Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 61

Thread: Prepare to See the Right in a Frothy Froth of Frothyness

  1. #1
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,650
    Post Thanks / Like

    Prepare to See the Right in a Frothy Froth of Frothyness

    [QUOTE][B][U][SIZE="6"]Muslim Brotherhood envoys met with White House officials in DC[/SIZE][/U][/B]


    White House officials met this week with envoys from the Muslim Brotherhood, in the latest sign that the Islamist group is returning to prominence in post-Mubarak Egypt after years in political exile.

    White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said representatives from the organization met with "mid-level" officials from the National Security Council in Washington.

    The meeting was held Tuesday, though it's unclear whether they met at the White House or elsewhere in the capital.

    The Obama administration cast the decision to meet with Brotherhood representatives as a reflection of political reality in the country, since the group will play a "prominent role" in Cairo going forward.

    "We have broadened our engagement to include new and emerging political parties and actors," Carney said Thursday. "Because of the fact that Egypt's political landscape has changed, the actors have become more diverse and our engagement reflects that. The point is that we will judge Egypt's political actors by how they act -- not by their religious affiliation."

    He also noted that Republican Sens. John McCain and Lindsey Graham met with the Brotherhood on a visit to Egypt.

    The Brotherhood was officially banned under Hosni Mubarak before he was overthrown, though it continued to be a force in Egyptian politics. The Brotherhood has past ties to terror group Hamas and espouses the implementation of Shariah law.

    But the Brotherhood, which says it is committed to nonviolence, returned to win control of the country's parliament in post-Mubarak elections.

    And despite saying earlier it would not put up a presidential candidate, the Brotherhood over the weekend nominated a prominent businessman to run.

    The United States, though, has not condemned the move. Administration officials have told The New York Times they were actually optimistic about the nomination -- as he could pose a challenge to another hard-line Islamist candidate now leading the race. [/QUOTE]

    Combine this, with sectarian and Tribal violence in Post-War Libya as bad (if not worse) than currently going on in Iraq, and the right will be claiming a hardcore "Told you so" during the Presidential Campaign.

    Man, we really have gotten bad at winning Wars, probably because we keep getting entangled in Wars that really have no clear purpose and can't be "won" like old school Wars could.

    Iraq?

    Afghanistan?

    Libya?

    Pakistan, Syria, Africa, etc.

    Not a clear-cut victory in the bunch.

  2. #2
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,365
    Post Thanks / Like
    We had no military action in Egypt.

    What's the problem with talking?

  3. #3
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,308
    Post Thanks / Like
    Don't think we'll see much froth. This has been out a few days now. There hasn't been a post yet.

    P.S. I see you conveniently left out our biggest, most expensive war. The War on Drugs. We won that one.

    Wait...

  4. #4
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,650
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SafetyBlitz;4428259]We had no military action in Egypt.[/quote]

    Agreed.

    We exerted heavy political pressure on a 30+ year ally that helped lead to his being deposed, and replaced with a Millitary Dictatorship, that will be replaced by a Democraticly Elected Pro-Islamic Fundamentalist Pro-War-With-Israel Majority.

    I'm fine with that btw. Their country, to do with as they wish.

    As long as they don't **** with us or our allies.

    [quote]What's the problem with talking?[/QUOTE]

    Depends on who you're talking to.

    For example, I wouldn't talk with the Third Reich.

    I wouldn;t talk with Stalin's Soviet Union.

    And personally, I wouldn't talk with an Islamic Fundamentalist/Terrorist State who wants to wage war on an ally of ours.

    But it's for each voter to decide how they feel about our role in the changes in Egypt, why we did what we did, and what the outcome is.

    I'd bet there are MANY Deocrat voters who think this is the best possible outcome for Egypt and welcome allying with the M.B. with open arms.

  5. #5
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,650
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetPotato;4428263]P.S. I see you conveniently left out our biggest, most expensive war. The War on Drugs. We won that one.

    Wait...[/QUOTE]

    I think you know where I stand on that one mate.

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    4,733
    Post Thanks / Like
    He is just breaking bread, then serving a pork chop dinner.

  7. #7
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7,875
    Post Thanks / Like
    lol...

    [quote]met with "mid-level" officials[/quote]

  8. #8
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,365
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4428265]Agreed.

    We exerted heavy political pressure on a 30+ year ally that helped lead to his being deposed, and replaced with a Millitary Dictatorship, that will be replaced by a Democraticly Elected Pro-Islamic Fundamentalist Pro-War-With-Israel Majority.

