Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Mubarek
What has happened to the good old days of:
1. Justinian I/Theodora sending an army in to the Hippodrome to exterminate 40,000 rebellious people?
2. Napoleon shooting a cannon in to a Parisan crowd.
These days, dictators have a lot more tools at their disposal than the ancient and medieval monarchs, yet they are wimps when compared to them. Those monarchs did not put up with nonsense, yet they accomplished what Mubarek can not with swords and clubs. Seriously, wtf?
Because now dictators have to worry about things like securing trade routes, extended security guarantees with outside nations, and the fact that people in Western nations give a shit about preventing internal problems much more than in the 1800's?
we do???
Probably because Mubarak remembers the example of Napoleon and his "whiff of grapeshot"; it did more to propel Napoleon than save the Directory.
@justinian:
1.) mass media, internet
2.) education
3.) guns & explosives
4.) public opinion of important trade partners.
to name a few...
if they wanted a million people they should have booked Fatbody Slim
come on egyptians I'm counting on you to sink the stock markitz so I can get me some cheap stock$ X(
Oil pipelines are still secure and I thought they closed off their stock market.
"Oil pipelines are still secure"
maybe its time to spread rumors then, before I have to sell my futures at a low price. 
Now there is USA. You can't give them an excuse to invade and take all your resources
"These days, dictators have a lot more tools at their disposal than the ancient and medieval monarchs, yet they are wimps when compared to them. Those monarchs did not put up with nonsense, yet they accomplished what Mubarek can not with swords and clubs. Seriously, wtf?"
Medieval monarchs were, in Western Europe, always forced to compromise. This is why the magna carta was signed. Or, even worse for the monarch, Mary of Burgundy was forced to sign "Het Groot Privilegie" (in english: the great privilege), wich instantly granted cities privileges that were comparable to those of the Italian city-states.
Another clear case is this: When Charles the good, count of Flanders was murdered, the french king (whom Flanders belonged to) couldn't get his candidate elected. The people preferred a different candidate and that one got the position fairly easy.
Absolute monarchs are something of a more recent time. They fit better in the period of the 17th to 19th century. Although, there too, that system shows clear cracks. You mentioned Napoleon, but he himself is the result of a civil uprising. In the end, most (if not all) absolute monarchs were dependent on how well their people fared.
Mubarak doesn't seem to have all control over his army anymore. And when you shoot into a crowd of over a million, it's the fastest way to find your death.
"And when you shoot into a crowd of over a million, it's the fastest way to find your death. "
if you are alone, and don't drive a tank or plane.
so that's why they sent in the camel-, donkey and horsef*****'ers
let me add:
5.) much bigger and denser population
...to my previous explanation.
@east:
lonely man, who never had sex. They could either
a - watch Star Wars
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zWNJHS9PBE&feature=related
b - go suicide into a crowd of protesters
Egypt is dependent on american grain and money.
Running down protestors with Abrams tanls on TV wouldn't really improve relations.
that must have been the logic
Looks like the west has to abandon the moral highground or imperialism
Can't have both.
depends on your pov. Mubarek DID manage peace for a very long time.
Don't get me wrong, I'm against this supposed-to-be-leader, but your statement is to simple to be correct.
the Smart Set in USA tells us we can't afford to sponsor democracy, that the lesser evil is to support a dictator who wll prevent an islamist yahoo movement from running the country.
if 40 million Egyptians have been born into peace Israel and regret it there's nothing the USA can do to stop another war.
I'm not sure why it's in our interest to stop that war. if the Arabs and Iran attack israel and Israel nukes the shit out of its neighbors that would settle that region for decades to come.
wow autoedit
It would have been electoral suicide for a president to go for a revolution in such an important country and loose it to fundamentalists like Iran. Especially if there's a lot of tension with israel afterwards.
If its clearly not the presidents doing, he could more easily afford a gamble and support democracy. If it turns out wrong, he's not to blaim. That explains Obama's behaviour.
In any case, an islamic revolution is still an unfortunate possibility, but is less likely i.m.o. as 30 years ago. It seems more difficult to remove these fundamentalist regimes as it has a larger support amongst the people. So maybe a dictator looked as the lesser of 2 evils to most who supported that regime.
the recent revolutions in north africa show, that the old politics have failed in the region. europe and the US have to change their policies. the times of support for an aggressive Israel are over. without support for Israel, the islamists lose their best political basis.
as long as israel is There, you mean. Israel gave Egypt back every inch of occupied territory and hasn't fought with Egypt in over 30 years and I don't hear Egyptians glad they never have to fight Israel again
@Yell the Egyptions like most Arabs dont like what Israel are doing in Palestine. we all know that if Israel wasnt best friends with America Israei nonsense would have stopped years ago. The Israelis wonder why the arabs hate them, they should look at their policies towards the occupied territories.
personally I dont want to see war in the middle east, but a lot of Arabs dislike intensely the free reign Israel has been given and at the very least they want Israel to take notice of their arab neighbours. This rising in Egypt is important because for the first time in 30 years Israeli has had to reassess its strategic situation in the mid east. The IDF is clearly uneasy with the prospect of the Egyptian military being an adversary.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Mubarek
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.