Moses Red Sea incident seems to have sobered their thinking about attacking civillians.

      1. The state army? Huh.

  2. But they’re anti-government extremists, doncha know!

    1. Count de Monet: It is said that the people are revolting.
      King Louis XVI: You said it! They stink on ice!

    2. It can’t be extreme if it is everybody. In a world where 90% of the women sport 32-DD’s, the 34-B (most common size today) would be the extremist.

      1. In a world where 90% of the women sport 32-DD’s – Libertopia!

  3. Egypt’s army has the Promise Keepers running things!

    1. No, they’re just not dominated by careerists who are more concerned about their pensions than with doing what’s right.

    2. Oath Keepers, not Promise Keepers. Fairly large difference there, except when viewed from the Upper West Side.

  4. I bet he’s sorry he didn’t up the grunts’ benefits package last year.

  5. Let me show you how WE do it…

  6. Good for them, but the military’s leadership may have some ideas about what’s to come.

    1. That, is the correct question, good sir.

  7. Ack! They’re like Egyptian Oathkeepers! Those damn militant right wingers are everywhere!

    1. Oathkeepers. Not promise keepers. My bad.

      1. We don’t know, the egyptian army could be sworn monogamists too.

        1. Does that seem likely?

  8. Clearly, Egypt is filled with rat-bagging tea-fuckers.

  9. Somewhere, Ann Coulter is doing a spit-take AND having an orgasm…

    1. Thanks for the visual.

    2. Picture of her scrawny anorexic O face, or it didn’t happen. And if you post that, we WILL find you, and make you sorry you tormented us in such a horrid fashion.

    3. Science Fun Fact: When excited, Ann Coulter’s quivering labia sounds just like the rustling of dry leaves. Scientists believe it evolved this as a defense against squirrels attempting to bury acorns in her hipbones.

      1. Dear…God!

      2. I’m more interested in just how you know this. I thought you liked fat girls.

        1. No, it’s John who’s into fatties.

      3. Can I plagiarize this on another link?

        1. Feel free.

          1. Somewhere an indie band is calling itself Ann Coulter’s Quivering Labia.

            I’ve always heard that if you get to close to her privates, that crazy doll from Trilogy of Terror slides out of her and chases you…

            1. Close, but not quite. Her privates are the crazy doll from Trilogy of Terror.

              1. And when Nancy Grace slides off her pants you get: http://pub32.bravenet.com/phot…..56A682.jpg

      4. Wow. That’s one of the most awesome things I’ve read in my life!

  10. Good on ’em. Perhaps they can escort Pres. Mubarak to his evacuation flight next.

    1. Good on ’em. Perhaps they can escort Pres. Mubarak to his evacuation flight execution next.

      FIFY. (You were sooo close!)

      1. Eh. Gone is gone. I’m not bloodthirsty.

  11. I hope that the military will still back protesters if a bunch of theocrats try and stifle ongoing moves towards civil society. It is hard for Mubarak to command loyalty – all he has are bribes and the appeal of the status quo (which has little appeal). Someone claiming to speak for Allah has a much easier time convincing enough people to kill the opposition in Egypt. I don’t see the Muslim Bros. having the same difficulty getting some folks willing to pull the trigger come crunch time.

    1. Turkey, take 2?

      1. Turkey II – Kemal’s Revenge seems better than a lot of the possible outcomes from all this.

        Another worry I have from how widespread all this is rioting is – some SOB will think that Nasserism is a viable option. That would mean a lot of dead people and not an expansion of freedom.

  12. I think what the military is doing right now is managing when, not if, Mubarak leaves, and is trying to get some kind of survivable interim government in place.

    This announcement is targeted more at Mubarak than anyone else. “We weren’t kidding. You ARE stepping down. Now get a move on.”

    1. This is probably true.

      1. With 25 billion f’ing dollars to keep his octogenarian ass company on the flight.

  13. The Joos are losing their goddamn minds right about now . . .

    1. http://www.salon.com/news/egyp…..t_protests

      Mike Huckabee, on his 15th trip to Israel, weighs in on the situation in Egypt — and essentially comes out against the pro-democracy protesters:

      “[T]he events of the past few days in Egypt have created a very tenuous situation, not just for Egypt, not just for the Middle East, but for the entire world, and the destabilization of that nation has the potential of cascading across the globe.”

