Posted on 02/22/2011 7:14:50 PM PST by Bigtigermike
What you are doing is assuming that enemies of 1400 years (Sunni and Shias) PLUS Persians (Iran) and Arabs (Muslim Brotherhood) are somehow cooperating in uprisings in multiple countries, including Iran
You gotta lay off the conspiracy theories. With planned socialistic economies being the complete failures that they always have been, social media, internet and populations that are 75% below the age of 30, this isn’t some Sunni+Shia alliance this is the actual spread of freedom.
Now what happens with this new found freedom is anyone’s guess, but this is exactly what George W was trying to accomplish early last decade. It just took a few more years as these economies completely fell apart
I am amazed that folks here think it would be a good idea to insert ourselves in another muslim country.
What for? I guess it seems anti Obama so that makes shedding more blood of our soldiers for a bunch of ungrateful muslims to make a point, is a okay.
The outcome would be a total disaster.
We’ve been stuck in the Egyptian mess for about thirty years. All those billions down Mubarak’s rathole and nothing gained. Did Palin oppose this failed policy at the time? Did she even give it a second thought? She is like all the rest.
Yeah...I know.
I guess I want to see my grandchildren grow up first.
However, if this is it, then we are all ready.
That’s a great comfort to me.
She's doing far more than "calling for freedom." In the tradition of her neocon debate handler, Billy Kristol, she's calling for the U.S. to meddle once again in the lives of its little brown brothers in the Middle East. Please give Big Sister Sarah a message: we can't afford to keep policing the world. Let the Libyans make their own revolution.
MadIsh32, ultimately the conventional wisdom may win out here. I can’t answer all the complexities this represents, but the Muslim Brotherhood was known to be working toward a broad spread political unrest in the region.
Is this brotherhood a conventional group, or are they something new, looking for power across borders? I don’t honestly know.
What we do know, is that the Muslim brotherhood had been working toward multi-nation instability.
What was their goal, if not to control these various nations?
If you have an answer for that, I’d be interested in hearing the theory.
I’m not convinced it would be productive. There are some circumstances that might change my mind, but those are not present now.
We do lack a sense of ruthlessness but that is our culture and it is not going to change.
And it is culture that determines policy not the other way around.
“Did Palin . . ?”
Did any of the rest of the proposed candidates have sufficient knowledge of the Egypt situation and oppose it? (I, frankly, seriously doubt that Sarah Palin is going to subject herself or her family to the leftist and RINO machine that she would if she tried to run. The leftist media is only going to temporarily sign off on a RINO candidate they approve of. (Witness Dole & McCain) Any other candidate will be sliced, diced, and destroyed by the media.)
I don't buy that. What "sufficient knowledge" do you need to take a stand on whether we should give billions to a sadistic torturer? It isn't like Egypt was a minor recipient of U.S. aid. It was second only to Israel. BTW, Ron Paul (and his son Rand) have consistently opposed foreign aid to all countries in the Middle East.
“I don’t buy that.”
Buy WHAT? I didn’t write that Palin did or did not have knowledge of Egypt’s situation. I just asked WHO do YOU suggest?? Obviously, Rand Paul. I don’t know about him; but rest assured he’ll be vetted totally and disected by the MSM if he gets anywhere in the campaign against their darling O.
Sorry, I misunderstood. As to your other question, I’ll be voting for Gary Johnson or Ron Paul.
“When it comes to foreign policy, Sarah is clueless.”
And her suggestion to create a no fly zone is now at the top of the list of foreign policy decisions.
Be careful when you criticize Palin. This is not the last time you will end up looking foolish.
Well stated.
Whether Sarah, Obama, or other governments want to do it or not, it’s not a good idea.
Obama agrees with her. That tells you nothing?
It tells me Palin voiced an opinion that turned out to be cold hard reality. Obama has to act in accordance with it in the same way he had to follow the Bush Doctrine after coming to the oval office.
Palin was so right, everyone had to fall in line with her original suggestion.
I believe I heard it said earlier today or last night that the Libyans wanted a no-fly zone, but they did not want the U. S. or Great Britain involved.
Even if that were not the case, I don’t want our troops to go into harms way for a people who will dance in the streets the next time we suffer a massive loss.
Our instincts are to help our fellow man, but good grief, there is no up side to helping out here.
I’ll be honest, Obama may have been spured to support a no fly zone due to Palin’s comments. He probably felt he had to do something, because he might be facing her in 2012. That doesn’t make it right.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.