These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Out of Pod Experience

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Coup d'etat in Egypt & Update British Cameraman
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#1 - 2013-07-03 20:36:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Kirjava
BBC
Guardian.

EDIT : More Egyptian developments, posted on P3 as opposed to making a new thread as it is a continuation of this thread more than anything else.

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
Destination SkillQueue
Doomheim
#2 - 2013-07-03 21:02:26 UTC
So an average Wednesday for Egypt?
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#3 - 2013-07-03 21:04:30 UTC
Best comment I've read so far is paraphrased "Silly Egyptians, don't they know in a democracy you have to wait 4 years till you get rid of a corrupt incompetent president?".

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
Jayem See
Perkone
Caldari State
#4 - 2013-07-03 21:11:36 UTC
Cue - 100 years of people going "Nope - this doesn't work - lets get the military to replace them"

Almost reminds me of the Jita Riots. Everyone threatens to shoot the monument, or unsub, every time they don't like something.

Major difference is that the Egyptians appear to actually do it!

Personally I am waiting for the limp response from the UK when politicians give themselves a 15% pay rise - having just removed , contractually agreed, pay progression from a sector of the population that has already gone through a 3 year pay freeze.

Yay \o/

Tosspots.

Aaaaaaand relax.
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#5 - 2013-07-03 21:20:05 UTC
I thought that was just a £5k increase from £65k to £70k as proposed by the independent Parliamentary pay Commission established by the early Coalition Government?

Also with regards to Egypt, this was the Muslim Brotherhood, Islamists that got elected to state and set about trying to turn the country into a Democratic Theocracy like Iran. The Brotherhood were a good underground opposition to the Mubarak regime but ultimately as bad as Mubarak and the people promptly regretted, protested and then won.

Note that the head of the Judicial branch is to be sworn in as the intern President of the Executive. The Army has dissolved the Legislature and not seized the Executive themselves, but given that to the independent (relatively all things considered) Judicial.

This has a good chance of working, the Army props up this to fix it, sets elections for the Legislature and when the pyramid of cards is indeed standing up properly this time, force an election for the Executive aswell and retreat to their barracks.

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
Jayem See
Perkone
Caldari State
#6 - 2013-07-03 21:24:32 UTC
Kirjava wrote:
I *snip to avoid huge forum*.


The suggestion is between 10-15k increase for MPs - the current wage is 60-65k. Not bad if you can get it.

As for Egypt - you are clearly more up on this than I am - but what is to stop the army stepping in every time the populous gets annoyed?

I don't understand how a government can be "democratic" when the army just stands over them.

Aaaaaaand relax.
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#7 - 2013-07-03 21:31:16 UTC
Basically the opposition rallied around the Brotherhood immediatly after the removal of Mubarek as they were unaccosiated with any of his regime, a bit like how people swung to Labor in 1997 to remove the Tories on principle and elect Tony Blairs government.

Turned out it was a mistake in retrospect, as Morsi read being elected president to being elected dictator for life. The Army had been running the country for decades and hence knows how the mechanisms work in living memory. They saw the President overstepping and forcing through rewrites of the Constitution to serve his own needs, the mass protests occurred and they found they were the Army of the Egyptian civilians, not the government when it turned on the people. Hence the current Coup.

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
Kayef See
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#8 - 2013-07-03 21:36:12 UTC
Kirjava wrote:
Basically the opposition rallied around the Brotherhood immediatly after the removal of Mubarek as they were unaccosiated with any of his regime, a bit like how people swung to Labor in 1997 to remove the Tories on principle and elect Tony Blairs government.

Turned out it was a mistake in retrospect, as Morsi read being elected president to being elected dictator for life. The Army had been running the country for decades and hence knows how the mechanisms work in living memory. They saw the President overstepping and forcing through rewrites of the Constitution to serve his own needs, the mass protests occurred and they found they were the Army of the Egyptian civilians, not the government when it turned on the people. Hence the current Coup.


Which is pretty much how I understood it. But doesn't answer the question of how democratic rule is upheld when the military can dictate terms. Can you imagine that in the UK? Or any other Western democracy? I am not arguing with your analysis but I think it's pretty scary - I can't see how this situation doesn't dissolve into a constant conflict.

It is your average Egyptian that is going to sufffer from constant disappointment and failed government.
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#9 - 2013-07-03 21:45:21 UTC
As I understand it, thats why the US president is Commander in Chief of the US forces as well as executive of the Federal Government.