      1. Biden / Huckabee ’12! How could it get any worse?

        1. Biden could get shot and then we’d have Huckabee for president, duh.

          I mean derp – don’t want to give away my age here.

        2. Leiberman / Huckabee

        3. Cthullu\Pelosi?

          1. You’re not allowed to run with yourself as the vice presidential nominee.

            Bad form.

            1. Cthullu embraces bad form…didn’t you read his platform?

              1. We were going to do some negotiating at the convention. You know…the whole smoke brimstone filled room thing.

      2. Ignorant hillbilly whackjob preacher.

      3. Ignorant hillbilly whackjob preacher.

    2. Israel is. But on this issue, the Realists are siding with Israel, whereas all the neocon commentary I’ve seen are siding with the protesters and liberation. (Examples: here and here.)

      Why, it’s almost as though the Realists and Neocons have consistent foreign policies that aren’t just about Israel and the Jews!

  14. Any current photos of Mubarak would likely show that his turkey timer has popped – he’s done.

  15. It’s a military coup!

    Send in the Delta Force!

    1. I campaigned for Huckabee, try digging up Lee Marvin.

  16. It is hard for Mubarak to command loyalty

    Hey, he’s only had thirty years; these things don’t happen overnight, you know.

    1. Hey, he’s only had thirty years; these things don’t happen overnight, you know.

      I hope we aren’t saying this about Obama 30 years from now.

  17. Well, here’s to hoping the Muslim Bros. take over, mobilize the army and push Israel into the sea . . . that would be the best possible result for U.S. foreign policy.

    1. Underzog?

    2. Can’t you learn from history? Egypt can’t push Israel into the sea. The sea will just open up, and the people will walk across on dry land.

  18. Mike Huckabee, on his 15th trip to Israel, weighs in on the situation in Egypt — and essentially comes out against the pro-democracy protesters:

    *jaw clonks on desk*

  19. Don’t these people know there’s been an emergency for the past 30 years? It’s an emergency damn it!

    1. Haven’t we officially been in an emergency since FDR, or maybe Truman?

  20. So, are we gonna send an Air Force plane to Baby Doc his ass off to exile? I bet that’ll make us look great to the Egyptian public.

    1. What? His buddy Colonel Q doesn’t have a Lear Jet and a couple hot nurses to spare?

  21. “Hey, hey, ho, ho!

    Yankee puppets gots to go!”

  22. I may have misheard but I could swear I heard a news report say the Egyptian military hasn’t used lethal force against civilians since the 60s.

    1. Their police force on the other hand…

    2. Anwar Sadat and everyone sitting near him might beg to differ.

    3. I heard that more than once too and as far as I can tell it is true.

  23. Mike Huckabee, on his 15th trip to Israel

    Gotta get that Third Temple built, Mikey. Ain’t gonna see Jesus if you don’t…

    1. He’s just trying to follow Isaac Newton’s example. I won’t be impressed until he gets appointed to run the Fed and then goes undercover to catch counterfeiters, though.

      1. I’d be happy if he just burned out his eyes staring into the sun.

        1. So would we, I see he turns his back on fellow believers with no problem. And we willingly die for our faith.

      2. If my balls were literally on the line, I’d be pretty militant about catching counterfeiters, too. I think that ought to be the indenture every Govt employee signs. Fail to meet your metric, lose your ability to breed.

        1. He died a virgin, I believe. So he probably wasn’t terribly concerned for the normal reasons.

          1. It was the price to pay for discovering the The Philosopher’s Stone. I just couldn’t tell anyone.

          2. Even virgins probably prefer not to be eunuchs. Except for that kid in the Hemingway story who cut off the wrong bit. Dumbass.

  24. Also, does this mean we can quit bribing the Egyptians to not attack Israel?

    1. Have we been doing that? I figured they’d lost interest in Israel (atleast leadership had) in 1979.

      1. I figured they’d have lost interest after 1967…

        1. Given they got the Sinai back from Israel after fighting it in the 70’s (mostly so Sadat could have some cover for forming a real peace treaty without looking weak), I date their waning interest starting from the Camp David Accords.

          1. Right, I phrased that poorly. I was surprised they had the will to keep on fighting after getting their asses handed to them in the 6 day war. I guess, as you said, they had to save face before calling it quits.

