so there's this and in case it goes away it's about protests in egypt. the specific line i wanted to draw your attention to is: "Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Egypt's government, a key U.S. ally in the Middle East, is stable despite the outpouring. Clinton said Egyptians have the right to protest, but urged all parties to avoid violence."

just like we resorted to peaceful protest to overthrow the british regime. just like when france told us to follow the rules laid down by king/pseudo-pope and a representative body that was not representative, and didn't support us in our revolution.

it shouldn't be surprising when a government who is propping up an ally government doesn't want said ally to suffer revolution. however, if you really want a country to hate the u.s., do nothing while the people revolt. if egypt (or iran) ever gets around to a serious revolt, i don't think they'll look too kindly on us for turning our back on the people when they needed our help. it's not as if we would be helping to overthrow an established democracy. we would be offering aid to people who want to reshape their own autocratic states into something they have a say in.

do we really want to be on more of a losing side of the middle east? even if they successfully revolted today, it could take decades, more than a century perhaps, before they were fully free and established. why slow that further? we're for spreading democracy but only at the end of a barrel, and only when we say. shut up and sit down until then.



< << < : : >> > >
number 9.. .   .? andy andy andy, get your adverbs here

brother, you have to wait