Weekend Sober Thread: Shit's Gettin' Real in Egypt

Any thoughts on this thing escalating into WWIII?

Seems like all it would really take is any one of the US, Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, or Israel to go do something stupid.

Oh, and what's up with the Sudan? Did they split into two countries or what? Can someone keep a running list of countries turned upside down?

 

Semi-informed rampant speculation: There are some imaginable scenarios by which this could escalate to WWIII. Let's say after all this shakes out, the Islamic brotherhood is able to land a candidate the presidency. This would, of course, have a highly combustible relationship with Israel. Israel has shown that they don't hesitate to lay the smackdown. A slight provocation could lead to outright war. Global opinion is difficult to predict. Obviously, the Muslim world would ally themselves with Egypt. Europe could go either way. Their populace has shown great sympathy toward Palestinians but the same sympathy may not extend to Egyptian provocation. The wildcard, of course, is America. As of now, most indications have been US and Israel unity, but as of late this has not been the case. Not only has popular opinion started to shift, there have been increasing tensions between the two governments. It would seem that whatever side America picks, if it picks one at all, would win. The big thing to keep in mind is that the debt problems of Western nations might make them resistant to entering war. If the West stayed out though, Israel would be on its own against the entire middle east. If America came to its rescue, then yeah, I can see WWIII happening pitting the US and Israel against the whole of the middle east + Pakistan(and remember, Pakistan's got nukes). Now I can't imagine a scenario where China or India get involved, but if they did...HoLeeShit.

This quick thought experiment does bring up the point that other than Egyptians, no one has more at stake here than Israel.

 

This is pretty much SOP for Al Jezeera. It's high time that America get over its "Oh my god, but it's teh Muslim's news network" prejudice and realize that we're missing out on one of the world's best news networks.

 

Interesting point it makes about subsidized bread and wheat. This year will see a significant drop in wheat harvests globally (-5% or more) so the price of wheat is going to rise to the point it won't be economically feasible to pay for the people's good faith. This can and will have huge effects combined with the power of educated, unemployed, poor youths and their access to the internet.

For better or worse, the winds of change are blowing. Even China has blocked searching for the word 'Egypt' on their state controlled search engines.

 

I have a long-distance thing going on with a girl just outside of Alexandria. With the social media blackout in Egypt I haven't been getting anything firsthand there from an actual Egyptian. When things start getting switched back on, if the thread isn't closed by then, I'll post anything interesting she or her family have to say.

 

This is exciting. Not in a perverse sense of the world, but this Egypt stuff validates our national construction. If they want it, they should be able to have it, too. This could be the domino that starts the next great period - a sort of historical demarcation. It's an all or nothing moment, in my humble opinion.

I certainly hope we come down on the right side of this one.

 

So was it just me or does anyone remember how Israel recently launched attack spy sharks to Egyptian beaches recently?

Clearly not a coincidence. Those sharks were sent out to destabilize the entire Mediterranean. Israel isn't worried about a war starting: it's already begun.

 

Because we all know how rational world leaders are. All it takes is one lunatic, and if we've learned anything during this crisis it's that there are lunatics running some countries.

Not saying I think this will lead to nuke launching, I give that probability of less than 5%, just saying I don't agree with the statement that "No state actor is ever going to use nuclear weapons." Especially considering some of the countries that aren't that far off from getting some.

Fuck, back to Egypt.

 

Correct.

Also correct, but I wouldn't use the term "unthinkable". I'd bet my life every nuculear power has a highly classified plan for just those kind of situations.

 

99% of South voters wanted to secede. They will not be able to tally the total number of votes and announce it until the 14 or the 24th (I forget) of next month. I imagine they say this to prepare for war with the North because they North has already started building up the military resources. I'm anxious to see how they decide to split up the oil fields in the south considering this is a huge economic resource for both sides.

 

The Muslim Brotherhood has announced that it will support Mohamed ElBaradei as the representative of the people in negotiating with the government.

 

Best Tweet ever (as reported on AJZ): "It's not only Egyptian parents who can't enforce a curfew."

 

Worst analysis of the situation I've heard:

This is what socialism gets you.

*headdesk*

 

Sorry to spam the thread, but there's an article on how Syria might be the next Middle Eastern state to revolt:

<a class="postlink" href="http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/01/2011129132243891877.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/fe ... 91877.html</a>

 

For anyone just now tuning in, the jets from the Egyptian AF just buzzed Tahrir Square, made a couple passes, with the last one low enough to set off car alarms.

Looks like a show of force, curfews are being expanded, and Mubarak shows no signs of standing down. Could easily devolve into a military coup (which will be strange, since the head of the military is a hardline Mubarak supporter), or a civil war.

 

I don't really understand the basis for this assertion. There's no indication that civil war is a possibility. For that to happen, the military would have to be factionally divided (it isn't), Mubarak would need to have the unwavering support of at least part of the army (He doesn't. Across the board, soldiers are refusing to engage protesters violently), and there would need to be a substantial portion of the public who supports the current regime (There isn't. So far, the number of pro-Mubarak supporters in the streets that I've heard about number exactly 1. One guy.)

 

The people Mubarak has appointed to the new government have strong ties to the military, and may be able to muster some support. The fact that the air force is being used to intimidate the protesters shows that there is some divide among military ranks.

And, of course there's the police, which still seems to be under Mubarak's control and has been ordered back into the streets.

 

One thing I never understand is why guys like Mubarak desperately try to hold onto power even when the writing is on the wall. In the sense that I try to look beyond the 'they're used to power, can't let it go, etc.', which, while probably true, are a bit too simple in my opinion. It's easy to paint someone as a power-hungry lunatic, but what could be the reason for a guy to act like such a cliché?

The guy ruled for 30 years, during which he probably stowed away some fuck-you money. Why doesn't he cut his losses and run? What's so bad about living out the rest of your life in luxury, without any more responsibilities? I get that African leaders and some guys from the Balkan held out as long as they could out of fear for legal retributions. But as far as I know Mubarak didn't kill lots of people or commit other crimes that would have him dragged to The Hague. He could work out a deal and not be bothered by anyone afterwards. A guy who rules that long and didn't do a lot of stupid shit (relatively speaking of course, in relation to other awful dictatorial countries), has to be smart enough and see that this won't end well.

The only thing I can come up with is that he's afraid someone in the new regime would try to fuck him over.