    I'm fine with that btw. Their country, to do with as they wish.

    [B]As long as they don't **** with us or our allies.[/B][/QUOTE]

    Agreed on the bold, and that clearly is the most important thing.

    Whether we supported Mubarak or not, it's likely the Egyptians would have deposed him. Lets not make it sound like we were integral in deposing him, that it was our choice. In fact, we probably supported him right up until it was unfashionable to do so.

    [QUOTE=Warfish;4428265]Depends on who you're talking to.

    For example, I wouldn't talk with the Third Reich.

    I wouldn;t talk with Stalin's Soviet Union.

    And personally, I wouldn't talk with an Islamic Fundamentalist/Terrorist State who wants to wage war on an ally of ours.

    But it's for each voter to decide how they feel about our role in the changes in Egypt, why we did what we did, and what the outcome is.

    I'd bet there are MANY Deocrat voters who think this is the best possible outcome for Egypt and welcome allying with the M.B. with open arms.[/QUOTE]

    We have and did talk to the Soviet Union during the Cold War... a lot.

    I mean are we really ready to call the Muslim Brotherhood the Third Reich? Listen I'm not defending these guys, let me be clear, but I just, you know, I just don't see how they're the Third Reich and we shouldn't be talking to them at all.

    Talking to them also doesn't really imply anything, we could be saying "Hey, you f*** with Israel, you f*** with us." Meeting over. After the wikileaks scandal where we learned that we say publicly is largely what we say privately, unlike the rest of the goddam world, I wouldn't really worry so much about this.

    Welcoming them with open arms. Man, what a partisan way to describe "democrat voters wants" with reality. You think as a democratic voter I even want to talk to these people that treat their women like sh*t? Of course not. But this is the real world, and part of being in the real world is talking to people that you do not like in order to not physically fight them over every difference.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    19,603
    Post Thanks / Like
    Disagree on frothyness. It'd be different if it was al Queda, Taliban, or Hamas.

  10. #10
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,650
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SafetyBlitz;4428295]Whether we supported Mubarak or not, it's likely the Egyptians would have deposed him.[/quote]

    I don't agree with that at all. The level of support and advice given to Mubarak (or not) by the U.S. Government was absolutely vital in his and Egypt's future.

    Don't downplay the power of Obama now, his publicly stated position and lack of any support was absolutely vital to this outcome. Like it or not, he owns a part of that, same as he owns a part of the future of Libya, and the ongoing tribal slaughter there.

    [QUOTE]We have and did talk to the Soviet Union during the Cold War... a lot.[/QUOTE]

    I didn't say the Soviet Union during the Cold War. I said Stalin's Soviet Union. Given the depths of evil of that man and that regime.

    [QUOTE]I mean are we really ready to call the Muslim Brotherhood the Third Reich?[/QUOTE]

    Absolutely.

    You couldn't ask for a closer ideal by ideal comparison to be honest, outside their core motivation (one is faith, one is ethnicity, also not exactly worlds apart).

    [QUOTE]Talking to them also doesn't really imply anything, we could be saying "Hey, you f*** with Israel, you f*** with us." Meeting over.[/QUOTE]

    Riiiiiight.;)

  11. #11
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,647
    Post Thanks / Like
    disagree on frothy ness.

    Frothyness is saved for Obama's kids going on vacation or Michelle suggesting we eat veggies.

  12. #12
    All League
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,565
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4428371]I don't agree with that at all. The level of support and advice given to Mubarak (or not) by the U.S. Government was absolutely vital in his and Egypt's future.

    Don't downplay the power of Obama now, his publicly stated position and lack of any support was absolutely vital to this outcome. Like it or not, he owns a part of that, same as he owns a part of the future of Libya, and the ongoing tribal slaughter there.



    I didn't say the Soviet Union during the Cold War. I said [COLOR="Red"]Stalin's Soviet Union.[/COLOR] Given the depths of evil of that man and that regime.



    Absolutely.

    You couldn't ask for a closer ideal by ideal comparison to be honest, outside their core motivation (one is faith, one is ethnicity, also not exactly worlds apart).



    Riiiiiight.;)[/QUOTE]

    They didn't need to "talk" with us, The great [COLOR="Red"]F.D.R.[/COLOR] had them in his administration.

