A yappy evil murderous dictator of four decades.

A yappy evil murderous dictator of four decades who wants to show you a little something with cards . . . don't worry it won't take too long . . . something like . . . maybe . . . SAM THE BELLHOP!!

Someone sent him a latter to ask. The reply came direct and was discussed on the news. That was a while ago. So what's really going on?

Remember in history class when you had to analyze what was going on in different parts of the world during the few years leading up to WW2? Well folks, in the future, if there is one, kids will be analyzing these years for the same reason.
There were pacifists and politically correct lefties in 1939 as well. Thank God The allied triumvirate didn't listen to them. Here's a tip. Don't listen to them now.

Fish, this can either be the beginning of a series of peaceful revolutions, like with egypt, or the start of something terrible. That won't be determined by HOW other countries get involved, it will be IF.

Are you kidding? Egypt? Peaceful? Wow. Don't kid yourself, Egypt is in dire straits.

Everything is relative Magicfish...compared to the Russian Revolution it was rather peaceful....I'm certain the military in Egypt after being in charge for decades will give it up, they are likely tired of it. Then they can share their tanks and gun boats with other friendly and peace loving arab nations, they would make wonderful parade floats after glueing flowers to them. Hey! Maybe they'll abolish govt and become pirates and join the Somalia Anarchy train!

As Santa points out, as far as revolutions go, VERY peaceful. The point was that the revolters were peaceful. All the violence was being perpetrated by the pro mubarak crowds, or police inserted instigators.

I realize, Santa, that the revolution itself was somewhat peaceful compared to the Russian or the French. The issue is that now the way is clear in Egypt for you no who. Same in Libya if kgquaddaaffiii falls.

Well....they had the guns. I walked right through an anti US protest in Israel the Arabs were putting on in full uniform. Had I seen the English version of their signs first rather than after going through I would have maybe walked slower, the looks on their lil' faces was so cute! You would'a thought I smacked their mamas.

Right now, the military is running things. Not that great of an option, but they have, so far, shown themselves to be decent with the people.

As far as leaving things open for islamic rule, as much as I don't care fro religion, and even more so don't care for "rules" at all, why the bigotry towards islam?

You're kidding right?

Which part, about the military, and the people getting along? At least they were last I heard.

Or asking about islam? In that case, are you asking if I'm kidding by saying there's bigotry, or kidding in wondering WHY there's bigotry?

It has been centuries since any of those countries were ran by other than Muslims. The problem is when fundimentalist Islamist take over, that is a completely different thing, ask any lib, they'll tell you. They tend to oppress their people, sponser terror activities, and are pretty much ****** bags. Your normal run o' the mill Muslim is fine, it's the crazy ones that people worry about for the most part. I don't think anyone believes that, say, a Baptist will be running Egypt six months from now and a Mormon leading Libya.

So far there has been very little evidence the people in any of these countries want theocracy - the great masses of them clearly want democracy. The same was actually true in Iran in the early days of the Revolution - and the ayatollahs claimed to have the same thing in mind but with the Shah's army distrusted the Revolutionary Guards were able to accumulate power and the current hideous situation came about.

Both Eygpt and Tunisia are in the fortunate position of having armies the people have some trust in and institutions that can ease the way forward - as a believer in democracy for all, I think we have to hope for the best, and acknowledge those two countries stand a decent chance of becoming moderate Moslem democracies. Libya is very different - unlike in most countries, the Libyan armed forces are not a distinct entity. Also the public servants and civil institutions only know how to serve the Ghaddafi family - the colonel has been in power for over 40 years and has brooked no dissent, let alone opposition. The thing that may save them is the tribal structure which he co-opted after unsuccessfully trying to destroy. If the tribes can get along for a while, as they seem to be doing now, there is a chance for the place.

There seems little chance of much Iranian influence - most North African Moslems are Sunni - there's only really Bahrain of the present protest countries where there's a chance of Shia contagion. Importantly it's obvious the people do not want radical Islamist leadership - they do not want theocracy or autocracy - their every word is for democracy - and they are dieing for those words, so I believe them.

Hopefully the democratic countries can help them achieve that goal at the expense of the ambition of Khamenei, bin Laden and similar nut jobs.

*** Just to the north of me is the world's most populous Moslem country - Indonesia - and it is - a moderate Moslem democracy. The Indonesians managed to get rid of Suharto, a general in the Mubarak/Ghaddafi mould, just over a decade ago, and have established a thriving and successful democracy, which is actually so mature they now have the balls to go after local extremists. Before Suharto's downfall there was very real fear that without the strongman, extremists would flourish - the opposite has been the case.

Well, Destiny, I don't think the Iranian people in 1979 wanted 40 years of state-run mullah-run terror, either. But that's what they got, because Khomeini and his gang were organized, and ruthless. Same as in St. Petersburg in 1917-1918. Same as in Paris in 1789-1792. To believe that the same actions repeated again and again will (magically?) produce a different result this time is . . . . insane? Google exec Wael Ghonim found himself booted off the platform as soon as al-Qaradawi made the scene . . . . in Egypt the high command of the military has ruled the country since 1952, and since 1952 has been involved in a deadly struggle with the Ikhwan. It appears that the military high command is still firmly and absolutely in control. But the fact that they found it necessary to depose Mubarak has created an opening for the Ikhwan. A violent struggle is likely to ensue, and I am not certain of the outcome, this round.

Woland

I concur.

What they should want is no government. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1e2aRfqp1sY

Thanks for the response. I imagined most didn't want ANY kind of fundamentalist in charge.
Just referring to islam didn't make that clear

Well, you gotta use a little bit of common sense. Did you think people had no problem with Budhist or Jewish fundimentalist taking over as leaders of countries with close to 100% Muslim populations?