Breaking: Mubarak out; Update: Dem official credits Obama, of course; Update: Military suspends parliament, fires cabinet? Update: Military leaders threatened to quit if Mubarak didn’t

posted at 11:25 am on February 11, 2011 by Allahpundit

That’s the word from Suleiman, as of 15 minutes ago. Live video shows Tahrir Square in ecstasy, Egyptian flags ubiquitous among the crowd. A question for you to chew on as I scramble for updates: Was yesterday’s “I’ll hand over power but won’t leave” speech a trial balloon to see how protesters would react, with the military warning him in advance that he’d have to leave today if the crowds rejected that arrangement? Or did Mubarak fully intend to stay on until September but was forcibly ousted this morning after someone high up got nervous at the size of the demonstrations? I speculated yesterday that there was an eleventh-hour power struggle that saved him; it’d be weird if the dynamics of that struggle shifted so dramatically within just 24 hours.

Here’s Suleiman’s official statement via the Beeb:

Full statement from Vice-President Suleiman: “In the name of God the merciful, the compassionate, citizens, during these very difficult circumstances Egypt is going through, President Hosni Mubarak has decided to step down from the office of president of the republic and has charged the high council of the armed forces to administer the affairs of the country. May God help everybody.”

Says a protester, “We did it. I cannot believe it. Mubarak the dictator has gone. And the Egyptian people will forever be free.” Let’s hope so; most Americans aren’t as confident. Lots of updates coming, needless to say, so stand by.

Update: A new update at the BBC blog linked above notes that the Egyptian constitution doesn’t allow for power to devolve to the military but rather to the speaker of parliament if the president steps down. This is, in other words, a military coup; the question I posed above is simply whether it’s a soft one, with Mubarak agreeing that he has no cards left to play, or a hard one, with the military tossing him under the bus. It sure sounded like a coup this morning, too:

As protesters were swarming into the streets Friday morning for what was expected to be the biggest and most volatile demonstrations in the three-week revolt here, the Supreme Council of the Egyptian Armed Forces issued a statement over state television and radio indicating that the military, not Mr. Mubarak, was in effective control of the country. It was unclear whether the military would take meaningful steps toward democracy or begin a military dictatorship…

The statement Friday by the military’s Supreme Council struck a very different tone and appeared to assert that the military, not President Mubarak, was now in control. The military said that first it would end the 30-year-old emergency law — used to detain without trial— “as soon as the current circumstances are over.” The protesters have demanded that the law be eliminated immediately, before any talks about ending the uprising.

The first test of new reforms will be whether they make good on their promise to lift the emergency law ASAP. The second test will be deciding on a new president. It’s unclear to me what Suleiman’s status is right now: If the military’s high council is formally in charge, is he the power behind the throne making executive decisions? Is he the de facto head of the council itself? Or is he out too along with Mubarak?

Update: Here’s the live feed of Tahrir Square from Al Jazeera Egypt. Updates continue below. Click the image to watch.

Update: After weeks of the White House ineffectually embarrassing itself at every turn, Democrats begin the inevitable spin: Obama did it!

Great news for the administration/president. People will remember , despite some fumbles yesterday, that the President played an excellent hand, walked the right line and that his statement last night was potentially decisive in brining this issue to a close. The situation remains complicated and delicate going forward, but this is a huge affirmation of the President’s leadership on the international stage.

Update: Ah, here’s a great clip from Fox Insider — the reaction in Tahrir Square at the moment of the announcement. Classic.

Update: RCP has CNN video of Suleiman making the announcement. Fox reported earlier this morning that an important statement would be forthcoming from Mubarak himself, but he’s nowhere to be found so far today. (In fact, he reportedly left Cairo this morning for Sharm el-Sheikh.) More evidence, perhaps, that this was a hard coup and not a soft one?

Update: Your Orwellian moment of the day came earlier this morning too in (where else?) Tehran:

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad says Egypt’s popular uprising shows a new Middle East is emerging, one that will have no signs of Israel and US “interference.”…

Ahmadinejad says Egyptians have the right to live in freedom and choose their own government.

Update: The “Egyptian people will forever be free” project is off to a bad start:

Middle East channel Al Arabiya reports that the Higher Military Council, which has taken control from Hosni Mubarak, will fire Mubarak’s Cabinet, suspend both houses of Parliament and rule with the head of the supreme constitutional court.

Reuters is quoting a military source as saying Defense Minister Mohamed Hussein Tantawi will be the head of the ruling military council.

Suleiman’s out too, then?

Update: I’m hearing on Twitter that Obama will speak at 1:30 p.m. He won’t take credit for Mubarak’s departure, natch, but that’s only because his spin doctors are already trying to do it for him. As the media conveniently forgets the past 17 days of bumbling statements and shifting demands from our foreign policy braintrust, here’s a vivid reminder from the Times (via Mediaite) of just how lame our “intelligence” wing has been during this episode. In a sane world, Panetta would be out on his ass — along with James “Largely Secular” Clapper:

Mr. Obama watched Mr. Mubarak’s speech on board Air Force One, returning from a trip to Michigan, the press secretary, Robert Gibbs, said. As soon as he arrived at the White House, Mr. Obama huddled with his national security aides. The administration appeared as taken aback by Mr. Mubarak’s speech as the crowds in Tahrir Square. The director of the Central Intelligence Agency, Leon E. Panetta, testified before the House of Representatives on Thursday morning that there was a “strong likelihood” that Mr. Mubarak would step down by the end of the day.