      2. It’s all a huge coincidence. They happen to have suddenly lost interest in pushing teh Jewz into the sea, and the US just happens to provide their government with massive amounts of foreign aide. Correlation /= causation y’know.

      3. I guess we can look forward to finding out if the M-1 is a better tank than the Merkava. Alert the Military Channel.

  25. I don’t think anybody will be celebrating when the Brotherhood comes to power.

    This is Iran 1979 all over again, with Obama as Carter. Obama should have told them to crack down, and hard, rather than being wishy-washy.

    1. But it’s Democracy! It’s taking down the Man! It must be good!

    2. Right. Because one of the main duties the President of the U. S. has sworn to carry out is to instruct leaders of other countries how to manage their countries’ troubles.

      1. The President has a sworn duty to protect US global interests, and a stable, friendly Egypt free of Islamist control is a vital interest due not only to Israel, but the Suez Canal.

        Spare me the Wilson/Carter garbage.

        1. Actually, he swears to uphold and defend the Constitution. Find the word Egypt in there for me, would you?

          1. well, you have to remove a whole lot of letters and spaces in between and that “y” was hell to find, but you’ll see if you read between the lines, its there.

          2. He has control over Mubarak. He could tell them to crack the fuck down on the protesters at any time, but he won’t, because he’s a Carter-esque pussy and he’ll wait until we have the Brother hood in charge and an Egypt allied with Iran.

            The real nightmare is when it spreads to Saudi Arabia. You don’t even want to contemplate what will happen then.

            1. All 0.02% of the population who claims royal blood are executed and the world goes on?

            2. One would assume if Mubarak had the power to quell the rebellion, he wouldn’t need Obama to tell him to…unless you’re suggestion the US needs to send in our troops to support Mubarak…

              1. No, Obama is actively restraining Mubarak to our detriment. that’s my point.

                He asked if he would be backed up if force were used and Obama didn’t say he would. Which will haunt us for decades to come.

                1. He must be a lousy dictator if he has to asked for the US’s permission.

                  1. He has to, we supply his entire military and give Egypt billions in foreign aid.

                    Since there’s no more Soviet Union, he doesn’t have a benefactor to turn to if we give up on him.

                    1. Ooooh, big mistake on his part. Its best to be a dictator without being on the international tit.

                      On the bright side, there’s several billion back into our coffers to balance the budget.

                    2. I’m sure they’ll find something else to spend it on. Probably buying the new Egyptian gov’t after the dust settles.

                2. Obama can’t stop Sarah Palin, he sure as hell can’t stop a revolt in Egypt.

            3. The Saudi ruling class starts using oil money to fund religious extremists?

                1. Well, he does have an opportunity that he likely does not fucking have the first clue about here, involving the Egyptian Military, the Iranian example, and US interests in one neat little package. All that needs to be done is to point out via quiet backchannels, via military to military contacts, how the military guys in Iran really took it up the ass when the religious nutjobs got to be all in charge of things. Pretty quick end to the whole ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ nest of fundies and any chance they’ll be in charge of jack squat, which would probably be all fine and dandy with the bulk of the pro-democracy protestors in Egypt as well (who are mostly NOT Muslim Brotherhood religious fundie jerks), while at the same time not advertising like a neon sign that we’re messing with their internal affairs.

                  Any of the DC brain trust likely to take this tack, at all? Oh hell no. They lack the both the imagination AND stones, despite Hillary! and her much rumored possesion of both.

                  Given the usual course of human events, my bet is that the absolutely worst and stupidest outcome is what’s most likely to happen.

        2. Fuck stability.

          Hail Eris!

          1. Nice marriage and family you got there. I left something shiny for your wife and kids. Golden delicious, to be precise. Why do you think Michelle is on this fruit kick?

    3. Yeah, Mubarak is just like the Shah.

      Wait, we don’t have a Khomeini…someone needs to get on that pronto.

      Oh…and Bush was totally Carter during the Lebanon revolution.

      1. “Lebanon Revolution”? It led to Hizbollah taking power just this week.

        DEMOCRACY!

        1. oh noes!!!! DOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!!!

          1. Guess what the new flag of Hizbollah has on it?

            “Allah Akbar” written in the shape of a nuclear mushroom cloud.

            And the Brotherhood is related to Hamas and spawned the second in command of Al Qaeda, as well as the man who assassinated Sadat.