And to answer, nothing really. The British Army has and will rebel if it feels the need, Oliver Cromwell for instance. I have heard rumors that the Army considered a similar action against the Thatcher government and during the Winter of Discontent. Funny how many poor people form the North ended up sighing up to the Military to get a job.

It's harder in the west, but not unthinkable if the civilian government turns on the population or doesn't do it's presumed duty then the military may feel its in its own duty to take control itself, Charles De Gaulle for instance ignored the French surrender and withdrew all forces and colonies prepared to continue fighting in the name of a state he was now technically at war with.

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
Jayem See
Perkone
Caldari State
#10 - 2013-07-03 21:53:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Jayem See
Kirjava wrote:
As I understand it, thats why the US president is Commander in Chief of the US forces as well as executive of the Federal Government.

And to answer, nothing really. The British Army has and will rebel if it feels the need, Oliver Cromwell for instance. I have heard rumors that the Army considered a similar action against the Thatcher government and during the Winter of Discontent. Funny how many poor people form the North ended up sighing up to the Military to get a job.

It's harder in the west, but not unthinkable if the civilian government turns on the population or doesn't do it's presumed duty then the military may feel its in its own duty to take control itself, Charles De Gaulle for instance ignored the French surrender and withdrew all forces and colonies prepared to continue fighting in the name of a state he was now technically at war with.


Interesting. The "million man" marches against the Poll Tax or Iraq war didn't result in a government overthrow. Turnouts were far higher than the current unrests in Egypt and yet the result is so so different.

It's a fascinating situation and yet I can't help having a bad feeling about it. The two different cultures manifest themselves in such different ways.

I suppose it comes down to "long term" democracy embedding itself vs the "New" democracy finding its feet.

Edit - I didn't put that very well - democracy obviously evolved in various countries - perhaps countries like Egypt are trying to achieve democracy as a "perfect" model when the reality is that it takes a long time. And it isn't perfect - that paradigm between perfect and perceived must be pretty harsh.

Aaaaaaand relax.
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#11 - 2013-07-03 23:10:05 UTC
No, a million man march wouldn't do it. The Egyptians on the other hand had fourteen million people on the streets, the largest protest in history.

Also the stakes were considerably higher, and the Egyptian military has the luxury of strategic thought due to having a border with Israel and considerable political weight due to its location and largest population in the Arabic sphere. This yields a more pragmatic player than the Isamist Morsi government when it was dismissing chunks of parliament and rewriting the constitution along more conservative Islamic lines.

The Iraq war at the time, the military of the UK and USA had read the intelligence same as the government and believed the conclusions that Iraq had chemical and biological WMD's still and was willing to use them as he previously had. Interestingly enough there's suspicious and arguments now that the WMD's being used in neighboring Syria are the same WMD's that Saddam had, but perhaps hid to avoid detection in Iraq itself.

The really ****** up part in Syria is that its President Assad is the secularist, and is fighting Islamists in the civil war.

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
jason hill
Red vs Blue Flight Academy
#12 - 2013-07-03 23:42:08 UTC
Kirjava wrote:
As I understand it, thats why the US president is Commander in Chief of the US forces as well as executive of the Federal Government.

And to answer, nothing really. The British Army has and will rebel if it feels the need, Oliver Cromwell for instance. I have heard rumors that the Army considered a similar action against the Thatcher government and during the Winter of Discontent. Funny how many poor people form the North ended up sighing up to the Military to get a job.

It's harder in the west, but not unthinkable if the civilian government turns on the population or doesn't do it's presumed duty then the military may feel its in its own duty to take control itself, Charles De Gaulle for instance ignored the French surrender and withdrew all forces and colonies prepared to continue fighting in the name of a state he was now technically at war with.




please correct your post !
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#13 - 2013-07-03 23:46:21 UTC
Please explain the issue at hand, I assume it isn't the and between two separate events they are rumored to have considered it.

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
jason hill
Red vs Blue Flight Academy
#14 - 2013-07-03 23:55:56 UTC
sorry but I`m having trouble understanding what you have just posted .

the winter of discontent happened under a labour led government and the prime minister was jim Callaghan. not a conservative government lead by Margret thatcher .

and whilst I you grant there were massive rumours of a take over by the army it didn't happen ...

true democracy at work
Kirjava
Lothian Enterprises
#15 - 2013-07-03 23:59:22 UTC
Kirjava wrote:
I have heard rumors that the Army considered a similar action against the Thatcher government and during the Winter of Discontent.


