Egypt and the Middle East Thread 6

[IheartTesla]

I know it's only been a week or two, but I'm looking back at Mubarak with more than a little bit of fondness compared to Gaddafi.

So according to that, we'd have likely have had a nuclear armed Gaddhafi right now. Yikes.

That would at least have given the international community an excuse to take him out by force.

[Samalander]

GADDAFI 's umbrella '' I 'm Killing in the rain"

[sologdin]

That was the big-time cry from a great many people in 2002-2003 -- that an action is illegitimate precisely because it was not U.N. approaved.

some folks may have disapproved of the war as it was but approved of it had the UN led it. those people are barbarians.

the primary objection to the war on jus ad bellum grounds is that it was a violation of art 2(4) of the UN charter, to which the US and iraq are states party, and in which is embodied the basic principle of civilization. a more plain violation has not been so readily apparent for generations. if the US can't live with that principle, then the US, and not the principle, should be stricken from the record of civilization.

[Usotsuki]

Egypt's general prosecutor has imposed a travel ban on former president Hosni Mubarak and his family pending further investigations.

The prosecutor Abdel Magid Mahmud on Monday also ordered the freezing of all of their financial assets inside the country.

"The decision today is acting on complaints received on wealth accumulated by former president and his family," a statement from the prosecutor's office said. The statement did not elaborate on the complaints.

Judicial officials said the decision applied to the deposed president, his wife Suzanne, his two sons Ala and Gamal, and

their wives.

The move follows a previous order for the family's financial assets abroad to be frozen. Mahmud requested the freeze on foreign assets on February 21, while charging foreign minister Ahmed Abuol Gheit with contacting foreign governments and financial institutions to seek the freeze.

Ah ! ça ira, ça ira, ça ira

[Samalander]

So, anyone saying that salafism or the MB will benefit from this overthrow over the dictatorship is full of it.

Nothing in what you posted proves that they won't.

Meanwhile, Iran is...

a. developing Nukes (that's what the UN says, anyway)

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/02/25/UN-Iran-developing-military-nukes/UPI-33961298676839/

b. threatening to boycott the Olympics if the logo is not changed, as it obviously spells out the word `Zion`

http://insidethegames.biz/summer-olympics/2012/12099-london-2012-logo-is-qracistq-claims-iran

c. bringing in Lebanese Hezbollah fighters to disperse the protests of the Iranian people

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4031344,00.html

d. all of the above

[Samalander]

Errr, not according to that article they didn't.

That's just UN diplomatic speak.

Here is a clearer link:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/8348831/UN-nuclear-watchdog-says-Iran-developing-nuclear-weapons.html

[Samalander]

Dude, that one doesn't say it either. All it says is there's a "concern" because of a report.

What can be clearer than: "The UN nuclear watchdog has said it new information that Iran is developing a nuclear weapon capable of being carried by its ballistic missiles".

[mormont]

Sam - does the issue of whether or not Iran is developing a nuclear weapon, in your mind, relate to the issue Coco was talking about? Or is this a change of subject?

[Lyanna Stark]

Thanks for posting those excerpts Coco.

I think in light of the fact that the age distribution (so many more younger people than older), it's really interesting to see that a lot of "old guard" organisations don't really know how to handle the younger generations who will probably on average have quite a different outlook on life than their older counterpart. Politically, in a representative democracy, that means the so called "youth vote" will be really, really important.

[KAH]

The split between the old guard MB and the newer, younger generation is intriguing and revealing. It confirms what I've said all along: the MB is filled with a bunch of old head religious types that no longer have their finger on the pulse of Egypt as they did when they were founded.

What you described seems more like an in-party disagreement of tactics, whereas the old guard wanted to take the careful engagement path

with Mubarak, the young cadre said "F'ck that" and kept right on protesting.

While that does speak of a rift within the MB, it doesn't really say anything about what we can expect from the youths of the Muslim Brotherhood. They could feasibly take over the party, split and form a new one...who knows. They appear to have decided to have let themselves be heard one way or another.