  13. #13
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    21,929
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=FF2®;4428451]...Michelle suggesting we eat veggies.[/QUOTE]

    ARG!!

    Vegetables?!?!?

    Terrible. How are Texans supposed to clog their arteries while sitting in lawn chairs, eating undercooked hamburger meat and watching guys drive in circles 500 times on Sunday afternoons?!?!

    Obama. Whar. Ghrab. And stuff....

  14. #14
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,650
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=FF2®;4428451]disagree on frothy ness.

    Frothyness is saved for Obama's kids going on vacation or Michelle suggesting we eat veggies.[/QUOTE]

    See kids, this is what we mean by "Off Topic Post".

    Lets explore:

    1. Has no relation to the topic being discussed? Check.

    2. Is an attempt to derail the topic being discussed to something more friendly to his worldview? Check.

    Yep, standard issue troll sighted.

  15. #15
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,365
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4428371]I don't agree with that at all. The level of support and advice given to Mubarak (or not) by the U.S. Government was absolutely vital in his and Egypt's future.

    Don't downplay the power of Obama now, his publicly stated position and lack of any support was absolutely vital to this outcome. Like it or not, he owns a part of that, same as he owns a part of the future of Libya, and the ongoing tribal slaughter there.

    [QUOTE]How history will judge Obama on Egypt
    EGYPTIAN PEOPLE

    February 12, 2011|By Hamid Dabashi, Special to CNN


    A dictator has fallen. A people are freed. The sky is the limit of their dream, and the dream of the rest of the world celebrating with them.

    How will history judge President Barack Obama's response to the seismic changes that have happened in Egypt?

    Observers around the globe are comparing the extraordinary events unfolding in and around Tahrir Square and the dramatic exit of Hosni Mubarak to the fall of the Berlin Wall, to the collapse of the Soviet Union or alternatively to the aspirations of the protesters of Tiananmen Square.

    All these metaphors can only hint at the historic magnitude of what we have been seeing unfold in front of our eyes, and not just in Egypt. And we are still coming to terms with the uprising in Tunisia and the Green Movement in Iran that followed the disputed presidential election of 2009.

    There is no doubt that when one puts these three events next to each other, all in the short span of 2½ years, the old, clichéd manner in which Washington tries to understand them categorically fails.

    The Obama administration's response to the Egypt revolution has been, from beginning to end, indecisive and incoherent, leading one to wonder who really minds the shop at the White House at times of crisis.

    Beginning with Vice President Joe Biden supporting President Hosni Mubarak as an ally and "not a dictator," and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton initially saying the regime was stable down to Obama handing the Egyptian president a laundry list of what he has to do "right now" before finally applauding the cause of the victorious protesters, we are witness to a political culture that's more embarrassing to the U.S. than the WikiLeaks disclosures.

    What we are dealing with is not merely a matter of "realist" and "pragmatic" policymakers trying to sustain a status quo that has resulted in catastrophic wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and an evidently insoluble Arab-Israeli conflict. Far more seriously, the dominant political culture of Washington is the issue. Obama got to the White House by challenging that culture and has now become a captive of it.

    The ground is shifting in one of the most vital spots on planet Earth with dizzying speed, and Washington seemed incapable of shifting its gears fast enough to catch up with it. America risks being seen as irrelevant and inconsequential to the rest of the world.

    (Page 2 of 2)
    Long before the demise of Mubarak, Obama should have recognized the historic importance of what was happening in Egypt and directly addressed the Egyptian people -- acknowledging their democratic will to be free, sharing their dream for emancipation from a politics of deception and despair and anticipating the spread of that dream to other parts of the region. He should have committed his administration not to wait for the fall of the next dictator before Americans extend their hands in solidarity with a transnational uprising to achieve a better world.

    Mubarak is now lost in ignominy in history. But what will American children read in their history books a decade or a century from now? How will Obama, once seen as a visionary statesman, be viewed?

    When he received the Nobel Peace Prize at the outset of his presidency, I was among those who said publicly that he deserved it. So early in his career as a president, he had not done anything meaningful to lend credence to that honor. But I thought he had awakened a sense of pride, purpose and dignity among the younger generation of Americans that would commit them to contribute greatly to humanity at large. In the events of the past month in Tunisia and Cairo, he has had a gift from history to justify the prize after the fact -- but alas he did very little to show he deserved it.