        2. BULLSHIT ALERT

    4. Hosni is that you?

    5. Eh. I think this fear is overblown. An Islamic-fundamentalist government in Egypt is one among many possible outcomes here. The protests really don’t seem all that religiously themed to me.

    6. Bullshit.

      Getting rid of a dictator is always a good thing.

      Who he is replaced with is another issue altogether.

      1. I’ll broaden that statement and say “Adminstration/Regime change is always a good thing…Who they’re replaced by is another issue altogether”

        🙂

      2. So, it was a good idea to get rid of Batista even though Castro followed?

        Are you serious?

        1. The cuban people might disagree at this point, but since the missle crisis, has it affected the US in any way other than made Miami Cuba Del Norte?

          1. So, it improved our food.

            1. Pickles = DO NOT WANT

              Otherwise I concur

              1. Something is seriously wrong with you.

              2. But the sandwich has three kinds of pork!

                1. Apparently you don’t understand my level of distaste for pickles…that I would pass up three kinds of pork.

                  1. I repeat, something is seriously wrong with you.

                    1. I don’t disagree

            2. We’re counting the pretty, but crazy women as a draw?

              1. Tell me, are they any crazier than Puerto Rican women?

                1. Not that I can tell, but my crazy meter may be too sensitive to discriminate.

        2. Can you not fucking read?

          1. Getting rid of Batista == good thing.

          2. Castro == bad thing.

          Two separate issues.

          The MB isnt running the protests in Egypt. Supporting the protesters overthrowing Mubarak is a good thing. If they then replace him with the Brotherhood, that is a separate bad thing.

          1. Bingo. Seems that it’s only the myopic and clueless pinheads in western media that tend to blur, conflate, and throw all this shit together like that, with a gratuitous dose of UN toady boy El Baradai thrown in for extra retching. Both the MB and El Baradai are neither responsible for what’s happening, nor shying away from trying to be total politicians by taking advantage and undue credit for events they showed up for after the fact. I wouldn’t shed a single tear if either became an ‘unfortunate’ footnote of history in the entire episode. As in ‘were squished flatter than a scarab beatle by a tourist bus full of German tourists on a day trip to the Valley of Kings’ unfortunate.

        3. Without Cuba, JFK would be remembered chiefly for boning Marilyn Monroe.

          1. What else did he do?

            1. Well, he almost started a nuclear war in a panic over something that didn’t actually increase the real danger to the United States, in the process helping the Stalinists remove a semi-reformist in the Kremlin.

              (The only thing the missiles in Cuba did, strategically, was reduce the available time for evacuation for senior officials in Washington in event of a nuclear war. To which the appropriate response would have been a back-channel negotiation to mutually remove missiles from Cuban and Turkey, not provoking a national panic and an international crisis. Worst. President. Ever.)

          2. Hey!

    7. Actually, I almost agree.

      But the “reality” is that the problem in 1979 was not that we let the Shah fall. It’s that we offered the Shah asylum and medical treatment.

      The Khomeini regime was reasonably accomodationist immediately following its rise to power. But when they demanded the Shah be repatriated and we said No, they lost their shit. In pretty much exactly the same way we did when we demanded Afghanistan turn over bin Laden and they said no to us.

      The Shah was a mass murdering scumbag and we should have stripped him naked and sent him back to Khomeini wearing a burlap fucking sack so he could receive the execution he so richly deserved. Had we done that, the history of events in the Middle East over the last 30 years would have been dramatically different.

      1. Eh, regardless of what the Shah was or was not, Khomeini was a radical thug that hated the west and worked to crush the moderate forces within his own government. Treatment of the Shah was just the excuse.

        Having said that, show me the Khomeini…

        1. IIRC, the Shah’s son recently met hi demise under violent circumstances recently.

          1. Pardon me whilst I report to the Dept. of Redundancy Dept. for re-education.

          2. Sure…and that means…what?

      2. That’s really not the case. The revolutionaries were pissed at us for supporting the Shah in the first place and for our intervention back in the 50s.

        1. The revolutionaries were yes, but Khomeini hated the west…just cause. Case of “powerful and ruthless leader” meets “disgruntled populace”. Combine and tada…crap sandwich.

        2. The Shah fell in January of 1979.

          He was admitted to the United States in October of 1979.

          From January to October, there was no hostage crisis, no oil embargo.

          A few days after the admission of the Shah to the US, the Iranians demanded his extradition.

