Civil unrest around the world

[glatt]

Depends on what she does with the gun.

The Egyptian military felt the situation warranted an armed response. I wasn't there, so I don't have any inside knowledge, but in general, if you shoot at soldiers, you shouldn't be surprised if they shoot back.

[Sundae]

I'll admit I'm playing Devil's Advocate, but I also suspect that not all 51 dead (it's not 51 shot at, it's 51 fatalities) were armed.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by classicman

Everyone is calling it a cop EXCEPT the US. Why? because ...

Well I'm guessing the media calls it it a coup because it brings more attention and they don't have to be as careful with semantics. Either way, its just typical foreign policy.

Originally Posted by Sundae

I'll admit I'm playing Devil's Advocate, but I also suspect that not all 51 dead (it's not 51 shot at, it's 51 fatalities) were armed.

I agree with you. The statements from the military and brotherhood (protestors that got shot) completely contradict each other. Military says they were attacked. Brotherhood says the shootings were unprovoked.

There is a video circulating of a soldier sitting on top of a rooftop shooting into the crowd and none of the protestors are attacking them. Also, the photos show gunshot wounds to the back of the head, suggesting that they were shot either running away or when they were praying.

[ZenGum]

There is also video of what look to be Brotherhood guys firing guns, apparently towards soldiers - it was edited in with the guy shooting from the roof, but it was not clear who shot first. Or even if any of it was genuine.

[BigV]

so... the difference here is what to call the method used to change the leadership? a coup or not a coup? Ok, wrestle with that. I understand the US government's ... reluctance to accept that label.

I think another interesting question is what to call the changes in the scope of the president's authority that Morsi made. Were they legal? Were they legal because he was "the decider"? I think he dramatically changed the role of the presidency but kept the title and the mantle of legitimacy of having been "democratically elected", but what they elected and what he/the office had become were completely different.

That's not a coup; that's cuckoo.

[ZenGum]

Well put.


Meanwhile, anyone watching North Carolina?

[ZenGum]

Then there's Saudi Arabia, our loyal and stable, or at least secure, ally. Right?

http://en.alalam.ir/news/1499049

“With pride, I announce my defection from Al Saudi family in Saudi Arabia,” he wrote in his statement.

“This regime in Saudi Arabia does not stand by God’s rules or even (country’s) established rules and its policies, decisions, and actions are totally based on personal will of its leaders.”

“All that is said in Saudi Arabia about respecting law and religion rules are factitious so that they can lie and pretend that the regime obeys Islamic rules.”

He criticized the royal family for considering the country as its own property while silencing all voices from inside and outside the government calling for any change and reforms.

Khalid Bin Farhan said the ruling family has deliberately pulled the country to the current condition where cries of oppressed people are ignored. “They don’t think about anything but their personal benefits and do not care for country’s and people’s interests or even national security,” he added.

He warned that current problems of Saudi Arabia are not “temporary or superficial” and they do not end at unemployment, low wages and unjustified distribution of common wealth, facilities and services.

This resentment has been festering for decades. Remember where 17 of the September 11 hijackers came from? A lot of people in this country hate their leadership, and by association, hate the west in general and the US in particular.

IIRC there was some civil protest in Saudi in 2011, which was bought off by cancelling student debts and stuff like that. I recall thinking that they had just bought time, although I was looking in the 6 to 12 month range.

[tw]

Originally Posted by glatt

... but in general, if you shoot at soldiers, you shouldn't be surprised if they shoot back.

Should one want to create conflict and instability (what extremists want), then ones takes a shoot and runs away. Then 51 others get shot.

That is the responsibility of a soldier. To be shot at and not fire back. Because the one in 1000 was not identified.

There is nothing fair about being responsible. Soldiers can complain about how life is unfair. But they must ACT responsibly. Let's never forget the murder of innocent students at Kent State. And in the days of Nixon, those soldiers were considered innocent. To this day, some blame students for their own death. Because soldiers violated their responsibilities.