Outside of this, I don't see how we know all that much. In my experience, zealous young men may not necessarily see eye to eye with their secular brethren once their common foe is gone, however...

[KAH]

Fighting in the west today, around cities like Misrata and Zawiya, the latter of which seems to be in the process of being encircled of the Khamis brigade. So far, the opposition are repelling attacks, but the question remains how long they can hold out against an enemy with heavy weaponry.

Just as troubling is reports that the anti-Gaddafi forces lack the weapons to go on the offensive against Tripoli. Gaddafi is holding Tripoli, and is using other forces like the Khamis brigade to take out the opposition piecemeal, just as predicted. Unless the opposition can regain the initiative and march on Tripolis, I fear Gaddafi is going to take horrible revenge on them all.

[Samalander]

Sam - does the issue of whether or not Iran is developing a nuclear weapon, in your mind, relate to the issue Coco was talking about? Or is this a change of subject?

It does not directly relate to what Cocco was talking about (hence my use of "meanwhile", which is not usually written when commenting directly on something and the space I left between my reply and my new comments) and is indeed a change of subject (or, at least, parallel subject). Is that verboten?

[Padraig]

Just as troubling is reports that the anti-Gaddafi forces lack the weapons to go on the offensive against Tripoli. Gaddafi is holding Tripoli, and is using other forces like the Khamis brigade to take out the opposition piecemeal, just as predicted. Unless the opposition can regain the initiative and march on Tripolis, I fear Gaddafi is going to take horrible revenge on them all.

Hard to say. Are we to believe of a very benevolent Gaddafi? Where he has the strength but decides not to attack opposition forces in Misrata and Zawiya? We have had government ministers saying that they want to talk to the opposition before they attack. And on the other hand, we already know there has been a lot of fighting already around those towns. But they hold for the rebels as of now.

Some of what Gaddafi and his son have said is deluded. It could be that they are trying to bluff the rebels. OTOH, things have not changed over the last few days. The rebels don't have the ability to strike at Tripoli and the Gaddafi loyalists (so far) have failed to retake any of the rebel held towns.

I'm more worried than I was but its still too early to say who wins.

[The Progressive]

Who has more guns?

[Shryke]

I'll just leave this here:

African mercenaries hired by the Gaddafi regime to kill Libyan protesters would be immune from prosecution for war crimes due to a clause in this weekend's UN resolution that was demanded by the United States.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8350968/Libya-African-mercenaries-immune-from-prosecution-for-war-crimes.html

The move was seen as an attempt to prevent a precedent that could see Americans prosecuted by the ICC for alleged crimes in other conflicts. While the US was once among the signatories to the court, George W. Bush withdrew from it in 2002 and declared that it did not have power over Washington.

[TrueMetis]

I'll just leave this here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8350968/Libya-African-mercenaries-immune-from-prosecution-for-war-crimes.html

I would love to see a defence of this.

[Lord O' Bones]

I'll just leave this here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8350968/Libya-African-mercenaries-immune-from-prosecution-for-war-crimes.html

I'll go ahead and say it: pathetic.

As a proud American I demand the freedom to commit war-crimes on my own recognizance without big brother hanging over my shoulder.

[mormont]

It does not directly relate to what Cocco was talking about (hence my use of "meanwhile", which is not usually written when commenting directly on something and the space I left between my reply and my new comments) and is indeed a change of subject (or, at least, parallel subject). Is that verboten?

No, I was just unclear because of the abrupt shift.

[Samalander]

I'll go ahead and say it: pathetic.

Yeah... but couldn't these people still be prosecuted for murder by their own countries (once they got back to their countries)?

[The Iceman of the North]

Yeah... but couldn't these people still be prosecuted for murder by their own countries (once they got back to their countries)?

In theory, but not likely. There's no reason why the home country would spend resources on such a case. The main argument the US use for staying out of the ICC is that they would prosecute American war criminals in the US, but this never happens.