Pic Related; its the protests

Views: 13

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I can't on principle support a totalitarian autocratic regime. Mub needs to step down. I am concerned as to what would replace him in the power vacuum, but that is to be seen. The people want change, and they'll get it in some form.
I think it's amazing that our policy is still to support people like Mubarak.  We'd sell the citizens of any country down the river just so that we get a government aligned with our interests.  No wonder people target us for terrorist attacks.  All week long on all the news it's been, what will be the best outcome for America?  The real question should be, what is the best outcome for the people of Egypt?
Exactly. The sad thing is that this isn't new behavior. We've been bulldozing and toppling foreign governments for the sake of our personal interests for decades, disregarding both the democratic process and the well-beings of the inhabitants of these countries.
That basically sums it up. And this is all post-Cold War. Back in the Us v Them days, we were as shameless as we were ruthless, and doublefold in each compared to today. All in the name of an Atomic Holy War against them Godless Communists...

It's been amazing to hear all of the pundits tip toe on this all week.  "We want democracy for the people of Egypt, so long as they do what we want them to do."  We fear the muslim world because they represent the biggest threat to our empire.  Religion is the number one thing that any nation needs to be able to sell an imperialist agenda.  There are many people today that think that god wants them to conquer the world and it's our god given right to kill and or convert those that aren't judeo christian.  The same could be said for muslims as well.  It boils down to a culture war and oil interests.


I think our number one goal as a country should be to get off of oil.  Think of how much better our country would be if all of our foreign policy wasn't focused on securing our oil interests. 

Ok that's fair, but I was stating that the threat imposed by them is that they are at least equally or more imperialist then we are.  Not actual tactical threats.
.  The drug lords in Mexico pose more of an immediate threat to the security of Americans~
Absolutely, the number of innocent people killed by the Mexican drug cartels simply to terrorize people into submission puts them in league with the worst terrorist on the planet. The amount of time the MSM spends covering the terrorist that live on (and over) our borders is one tenth of the time they spend on the most recent missing blonde, white, teenage girl.
They are well armed (better than the Mexican army) , very well financed, organized, numerous and have the moral fiber of a cockroach. Those who doubt the killers will spill their violence over the border are dangerously deluded.

Once again though, this is of our own making.  If we didn't have a prohibitionist stance on recreational drug use, the cartels in Mexico wouldn't be making millions if not billions of dollars ever year. 


I hope you are safe wherever you deploy.  Warfare isn't about how manly you can be.  It's about killing as many of the enemy as possible and staying alive to see your goals met.  I absolutely see why the insurgents use the tactics they do.  They are outnumbered and severely outgunned.  It's the same situation we used when we fought the British for our independence.  They used to line up and shoot.  We said to hell with that, let's hide behind some trees and shoot at those fools lining up. 

If I were 30 years old and had the same bush-friendly head of whatever...

do the math. Imagine if McCain Palin won in the U.S.A.. Theocracy, or at least too much money wasted on pushing xtian tradition or control mechanisms on the masses.


I'm in love w/a couple of Egyptian women that I see on TV speaking their minds.

So there.

Some people are saying this is a good thing that's hapening because it's the dawn of an Egyptian democracy but I'm not so optimistic.  I mean, these people have allowed themselves to be governed by only this one man for three decades: clearly they don't have much of democratic values and especially in a society plagued by religious superstition, it would take a lot for democratic values to take root and become strong.  But who knows ...


I'm very proud of the Tunisians though: they have 20 % of their politicians are women, they banned poligamy and are one of the most secularized Islamic societies and they are the ones that treat the women the best in all of the Arabic world.  But it took a dictator with a strong arm.  NOW it remains to be seen whether they can keep up their progressive culture without one ...

Poligamy, particularly as practiced by traditional Moslems and Mormons, generally illustrates the Marxist critique of marriage (not to mention some of the telltale symptoms exhibited by dangerous cult): it was invented as a way to cement men's ownership of women as property.  In many cases, many of the women are married against their will to men much older than they are, sometimes when they're still little girls, sometimes even before they hit puberty.

Muhammad himself married Aisha when she was six and consumated the marriage when she was nine and he was in his sixties.  Joseph Smith, the guy who invented Mormonism, had about 30 wives, they're all buried alongside him in Utah, two of them had been 14 when they were married off to him.

There is also a pattern of abuse, not just sexual but also physical, and of silence since these girls and women are discouraged from disobeying their husbands and other figures of authority.

That doesn't make polygamy wrong.  It just means that people have abused it.


Support Atheist Nexus

Supporting Membership

Nexus on Social Media:

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service