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

Meanwhile, anyone watching North Carolina?

Anyone watching Belfast?
Night of riots over the right to march.
How many months in an Orangeman's calender? 15, because you have the usual amount and then March! March! March!

And the normal melting pot, which always runs at boiling point.
In this case nationalists (Catholic) attacking loyalist (Protestant) property.

From the BBC here:

"It appears that a crowd had come from the Stewartstown Road end and from the Black's Road end into the estate and just started - for no reason other than I would take purely sectarian reasons - attacking cars.

The numbers of them. You are used to people walking by the odd Saturday night and throwing bricks or throwing bottles but fact that there was so many of them, this time, was extremely worrying."

Bolding mine.

This is still a part of everyday life in NI.
Live somewhere dominated by one form of Christianity, get targeted by the other.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by tw

Should one want to create conflict and instability (what extremists want), then ones takes a shoot and runs away. Then 51 others get shot.

That is the responsibility of a soldier. To be shot at and not fire back. Because the one in 1000 was not identified.

There is nothing fair about being responsible. Soldiers can complain about how life is unfair. But they must ACT responsibly. Let's never forget the murder of innocent students at Kent State. And in the days of Nixon, those soldiers were considered innocent. To this day, some blame students for their own death. Because soldiers violated their responsibilities.

I saw an interview with an Egyptian doctor. He described *lots* of patients who had been shot ... right in the forehead. BOOM, headshot.

The impression I got was of a big crowd being generally boisterous, then as individuals stepped up to become leaders and agitate for further trouble, a sniper would target them. Just like on the battlefield, where snipers target junior officers who have to make themselves conspicuous to act as leaders.

I would say this has happened too many times for it to be one rogue sniper acting without orders. It looks deliberate and ordered to me. It does NOT look like a bunch of panicky soldiers "returning" fire into a mob after a few shots in their direction.

If so, it is ruthless, and almost certainly illegal, but also a very effective way of pruning off the 1% most dangerous of the troublemakers in the Brotherhood, and intimidating the rest into behaving.

[gvidas]

The last sentence of this sounds more like Dr. Seuss than White House Spokesperson. So surreal.

The senior official did not describe the legal reasoning behind the finding, saying only, “The law does not require us to make a formal determination as to whether a coup took place, and it is not in our national interest to make such a determination.”

“We will not say it was a coup, we will not say it was not a coup, we will just not say,” the official said.

NY Times, "Aid to Egypt Can Keep Flowing, Despite Overthrow, White House Decides"

[BigV]

Wow. A first grader that could school the whole political establishment, not just in Egypt either.

[Sundae]

Dunno. Although I actually agree with what he is saying, the terms he uses don't sound like they are his own naturally occurring ideas.

But then I was distraction by the concept of Free Arabs.
I'm still waiting for mine to arrive.

[BigV]

Originally Posted by Sundae

Dunno. Although I actually agree with what he is saying, the terms he uses don't sound like they are his own naturally occurring ideas.

But then I was distraction by the concept of Free Arabs.
I'm still waiting for mine to arrive.

well... I have known some children that were mature far beyond their years, and this is what they sounded like. however, if you can't believe he understands what he says, perhaps you could appreciate his completely believable acting ability. regardless, I, too, agree with he says.

the piece has several cuts in it, I'm sure the realtime conversation had a much different flow.

[Sundae]

I watched it again after I posted.
The beliefs are his. Maybe he lifted some words and phrases from his reading and listening, but I don't think he's acting.

Our Foreign Secretary, William Hague, addressed the Tory Party Conference at 16.
He'd probably have been this articulate at 12 too.
Hague's views aren't mine, but I have to allow him a precocious interest and grasp of politics.
He read PPE at Oxford and got a First, so he was in the top percentile.

This young lad could end up changing a country.
If he isn't shot by a sniper.

The ancient sages said "do not despise the snake for having no horns, for who is to say it will not become a dragon?"
So may one just man become an army.