Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: National Review
There is real peril in this kind of sentiment.

The police powers in Egypt, for the most part, did not attack the protestors, showing at least some respect for the rule of law. Hence, to remove Morsi now would be to demonstrate that raw force supersedes law. Should a new Salafist regime ever take the reins again, they will make sure that can't happen again. It is to inculcate the rule of force.

Although they do exist, there are few historical examples of militarist regimes stepping aside for plurality (Franco and Allende come to mind(, but they are the exception and not the rule. In my opinion, the military should have waited until Morsi's government did something so outrageous as to delegitimize itself completely in the eyes of the world. Of course, there is peril in that too in that Egypt's institutions would have collapsed so far as to protract a reconstruction, with much suffering on the part of many. One thing is certain: if Morsi does not back down and the military does not move, Morsi will purge it of every officer with even a shred of "impurity" and this situation will have backfired. Hence my concern at the potential intemperance of this move. It is a delicate balance indeed.

Time will tell.

14 posted on 07/03/2013 7:01:14 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (The environment is too complex and too important to be managed by central planning.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Carry_Okie

Hi!

Could you tell me what the dynamic is between the Salafis and the MB? My understanding is they’re both Sunni, but Salafi is the extreme branch, more puritanical and MB could be called more Pan-Arabic?


17 posted on 07/03/2013 7:12:30 AM PDT by JPX2011
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson