EGYPT: Will the next stage troublesome or...?.......

Charles Krauthammer

Toward a soft landing in Egypt

Blogger's comments are in italic.

WASHINGTON — Who doesn't love a democratic revolution? Who is not moved by the renunciation of fear and the reclamation of dignity in the streets of Cairo and Alexandria?

The worldwide euphoria that has greeted the Egyptian uprising is understandable. All revolutions are blissful in the first days. The romance could be forgiven if this were Paris 1789. But it is not. In the intervening 222 years, we have learned how these things can end.

The Egyptian awakening carries promise and hope and of course merits our support. But only a child can believe that a democratic outcome is inevitable. And only a blinkered optimist can believe that it is even the most likely outcome.

Very nice introduction. And here comes the but preparing paving the road for the vehicles of sneakiness to transport all sophisticated Jewish ideas. So be careful. He is totally nipping in the bud, from the beging, the fact that demo0cracy is possible at the end, but of course the word "only" is utilized to state the obvious.

Yes, the Egyptian revolution is broad-based. But so were the French and the Russian and the Iranian revolutions. Indeed in Iran, the revolution only succeeded — the shah was long opposed by the mullahs — when the merchants, the housewives, the students and the secularists joined to bring him down.

In his implicit comparison, he is over sighting intentionally or otherwise that there is one unique element that makes the Egyptian revolution different, and that is that it has started by the people for the people with foreign interference, organizer, leader as was the case with other revolutions, specially the French Revolution. The Egyptian revolution is the revolution of young people who had enough of the their dictator's regime, broke the fear barrier and stood up to reclaim their degnity and honour.

And who ended up in control? The most disciplined, ruthless and ideologically committed — the radical Islamists.

Here, the writer remove the mask and reveal his Jewish fear.  "ruthless, most disciplined, Ideologically committed", words that I easily collect them in my hand throw them back into his face like Palestinian stone-throwers do in Palestine. The writers words totally fit what Israel's actions since its inceptions; the massacres and ethnic cleansing. Dare he criticize Zionist Israel for that? No, he is just clever in drowning the reader in his journalistic twisted ocean of words.

This is why our paramount moral and strategic interest in Egypt is real democracy in which power does not devolve to those who believe in one man, one vote, one time.

Well said and I agree with you. I am open minded.

That would be Egypt's fate should the Muslim Brotherhood prevail. That was the fate of Gaza, now under the brutal thumb of Hamas, a Palestinian wing (see article 2 of Hamas' founding covenant) of the Muslim Brotherhood.

Why mostly every Jew, religious, atheist, secular or whatever is so fearful that he/she become so confused and contradict him/herself. One cannot achieve democracy without allowing all partied to participate in the election. I always say, "what is good for the goose is good for the gander". And if it ends up being the Muslim Brotherhood have been elected, then be it,. the nation has spoken. The same thing happened in Gaza as people of Gaza democratically elected Hamas to rule. And yes they are desciplined and ideologically committed to free themselves from the brutal Israeli regime. Anything wrong with that? Yes, but only in the Jewish eye.

We are told by sage Western analysts not to worry about the Brotherhood because it probably commands only about 30 percent of the vote. This is reassurance? In a country where the secular democratic opposition is weak and fractured after decades of persecution, any Islamist party commanding a third of the vote rules the country.

Here floats his Jewish traits to the surface;  cheating, lying and deceiving. The above is a total nonsense and is to the opposite. 

The country itself has been declared secular for decades. Religion and authority have been separated from each other for decades. On top of that, the Muslim brotherhood have even been more persecuted since since the the 1952 revolution.

Brotherhood members  have always been kidnapped from the comfort of their own homes, thrown into political prisons for no reason, and rounded before any election  and thrown into prison.

Elections will be held. The primary U.S. objective is to guide a transition period that gives secular democrats a chance,

Whom is he bluffing? the writer means to give a chance to the triators who will listen to the instructions of their masters in the USA.

The House of Mubarak is no more. He is 82, reviled and not running for re-election. The only question is who fills the vacuum. There are two principal possibilities: a provisional government of opposition forces, possibly led by Mohamed ElBaradei, or an interim government led by the military.

ElBaradei would be a disaster. As head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, he did more than anyone to make an Iranian nuclear bomb possible, covering for the mullahs for years. (As soon as he left, the IAEA issued a strikingly tough, unvarnished report about the program.)

Now the writer shows his total bias towards Israel by lying through his teeth.

Worse, ElBaradei has allied himself with the Muslim Brotherhood. Such an alliance is grossly unequal. The Brotherhood has organization, discipline and widespread support. In 2005, it won approximately 20 percent of parliamentary seats. ElBaradei has no constituency of his own, no political base, no political history within Egypt at all.

The writer is recycling the same BS, Israel and its allies have been saying since the commencement of revolting in Tahrir square. The three NO's mentioned above do in fact have no value and sound more bureaucratic to me.

He has lived abroad for decades. He has less of a residency claim to Egypt than Rahm Emanuel has to Chicago. A man with no constituency allied with a highly organized and powerful political party is nothing but a mouthpiece and a figurehead, a useful idiot that the Brotherhood will dispense with when it ceases to have need of a cosmopolitan frontman.

I would not lower myself and comment on the above because it is obvious that it is a total BS.

The Egyptian military, on the other hand, is the most stable and important institution in the country. It is Western-oriented and rightly suspicious of the Brotherhood. And it is widely respected, carrying the prestige of the 1952 "Free Officers Movement" that overthrew the monarchy and the 1973 October War that restored Egyptian pride along with the Sinai.

What a crockpot full of steaming shit. He thinks he knows more about Egypt than ElBaradei. He wants the country to still be run by the military. It has been all the time since the 1952 revolution, and look at it now; shambled like it has never been! And the asshole has the audacity to describe the Egyptian army as "Western-Oriented". What the hell is that. I thought the army should be "Nation-oriented"!

The military is the best vehicle for guiding the country to free elections over the coming months. Whether it does so with Mubarak at the top, or with Vice President Omar Suleiman or perhaps with some technocrat who arouses no ire among the demonstrators, matters not to us. If the army calculates that sacrificing Mubarak (through exile) will satisfy the opposition and end the unrest, so be it.

The overriding objective is a period of stability during which secularists and other democratic elements of civil society can organize themselves for the coming elections and prevail. ElBaradei is a menace. Mubarak will be gone one way or the other. The key is the military. The U.S. should say very little in public and do everything behind the scenes to help the military midwife — and then guarantee — what is still something of a long shot: Egyptian democracy.

A weasel like most Jews are. "do everything behind the scene to help the military midwife" Yes, midwife for delivering a bastard baby who is the result of fornication that took place behind the scene in a dark night between the American and Israeli self-interest and some Egyptian goons in the absence of the Muslim brotherhood who could have interfere and stopped such illegal impregnation.

Tranceparency 

does not necissarily mean cleanliness, 

but lookthrough.