Updated Title: World Revolution 2011

Rule by the Muslim Brotherhood would not be a good thing. That said, although the MB follows a radical ideology, they are not a violent group now (unlike in the '80's). That is, the MB should not be confused with al Qaeda. If you think radically, you join the MB; if you want to kill folks, you join al Qaeda. So rule by the MB, while it would not be a good thing, is not the same as installing a terrorist regime.

With all of that said, it is extremely unlikely that the MB could seize power. While they are organized and get a lot of press, they are not a particularly large group numerically compared to the total population of Egypt. So if Egypt turned democratic, it is very unlikely that the MB would be a ruling party, although they may capture a seat or two in the legislature.

El Baradei represents a rational and moderate Egyptian political voice. When all is said and done, I hope that he assumes power within a genuine Egyptian democracy. This would be good for us. If you follow terrorists, you know that they almost always come from places with autocratic regimes. Places like Turkey, which are both Muslim and democratic, produce far fewer terrorists.

If I could, I would storm the palace and put Mubarak out on the streets TODAY. I would install a caretaking UN oversight committee to keep the government and economy viable. Then I would schedule democratic elections for as soon as possible and presume that El Baradei would win the elections.

Is that not one of the biggest things the ME hates about out siders today. That would just give fuel to the radicals that say the left just wants to take them over.

Problem is we are in a messed up situation. Western powers have always pushed pro-western regimes in the ME. These regimes had to be authoritarian to ally with the West the way they did. I am a strong believer that all people have the right to live democratically and their society will push towards that direction against the status quo.

Unfortunately the status quo was pro-Western, so most of the stronger democratic movements in the ME have been anti-Western in nature.

We are screwed whatever way we move on this. It is about minimizing the level of that.

Is that not one of the biggest things the ME hates about out siders today. That would just give fuel to the radicals that say the left just wants to take them over.

I understand your argument. My idea (which was not the most important thing I said) includes the idea that such a presence would be clearly presented as very short-term only and that such a presence would take it as a top priority to provide oversight for genuine elections. That is, such an idea would take pains to make it clear to Egyptians, both in word and action, that it has no intention to do anything but mind the store for a minute. Since it would be a UN committee, it could even be staffed by representatives from Middle Eastern countries, which should allay some fears.

Yeah, burning down well-guarded stone buildings far far away in the ****ing desert. Really practical. Or are you just ignorant of the logistics?

The pyramids and the Sphinx are located in Giza, essentially a suburb if cairo with a population of 5 million. Not exactly the middle of nowhere.

Apparently opposition parties meet with VP Omar Sulieman to discuss constitutional change. The Muslim Brotherhood was not included in the meetings.

The pyramids and the Sphinx are located in Giza, essentially a suburb if cairo with a population of 5 million. Not exactly the middle of nowhere.

Apparently opposition parties meet with VP Omar Sulieman to discuss constitutional change. The Muslim Brotherhood was not included in the meetings.

What a terrible mistake.

It looks like Sulieman did meet with the MB.

In Egypt, Muslim Brotherhood reverses course, agrees to talks on transition (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/02/05/AR2011020501707.html?hpid=topnews)

Initially it sounds they didn't want to meet with him, but I think once they saw concessions are being made they jumped at the opportunity. Its a little weird hearing they want a democracy, but have it based on religious law. Didn't the puritans try that?

What a terrible mistake.

Why? Just curious, i dont really know what to think either way

Why? Just curious, i dont really know what to think either way

They are considered to be one of the largest opposition organizations to the current government. So if there was a transition to occur they would represent the feelings of a large population.

Well my buddies parents made it home safe but it was a pain in the ass. They really did not know how big this was until they got out because the news had been pretty much cut off. Their travel agency refunded their money plus some and they also gave everyone cell phones to call home.

They are considered to be one of the largest opposition organizations to the current government. So if there was a transition to occur they would represent the feelings of a large population.

That and the fact that excluding groups rarely works...see the exclusion of Ba'ath party in Iraq and Taliban in Afghanistan. You want them to have a voice even if you dont agree with them...unlike al qada they can at least play political ball.