    The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Hamid Dabashi.[/QUOTE]

    [url]http://articles.cnn.com/2011-02-12/opinion/dabashi.obama.egypt_1_egyptian-people-egypt-revolution-dream?_s=PM:OPINION[/url][/QUOTE]


    This wasn't that long ago. We did not make nor were we "instrumental" in Egypt's revolution. The prevailing criticism and opinion at the time was that the US was never exactly clear on what it wanted till the very end when it became inevitable that Mubarak would be gone.


    [QUOTE=Warfish;4428371]I didn't say the Soviet Union during the Cold War. I said Stalin's Soviet Union. Given the depths of evil of that man and that regime.



    Absolutely.

    You couldn't ask for a closer ideal by ideal comparison to be honest, outside their core motivation (one is faith, one is ethnicity, also not exactly worlds apart).



    Riiiiiight.;)[/QUOTE]

    Listen if you really think they're an "ideal comparison" to Stalin and the Third Reich, you should be calling for us to fight them now in Egypt before they ever reach that level.

  16. #16
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,650
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=SafetyBlitz;4428562]This wasn't that long ago. We did not make nor were we "instrumental" in Egypt's revolution. The prevailing criticism and opinion at the time was that the US was never exactly clear on what it wanted till the very end when it became inevitable that Mubarak would be gone.[/quote]

    As I expected, now that things don't look rosy, we "had almost nothing to do with it". Had it gone great, it would be an Obama Acomplishment. Best of both worlds politics.

    [quote]Listen if you really think they're an "ideal comparison" to Stalin and the Third Reich, you should be calling for us to fight them now in Egypt before they ever reach that level.[/QUOTE]

    I'm not a Neo-Con, I don't support policies of theoretical "presumptive preemption".

  17. #17
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,647
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4428514]See kids, this is what we mean by "Off Topic Post".

    Lets explore:

    1. Has no relation to the topic being discussed? Check.

    2. Is an attempt to derail the topic being discussed to something more friendly to his worldview? Check.

    Yep, standard issue troll sighted.[/QUOTE]

    I thought you had me on ignore? :(

    Listen, if you had any sense or nuance or irony my posts would be crystal-clear and on point. I'm not going to dumb it down just for you.

  18. #18
    All League
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    3,565
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan;4428480]ARG!!

    Vegetables?!?!?

    Terrible. [COLOR="Red"]How are Texans supposed to clog their arteries while sitting in lawn chairs, eating undercooked hamburger meat and watching guys drive in circles 500 times on Sunday afternoons?[/COLOR]!?!

    Obama. Whar. Ghrab. And stuff....[/QUOTE]

    Hey Dumazz, We're into monster trucks, Settin on our bench seats from our wreaked f250 that's placed on our dirt lawn over where the dog is chained, and eatin under cooked bb-q brisket.

  19. #19
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,650
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=FF2®;4428789]I thought you had me on ignore? :([/quote]

    You've known for a while now that you're not. Pleading iognorance is no excuse, nor is the idea that you're going to knowingly troll my thread/topics under the premise that it's ok because I can't see your trolling.:rolleyes:

    Again, why not just stay away FF? Is it really so hard? Is annoying me and stalking my threads really the only fun you can have?

    [quote]Listen, if you had any sense or nuance or irony my posts would be crystal-clear and on point. I'm not going to dumb it down just for you.[/QUOTE]

    Listen, there is no nuance or irony, just trolling and derailing. Standard issue troll material, without any style or substance. I don't need it "dumbed down" FF, as you're as dumb as it comes round here.

    Now, sod off. You're neither wanted nor needed here. Can't be more clear than that.

  20. #20
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,647
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4428802]You've known for a while now that you're not. Pleading iognorance is no excuse, nor is the idea that you're going to knowingly troll my thread/topics under the premise that it's ok because I can't see your trolling.:rolleyes:

    Again, why not just stay away FF? Is it really so hard? Is annoying me and stalking my threads really the only fun you can have?



    Listen, there is no nuance or irony, just trolling and derailing. Standard issue troll material, without any style or substance. I don't need it "dumbed down" FF, as you're as dumb as it comes round here.

    Now, sod off. You're neither wanted nor needed here. Can't be more clear than that.[/QUOTE]

    Listen, last time I checked this is a public forum. Your constant insults, bullying and whining to the Mods won't stop me from expressing my opinions. Simply because you disagree with their content is no reason to call for my ouster. Suck it up big fella.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us