I apologize for any confusion, I mean that on 2 separate occurrences in the post war era they are heard to have considered it, during the Thatcher government and a separate time during the Winter of Discontent a decade prior. Both were socioeconomic tensions coming to the front in violence.

[center]Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. /人◕‿‿◕人\ Unban Saede![/center]
jason hill
Red vs Blue Flight Academy
#16 - 2013-07-04 00:04:44 UTC
kirjava

you mentioned the there were two rumours of a coup attempt in the uk since the 2nd WW ...

its well known about the army one in the seventies but ive looked around and I cant see any evidence of one prior to that
Freakdevil
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#17 - 2013-07-04 01:41:14 UTC
From what I heard and read, I am impressed by how the Egyptians and the Army have handled the situation. At least based on what I have heard so far. I wish them all the best in restoring normal life.
Anya Klibor
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#18 - 2013-07-04 03:13:14 UTC
Well I sure hope someone picks up that phone.

Leadership is something you learn. Maybe one day, you'll learn that.
Nerath Naaris
Pink Winged Unicorns for Peace Love and Anarchy
#19 - 2013-07-04 05:01:12 UTC
It´s actually quite ironic just how the general population (at least the one present in Cairo) celebrates this coup d´etat.

Quite different from the usual reactions of the average military coup....

Je suis Paris // Köln // Brüssel // Orlando // Nice // Würzburg, München, Ansbach // Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray

Je suis Berlin // Fort Lauderdale // London // St. Petersburg // Stockholm

Je suis [?]
Indahmawar Fazmarai
#20 - 2013-07-04 06:54:27 UTC
Jayem See wrote:
Kirjava wrote:
As I understand it, thats why the US president is Commander in Chief of the US forces as well as executive of the Federal Government.

And to answer, nothing really. The British Army has and will rebel if it feels the need, Oliver Cromwell for instance. I have heard rumors that the Army considered a similar action against the Thatcher government and during the Winter of Discontent. Funny how many poor people form the North ended up sighing up to the Military to get a job.

It's harder in the west, but not unthinkable if the civilian government turns on the population or doesn't do it's presumed duty then the military may feel its in its own duty to take control itself, Charles De Gaulle for instance ignored the French surrender and withdrew all forces and colonies prepared to continue fighting in the name of a state he was now technically at war with.


Interesting. The "million man" marches against the Poll Tax or Iraq war didn't result in a government overthrow. Turnouts were far higher than the current unrests in Egypt and yet the result is so so different.

It's a fascinating situation and yet I can't help having a bad feeling about it. The two different cultures manifest themselves in such different ways.

I suppose it comes down to "long term" democracy embedding itself vs the "New" democracy finding its feet.

Edit - I didn't put that very well - democracy obviously evolved in various countries - perhaps countries like Egypt are trying to achieve democracy as a "perfect" model when the reality is that it takes a long time. And it isn't perfect - that paradigm between perfect and perceived must be pretty harsh.


Well, American have the advantage/handicap that they never experienced actual tyranny. That kind of opression leaves undelible scars in the collective mind and leads to funny consequences. Also makes it very difficult to the average American to understand what it means liberty or democracy to the average denizen of this planet. In my experience, American totally and actually believe in those concepts. Sun rises from the east and men are born free, et cetera. The average attitude, even in liberal Europe, is more like "maybe, for the time being". And in southern Europe the attitude is of polite but cynical disbelief -"them" always rule to their benefit, be it with arms or with votes.

So, to the average denizen of this planet, a benevolent tyrant is an acceptable second best, compared to the average tyrant. Democracy is good, but also is optional when what matters is to further your political goals. And men are only free if you allow them to, which is "maybe right, for the time being, and until further notice". So the military set a coup and ask you to vote for other President? Wow, that's so nice of them. I mean, they don't even try to hold the power themselves -probably because they lack a wannabe Supreme Commander of Egypt to rule them all à la Nasser, not because of some love for the alien concepts of freedom, democracy and the usual yadda yadda. If the new President allows some more freedom (as in "messes less with what Egyptians please/would please to do"), keeps the Israel matter at bay and makes a good job with economy, it will have a go, even if he's not exactly a model of democracy and only picks on minorities small enough to be opressed without consequence.

Mursi's mistake has been to oppose large minorities, none of them able to establish a majority, but some of them (the military) strong enough to put an end to his mandate.
123Next page