          We said no.

          In the first week of November, the “students” attacked the embassy.

          There was a lot about the Khomeini regime to dislike, but the argument that Khomeini’s rise automatically meant an Iran actively hostile to the US has to account for that whole January to October 1979 period of no conflict.

          1. I don’t doubt the treatment of the Shah was the proximate cause of the hostage crisis, but they were going to hate us and not be our buddies regardless.

          2. Keep in mind that Khomeini hadn’t consolidated control until the Shah got admitted to the US. That allowed him to shout down the dissenters and finalize his grip on power and then rile of the “students” to attack the embassy. Khomeini hated the US beforehand (Israel, western culture, etc)

            1. Yeah, nice try pinning it all on the US – which you COULD do, in the person of one dumbass peanut farmer, and his insistence that the Shah be more ‘fair’ and ‘compassionate’ about a bunch of fundamental hard line Islamic radicals that wanted to establish a Caliphate and Islamofacism, regardless of women’s shoe fashions or hemlines in the west in general. The Shah may not have played pattycake to Jimmy’s liking, but they fully understood what they were dealing with, and what was required to keep it at bay. Which was being done, till Jimmy the Dhimmi yanked the fucking Persian Rug out from under them. Something we are STILL having to pay for, in a number of ways, ever since.

              1. The US position may have been nebulous, but the Shah was already weakened by cancer and phoned in the last few months of his reign. The US could have come out fully in support of the Shah and might not have changed the result.

      3. I cannot see how sacrificing the Shah to Khomenei would change Khomenei’s evil Islamist anti-Israeli attitude. Weak argument.

        1. I think the argument is more that it would have weakened his support base, such that liberals may have been able to get more power in the new government.

          1. He was too strong. Khameini was the head of Iran’s religious structure.

            1. Khomeini was in exile but had a fanatical and ruthless base of followers, Khameini is the current head of the religious structure and not the same person.

    8. Wow. You’re going to blame the President for allowing a people’s democratic aspirations to surface? You suck.

    9. Oh, fuck off. It is most definitely not part of the president’s job to tell other rulers what to do with their countries. And people do have a right to at least attempt to change their governments for the better. How do you know this won’t be more like Turkey than Iran?
      Mubarak is not going to live forever. Change in the Egyptian government is going to happen sometime. It’s happening now in a relatively peaceful way. I’m slightly optimistic.

  26. Guess what the new flag of Hizbollah has on it?

    “Allah Akbar” written in the shape of a nuclear mushroom cloud.

    1. I’m sorry, where is the mushroom cloud?

      1. i’m sorry, are you having a hard time finding the flag? Or did you just realize you’re lying your ass off?

        1. Yep, RC is just an ignorant troll.

          1. Salman Rushdie and Christopher Hitchens made the claim that the party symbol is a mushroom cloud in this video. I have no idea about the truth of the claim.

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KwjLMYFAx0

  27. Jacques: Don’t cry, my dear. I may not have been born a king, or lived like a king. But at least I can die like a king!
    [He strides to the guillotine with dignity]
    Citizen Official: Your Majesty, do you require a blindfold?
    Jacques: None!
    Citizen Official: Have you any last request?
    Jacques: None!
    Citizen Official: Test the guillotine!
    [Another executioner triggers the guillotine; the blade comes down and chops the head off a wooden dummy]
    Jacques: *Holy shit!* Uh, wait! Wait! Last request! I have a last request!
    Citizen Official: What is your last request?
    Jacques: Novocaine!
    [the Official confers with the Executioner]
    Citizen Official: There is no such thing known to medical science!
    Jacques: I’ll wait!

  28. But seriously, the best thing to result from this would be the destruction of Israel. That would = 50% of the world’s problems solved. How’s that for realism?

    1. Pretty far fetched to say the least.

    2. Surfing the net drunk is not a good idea either, Mr. Gibson…

  29. Can’t say I’m shocked that the military refuses to attack the protesters. Gunning down thousands of unarmed civilians in your home country is something few soldiers are prepared to do. Not that it’s unheard-of, just that it’s unlikely.

    1. Look for sales of autonomous attack drones to despots to triple next year.

      ” And with this touch screen I-Pad app, your majesty can spray the miserable scum with 20mm shells-all from the safety of the throne room.”

