Article

2012-03-23 Africa North

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by trailing wife 2012-03-23 00:00|| || Front Page|| [8 views ] Top

#1 Ah yes, once again BASE-TOO-FAR QATAR!?

Posted by JosephMendiola 2012-03-23 00:49|| 2012-03-23 00:49|| Front Page Top

#2 I have read this in a few places that US back Islamist takeovers.I dont understand how US would gain from having MB or salfists in control.

Posted by Spats Slath4746 2012-03-23 06:29|| 2012-03-23 06:29|| Front Page Top

#3 Spats, that exactly why I was confused when Obama backed the revolution in Egypt. It was obvious from the beginning that the MB was the only political group in the country that was half-ass organized. The answer is that there must be a desire on the administration's part to prefer such Islamist governments to the military dictatorships that the Republicans traditionally cozy up to.

Posted by Kentucky Beef 2012-03-23 08:47|| 2012-03-23 08:47|| Front Page Top

#4 We don't. But the progressive Left does. There's your answer.

Posted by Steve White 2012-03-23 08:54|| 2012-03-23 08:54|| Front Page Top

#5 I have read this in a few places that US back Islamist takeovers.I dont understand how US would gain from having MB or salfists in control.

I don't think the outcome was intended, Spats Slath4746. Rather, the clever men in the White House saw the romance of a "people's revolution" and ran with it without thinking of possible consequences. At the time I sincerely believed that, in Egypt at least, the Muslim Brotherhood would let the secularists take the fall for the inevitable economic crash, then take over afterward, so I was wrong, too. I think they've made a mistake in going for power immediately although, like in Iran, it may take two generations for them to thoroughly discredit the idea of Islamic rule.

Posted by trailing wife 2012-03-23 09:02|| 2012-03-23 09:02|| Front Page Top

#6 "I have read this in a few places that US back Islamist takeovers.I dont understand how US would gain from having MB or salfists in control."

We don't gain and, in fact, Obama, Hillary and company were almost certain that the Salafists wouldn't gain even partial control. However, because the arab world lives in a cocoon of conspiracy theories, secularists in countries taken over by islamists believe in the conspiracty du jour.

Posted by Lord Garth 2012-03-23 12:15|| 2012-03-23 12:15|| Front Page Top

#7 "I have read this in a few places that US back Islamist takeovers.I dont understand how US would gain from having MB or salfists in control."

It is the logical consequence of the 'War on Terror' approach.

The West makes political concessions to islamofascists who do not employ the method 'terrorism' in order to weaken those islamofascists who do.

When they understand that they can get their way without 'terrorism' then 'terrorism' will cease and the WoT will be 'won.'
</sarc>

Posted by Herb Phavick7554 2012-03-23 22:26|| 2012-03-23 22:26|| Front Page Top

23:39 canalzone
23:14 newc
23:04 JosephMendiola
22:47 JosephMendiola
22:44 Water Modem
22:34 JosephMendiola
22:26 Herb Phavick7554
22:23 JosephMendiola
22:22 Barbara
22:07 JosephMendiola
21:49 Herb Phavick7554
21:33 manversgwtw
21:02 manversgwtw
21:01 Barbara
20:48 manversgwtw
20:30 DepotGuy
20:28 phil_b
20:25 phil_b
20:13 Phil_B
20:13 JosephMendiola
20:06 JosephMendiola
20:03 JosephMendiola
19:59 JosephMendiola
19:47 Besoeker