Obama's Support of Suleiman Should Be The Top Story Among The So-Called Left In America Today.
Primary tabs
Please read this article and ask yourself if you wouldn't be outraged if Bush and Cheney were supporting Suleiman today? Don't you think the left blogosphere would be on fire right now if the same scenario were occurring under a Bush Cheney regime? These are important moments on so many levels. Perhaps most important for us to watch and learn who will demand sanity, human rights, liberty, and who will avoid it in silence, denial or spin themselves into dizzying new lows trying to avoid the crux of the matter at all costs.
No single story, or lack thereof, among the center and left blogosphere sums up why I am both no longer a Democrat and demonstrates why I sincerely believe our system is completely broken. Who among our countries leadership is expressing outrage at Obama's support of Suleiman? I suspect it's less than a handful among 536 leaders in the White House, Senate and House today. How and why anyone would make excuses for someone who thinks support of Suleiman is somehow reasonable or a good idea, no matter how bad the options is just beyond me.
Sociopaths, torturers, don't stop of their own accord. They wont suddenly respect borders or rule of law out of the kindness of their dark little hearts. Leaders like Bush and Obama will someday bring it home unless we utterly reject them for hiring such behavior abroad now.
Where's the outrage, where are the droves of self-respecting individuals abandoning the Democratic party in shame and disgust today? What will it take?
- Eureka Springs's blog
- Log in or register to post comments
Comments
Obama transcends conscience
Don't you think the left blogosphere would be on fire right now if the same scenario were occurring under a Bush Cheney regime?
I ask that on every single issue that's come up, and so far Obama gets a free pass on everything.
The droves already left, I would say
Wouldn't you? Well, maybe not. I think we can still chip away at, say, some of the Roosevelt Institute types. What they will want to see, though, is institutional structures. That won't come 'til 2016, if then.
NOTE I think, though, that the basic problem is that they call think in terms of realpolitik. Everybody accepts the empire as a frame of reference, and once the uniquely Bushian evil is removed, that's the default setting from every think tank to every barstool. It feels responsible -- "Is it good for the Egyptians? What about the balance of power in the Middle East?" and yadda yadda -- but there isn't a thought for the Egyptian people, and there's no idea that the situation of the Egyptian people might really be a lot like ours, and moreso every day.
On consideration, I disagree
Now, I yield to nobody in my disadmiration for "the so-called left."
But I think the real story is what the Egyptian people are doing. That is what is new. That is what is interesting. That is the story. All the other players are doing what they do, including the access bloggers and the other usual suspects. But Tahrir Square is new. We need to learn from it, and on the fly, because soon the story will be covered. The flower will fade, as it were. And the opportunity cost of a focus on elite tactics (and by global standards, our left is definitely an elite) is, precisely, a focus on the Egyptian people, or at least models of them. It's hard to pick that level of detail out of the news flow, but I'm really, really trying.
And you are doing a fine job..
In terms of the real story. I mean what role our country plays, or tries to play. Supporting Suleiman and sending aircraft carriers to the area in lieu of just saying nothing and or sending ships of food. What's our story.. what we are doing is important... and it's as sinister as it ever was.
I do hope many are watching and learning from the Egyptians... but clearly our leadership is actively trying to hurt/subvert their cause... not help or even remain neutral. I've learned saying nothing while we (D's or R's) prop up the worst possible subhumans in the world back to back has got to stop.
The story over there is the big one, but we should not let ourselves off the hook where it counts so easily.
Violence is in nobody's interest
I'm less worried about someone's past than what they are doing in the present especially in a volatile situation like this. The troops are not being sent in, the protests (aside from Mubarek's thugs incitement) have been peaceful for some time (so good, but for how long?) and Suleiman appears to be working to create a dialogue and atmosphere for peaceful change, though he is still protecting Mubarek's backside. He has unequivacably said he is not running for president in the upcoming election, and Mubarek's son is also not running. These are all good signs, but without Mubarek leaving (some how), it doesn't appear enough to appease "the street".
What would you have people do? Advocate for anarchy? No leadership or government whatever? Is that really going to be helpful?
Suleiman is Mubarak's chief
Suleiman is Mubarak's chief torturer and henchman, and that Obama and Washington are backing him is a disgrace, expected, but still a disgrace.
Who would you prefer they back?
The Muslim Brotherhood?
Seriously, name some entity that will create order and prevent disintigration of the country and replacement of the government with anarchy.
Any entity at all. Any person at all.
An organic group of "The People"? When has that ever, ever, ever happened? Pie in the sky fucking fantasy land nonsense. Nature abhors a vacuum, and if no entity maintains or gains control of the apparatus of government, the absolute worst elements of greedheads, power-mongers, charlatans and religionists will flood into the void.
Can you say Mahdi Army?
The United States is urging them to maintain along with their constitution, which if they abandon it is the only thread left preventing a coup, direct seizure of power by elements of the military or civil war.
It is fucking depressing as hell that this site seems to be going all libertarian, damn the consequences, at least for Egypt....
Why..
do they have to back anyone?
Why not let the people of Egypt decide?
I don't know what a libertarian is. But I do know that the influence of business over our government is so pervasive that no decision that comes from Washington is free of majority ulterior monetary concerns.
I agree that realpolitik is alluring if you believe that we can control the fate of the world. But if history proves anything, it is that control generates resentment and enlightened despots (theirs or ours) don't stay enlightened very long.
I've spent enough time immersed in cultures outside the US to know that imperialism is not an empty word to them. We create the people of which we are afraid by doing things that widen the gulf between what we say and what we do. It's becoming a chasm.
It's tempting to say that the world is a nasty place and that, without us to maintain the balance of power, chaos would ensue. But what do we have now? We are more anxious than ever. We can't see a person different from ourselves without feeling fear. We can't open our mouths at work without being afraid of losing our jobs. Each of us lowers our voice when criticizing our government in public. If those are the prices of balance, we're on the wrong scale.
We (and those in office and running for office) spend too much time being indoctrinated into the prevailing narrative. The world is not as we think and even less the way our politicians think. To continue to live in the bubble is to invite trouble. To burst the bubbles of other cultures is to double-down.
We can certainly encourage everyone(including ourselves) to do the right thing. That necessitates reviewing that encouragement for ulterior motives and acceptance that the big kid on the block will never be seen as Caesar's wife. But it starts with understanding that our place on the planet is one global citizen among many.
We've made our standard of living dependent on foreign policy that enrages a lot of the world. That has to change. We have to become self-sufficient consumers instead of self-serving customers.
If that's libertarianism, count me in.
I agree with you, okanagen
it may not be idealistic, but I see the State Dept as doing it's best to promote peaceful reform (not revolution) as a way to stabilize an entity it does depend on in the region.
Current Egypt govt set-up seems, in some ways, to be like a wolf hierarchy, and the hierarchy is what is keeping the lower-level wolves (all the various police gangs) in check. The last thing the USA wants is for the current power-holders to think that it's every man for himself.
Remember Iraq, where the stupidest thing W's admin did was to disband the Army instead of take charge of it. Don't want something similar to that happen.
Outraged!
Of course, I'm outraged. But if this were Bush and Cheney, the expressed outrage would be part of an effort to highlight how evil they were and how much we needed to elect Ds in the next election.
The problem, now, is that the Ds have proven to be a terrible alternative, so rather than make a lot of noise about how evil Obama is, I'd rather spend my time figuring out how to get both him, most Democrats and all the Republicans out of there in 2012, and replace them with people who will really try to solve our problems.