    2. Armies never shoot unarmed domestic civilians. They do shoot enemies of the state looking to overthrow the government (and the two groups look the same from a gun sight).

      Mubarak’s error is to not set the stage so that the army could pull the trigger. Mubarak should have claimed these protestors were mostly Jews and their allies, who have hidden in society in order to make Egypt a new Israeli sattelite. Too late for that now.

  30. Police and Royal Guard forces on the other hand…you can’t stop those mothas..they’re jacked and looking for the target.

  31. Islam sure fucking blows. I feel that needs to be said more often.

    1. So does Christianity, for that matter.

  32. Here are some heartwarming, freedom-loving quotes from the leader of the Brotherhood:

    “Today the Muslims desperately need a mentality of honor and means of power [that will enable them] to confront global Zionism. [This movement] knows nothing but the language of force, so [the Muslims] must meet iron with iron, and winds with [even more powerful] storms. They crucially need to understand that the improvement and change that the [Muslim] nation seeks can only be attained through jihad and sacrifice and by raising a jihadi generation that pursues death just as the enemies pursue life.”

    And:

    “The Soviet Union fell dramatically, but the factors that will lead to the collapse of the U.S. are much more powerful than those that led to the collapse of the Soviet empire – for a nation that does not champion moral and human values cannot lead humanity, and its wealth will not avail it once Allah has had His say, as happened with [powerful] nations in the past. The U.S. is now experiencing the beginning of its end, and is heading towards its demise…

    And:

    “Resistance is the only solution against the Zio-American arrogance and tyranny, and all we need is for the Arab and Muslim peoples to stand behind it and support it. The peoples know well who is [carrying out] resistance and who has sold out the [Palestinian] cause and bargained over it. We say to our brothers the mujahideen in Gaza: be patient, persist in [your jihad], and know that Allah is with you…”

    DEMOCRACY!

    http://www.theatlantic.com/int…..for/70502/

    1. You know, they’re not the only dog in this fight. Whether they come out on top is yet to be determined…and within their organization is both moderation and radicalism. So split could and probably will occur.

    2. It’s disturbing that you think gunning down protesters in the streets will be effective. If Obama demands that when the government does fall (and believe me there is no going back at this point) it will be more Anti-American than ever.

      Yeah the people taking over probably aren’t great either but it’s inevitable at this point. Pretending we can prevent this is audacious. Influence after the fact? Perhaps, but not if we endorse their military shooting down people in the streets.

      1. It seemed to work out for the Chinese.

        It doesn’t take much for people to get the message.

        1. You really want to hitch your wagon to that horse?

          1. Did it work, or not?

            1. No, it didnt. The chinese still arent free.

              1. I think that argument doesn’t compute with Mr. RC. Freedom for Egyptians he doesn’t care about, status quo is what really matters. Or atleast getting rid of those creepy Muslims…*shiver*

            2. not if they hadn’t started opening up their economy already and cut down on the rampant bureaucratic corruption. And now their memory will always be shooting students.

              1. Nobody growing up in China now even knows that it happened.

                1. Oh, I’m sorry, I didn’t know you were commenting out of Shanghai….ohhhh wait….

                2. We know the names of those that died at the Boston Massacre. We don’t even know how many died at Tiananmen, let alone their names.

                3. I work with Chinese students. That is a lie.

                  1. Reality Check is full of crap and not worth responding to.

      2. Yeah, people would die, but far more would die and far more lives made miserable under an Islamist theocracy that throws acid in the faces of women who don’t wear veils.

        1. Hey, I havent had a chance to use this in a while.

          FUCK UTILITARIANISM.

          Also, fuck you and your evil brain. Murder is never acceptable.

          1. FUCK UTILITARIANISM.

            Absolute agreement. This is what this boils down to. It also ilustrates the difference between libertarians and neocons/liberal “humaniatarian” interventionism.

          2. I think the point should be made that utilitarianism works fine in this case considering there are far more than two options and one of those options will bring the most liberty and the least death. The choices aren’t limited to Mubarak’s American-backed dictatorship or the Muslim Brotherhood’s anti-American dictatorship.

            Libertarianism and utilitarianism are complementary because maximizing utility or personal happiness is usually a function of maximizing freedom.

        2. Don’t move to Arkansas

    3. How are any of those quotes anti-freedom? Oh riiight… because they’re anti-American and anti-Isreali.

      1. Don’t take my comment as a defense of the MB, but the idea that Anti-American/Israeli = Ant-Freedom is… dumb.

        1. No not really. Those 2 countries are compared to the rest embodiments of freedom. To be profreedom you really have to be pro-America and pro-Israel. Anything else is like liking sunlight but hating the sun.

          1. You have that backwards. Freedom is the sun and Israel and the US are illuminated (a little bit) by the sun. You can still like the sun, but not like the partly cloudy conditions of the US and Israel, even if it is nicer there than in Egypt where it is pretty cloudy.

          2. Sorry, but never thought of Israel as the embodiment of freedom. It’s got one of the larger per-capita governments in the world and they have no qualms about violently crushing vast neighborhoods of people who are supposedly not citizens but also not allowed to be independent.

            1. Compared to her neighbors, Israel is free. It’s also gotten much more free-markety over the decades. And the people ‘crushed’ by Israel have more rights being ‘crushed’ than they do as an independent ‘nation’. Crushing enemies of freedom is what good nations do.

              1. Well, considering most of the dead in the Gaza invasion were civilians, not the “enemies of freedom,” and considering Israel’s bizarre penchant for genocide with, for example, the Sabra and Shatila massacre…

                Israel is the epitome of “security state” and the occupied territories are certainly not free. Israel has the “Basic Law” to protect rights, but since they are in a constant state of emergency, this is largely suspended. They have little regard for the property rights of Palestinians and use military force at the expense of taxpayers to subsidize provocative settlements deep in occupied territory, in violation of their own peace agreements.

                Zionism is not dissimilar to Manifest Destiny and is founded on the antilibertarian notion that since the Jews were victimized by the Europeans, the Europeans needed to be guilted into helping them victimize the Palestinians, who happened to be interfering with their religious predestination. Now the cycle of violence is so deep, it’s pointless to point fingers, but “relative freedom” compared to its neighbors does not mean that it is pro-freedom to be pro-Israeli government. When Israel makes a concerted effort to break the cycle of violence and provocation and supports democracy (which obviously they don’t in countries like Egypt), then we can have a discussion of whether Israel (or America for that matter) is a pro-freedom entity. Nationalism is rarely a pro-freedom stance, however.

                1. So what if there were a lot of civilians killed in the Gaza fighting? That’s not their moral burden. Many of those civilians were not innocent either; they were Hamas supporters either morally and/or practically.

                  Israel is the only ME state that is really nice to gays and minorities. Arabs are represented in its legislature and they also have property and political rights unheard of in most of the rest of the ME. I don’t approve of Israel’s conscription or settlements, but they are only a security state insofar as they perceive it to be vital to their survival. Besides, it’s Israel’s right to occupy territory it won during a war of aggression upon it. Israel has always been the victim.

                  When Israel makes a concerted effort to break the cycle of violence and provocation and supports democracy

                  Oh seriously fuck right off. Israel gave up Sinai. Israel was willing to give pretty much everything Arafat wanted but no he’d rather have an intifada. Israel unilaterally pulled out of Lebanon and Gaza. I approved of both these pullouts at the time and the Palies have been doing everything they can to make me regret it. What major action have the Palestinians done for peace aside from get their asses kicked when Israel got really serious about fighting back?

                  1. Israel has always been the victim.

                    Woah there buddy. Let’s atleast acknowlege the Israeli initial pushout of the existing palestinians in the 1950’s and the past and current “settlements”. Throwing people off their land and bulldozing their homes is not quite victimhood.

                  2. Let me phrase it a different way: China is significantly pro-freedom compared to Burma and North Korea. Even though it is a human rights-violating fascist regime, China has a semblance of capitalism and personal freedom. By your logic it is pro-liberty to support China’s government because relative to some of their neighbors they are free.

                    Being pro-freedom requires objective standards, not relative comparisons to one’s neighbors. If every nation were a tad more free than North Korea, we’d still be a world full of slavery.

                    And if you want to play that game, nearby Cyprus is far freer than Israel, comparatively – and about as free overall as the United States (smaller per capita government and slightly more personal freedom, with a bit less economic freedom). Not really ME per se, but the point still stands.

      2. What makes you think that RealityCheck is pro-freedom? It sounds like he’s just a simple nationalist. Although whether the nation in question is the U.S. or Israel, I have no idea.

        1. This: “Here are some heartwarming, freedom-loving quotes from the leader of the Brotherhood”

          Although your analysis is correct. I called myself a conservative for a number of years and I know exactly how RealityCheck’s warped mind works.

  33. Florida Judge Strikes Down Entirety of Obamacare

    The full text of the decision from Federal Judge Roger Vinson is not available yet, but according to reporters who’ve seen the decision, he’s ruled the entire Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act unconstitutional. The ruling favors of the 26 state attorney generals challenging the law. The judge ruled the individual mandate that requires all Americans to purchase health insurance invalid and, according to the decision, “because the individual mandate is unconstitutional and not severable, the entire Act must be declared void.”

    http://www.sfexaminer.com/blog…..titutional

    1. USA! USA! USA!

      /now this decision has to hold up on appeal

    2. Nancy Pelosi just shit her pants.

  34. I hope no one here has ANY doubt what would happen if American soldiers found themselves in similar circumstances.

    Remember the Bonus Army!

    1. Tell us, oh prophet.

    2. I don’t think the army would fire on rioting US citizens with a legitimate beef.

      The cops would have taken them down before the army ever deployed.

      1. A large enough group of Texans could hold out any amount of cops you throw at them.

        *says this with a sense of misplaced pride*

        1. Apparently 86, or however many were at the Branch Davidian compound weren’t enough? Or does BATF(E) not count?

          1. Most were women and children…and come on, that wasn’t the police anymore.

            Wait…why am I trying to justify what was obviously a humorous exxageration…

          2. Hey, now. BATF had to call in the FBI for help.

        2. Ugh, don’t remind me.

      2. Yeah that would never happen!

  35. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, derving their just powers from the consent of the governed, that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of those ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolist it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

    Oh, and fuck reality check.

    1. “Oh, and fuck reality check.”

      No thank you.

  36. If it happened here, which side would the TSA take?

    1. The TSA would want to kill the protestors and then molest their corpses, but luckily they’ll be unionized soon and all you’ll need to do to defeat them is wait for them to go on break.

  37. Could we refrain from referring to “Reality Check” as “RC”?

    Just asking, is all.

    1. You should just start going by “Will Smith”

      1. Big Willie Style!

  38. While the MB warrants concern and a close eye, I find the comparisons to Iran ’79 made by Real Cunt to be hysterical. There is no equivalent to the figure of Khomeini. No, the MB’s leader doesn’t count he doesn’t have nearly the same stature. Further, in the Iran revolution, I believe the army was rendered inoperable. It seems the Egyptian army is not only operable but able to set the course of the country to a much greater degree than the MB. And the army likely does NOT have an interest in getting its ass handed to it by Israel again.

    I think the army should just coup it. Take power, head up a secular Ataturk government -“temporarily” of course-and craft a hard-core secular constitution that keeps Islamists and other anti-Israel forces from actually doing anything even if they achieve power.

    1. One other thing: fuck the House of Sod and SA. If this whole thing ends with Riyadh burning it will be worth it even if the MB gets into power.

        1. Sorry. Sod>Saud.

          1. KNEEL before Zod!

    2. As i mentioned upthread, the best way to keep the MB out of the equation, and for the military to make sure about that, is simply to remind the Egyptian military guys just how hard the Iranian Military took it up the ass when the Islamofascists got ahold of power in Iran. My guess is that this would also 86 El Baradai’s parasitic lurch for some sort of relevance simply by the MB having even mentioned his name as acceptable, much less endorsing the little toad.

      1. El Baradai is a douchenozzle…but there are worse things.

  39. If the Saudi royals are being hung from lampposts by the end of the month I might cream my pants

    1. The next time I hear the Sauds referred to as ‘Arab Allies (of the West)’, I might have a small stroke. Worst allies ever.

  40. You have to be wary of what kind of regime replaces Mubarak. In 1917 the Czar’s troops refused to fire on the people as well. All you have to do is read a history book to figure out the rest.

    1. Happens all the time, else the Orange, Rose and Cedar revolutions wouldn’t have happened. Dictators don’t exactly breed civility. You just have to hope that the leaders and followers of the revolution ave learned the lessons from the previous revolutions and attempt not to make the same mistakes.

      Also, always pre-fire the police upon institution of a new regime. I’ve never not heard of a corrupt police force under a dictator.

  41. fuc thisxz bull shit god damn meh ass hole

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.