American officials said Mr. Panetta was basing his statement not on secret intelligence but on media broadcasts, which began circulating before he sat down before the House Intelligence Committee. But a senior administration official said Mr. Obama had also expected that Egypt was on the cusp of dramatic change. Speaking at Northern Michigan University in Marquette, he said, “We are witnessing history unfold,” adding, “America will do everything we can to support an orderly and genuine transition to democracy.”

The Journal actually headlined an early-morning story about Egypt, “Crisis Puts White House in Disarray.” Then, mysteriously, that headline was changed to “Crisis Flummoxes White House.” Ben Smith of Politico speculates that the White House might have actually phoned the paper and objected to the earlier hed, accurate though it was. That’s how sensitive they are about how embarrassing this situation has become to them. In fact, I’ll end this update with a choice quote from that Journal story from Steve Clemons, a liberal who’s attended two meetings on Egypt with National Security Council members: “The mystique of America’s superpower status has been shattered.”

Update: One of the cold comforts about military dominance in Egypt is that it makes a Muslim Brotherhood takeover unlikely, at least in the short term. The army simply has too much at stake — especially financially — to let Islamists spoil their racket. The downside of that, though? It has too much at stake to let Egyptian entrepreneurs spoil it either, which means economic stagnation and political discontent for years to come. Fred Kaplan:

As in many undemocratic countries, the military is more than just the military. Egypt’s officer corps is said to own or operate vast networks of commercial enterprises, including water, construction, cement, olive oil, the hotel and gasoline industries—in all, about one-third of the country’s economy—as well as vast chunks of seaside property…

The army’s material interests don’t mesh so well with the premises of a thriving middle-class society. And the absence of such a society—the combination of large numbers of well-educated young people and few jobs to suit their talents—has no doubt fueled these last two weeks of protest.

That same WikiLeaks cable from the U.S. embassy in Cairo reported that the military views efforts at privatization “as a threat to its economic position, and therefore generally opposes economic reforms.” To the extent the military does retain power in Egypt, the people’s “rising expectations” may be frustrated, regardless of the outcome of this current clash. Whatever happens in the coming days and weeks, Egypt, once the emblem of Arab stability, might be locked in the dynamics of revolution for a long time to come.

The above is also entirely true of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, which controls hugely lucrative industries inside that country. The trick for the Brotherhood will be emulating the Iranian model to coopt the military somehow. They’ll have to do it in reverse order from how Iran did it — i.e., instead of starting a la Iran with an Islamist revolt that’s later secured by a de facto military coup (in 2009), they’ll have to follow today’s de facto coup with an Islamist revolt — but it’s not impossible. If the Egyptian military holds on too tightly to power and the public gets restless again, they could strike a deal with the Brotherhood in which the Islamists take formal control in the name of “democratic legitimacy” in return for guaranteeing that the military can keep its business rackets going.

Update: Another fun clip from Fox Insider. More than 90 minutes after the announcement, Tahrir Square is still roaring so loudly that reporters can’t hear themselves.

Update: A hopeful note from an op-ed at Politico. However this ends, and we probably won’t know for years, the successful revolts in Tunisia and Egypt could make peaceful demonstrations the new vogue for political expression in the Middle East for awhile.

Speaking of which, one of Ace’s co-bloggers wondered on Twitter which Arab regime would be next to go. My pick for the last to go: The Saudis. They’ll be more ruthless than Mubarak was and they’ll receive far more western backing in that ruthlessness, partly because of our oil interests there, partly because of the greater risk of a fundie takeover, and partly to avert the ominous symbolism of Mecca being captured by jihadist nutjobs. But even the Saudis are worried now. According to Fox News, Obama’s phone call on Egypt with Abdullah a few days ago was “unusually tense” because we wouldn’t back Mubarak as fully as they’d like.

Update: A depressing piece from Ellis Goldberg at Foreign Policy Affairs makes the same point as Fred Kaplan: The army’s not going to relax its stranglehold on the economy, which means democracy and privatization are dead on arrival.

The practical demands of the protesters seem fairly simple: end the state of emergency, hold new elections, and grant the freedom to form parties without state interference. But these demands would amount to opening up the political space to everyone across Egypt’s social and political structure. That would involve constitutional and statutory changes, such as reforming Egypt as a parliamentary rather than a presidential system, in which a freely elected majority selects the prime minister (who is now appointed by the president). These changes would wipe away the power structure the army created in 1952 and has backed since.

A freely elected parliament and a reconstituted government would weaken the role of the presidency, a position the military is likely to try to keep in its portfolio. Moreover, open elections could hand the new business elites power in parliament where they could work to limit the role of the army in the economy. This would put the army’s vast economic holdings — from the ubiquitous propane cylinders that provide all Egyptian homes with cooking gas to clothing, food, and hotels — in jeopardy. Moreover, the army has always preferred that the country be orderly and hierarchical. It is uncomfortable with the growing participatory festival on the streets and, even if the officers were to tolerate more contestation than their grandfathers did in the 1950s, they would likely try to limit participation in politics to those whose lives have been spent in the military by retaining the system of presidential appointment for government ministers.

Update: Tapper has a useful reality check up in advance of the coming White House spin about how pro-democracy they allegedly are. Which of the last two presidents pushed harder — and provided more funding — for liberalization in Egypt? Hint: Not Hopenchange.

Update: The mullahs who were cheering Egypt’s protesters suddenly get cold feet. As do the Swiss, who were apparently holding his stolen money for him for years.

Update: A mystery solved, maybe: Richard Engel claims that senior Egyptian military leaders expected Mubarak to quit yesterday and were “furious” when he didn’t, going so far as to threaten to resign and join the protests if he didn’t do so today. True, or self-serving spin after the fact aimed at proving that they were on the people’s side all along? The rumor yesterday was that Mubarak’s speech was pre-recorded; if that’s true, then if the military disapproved of it, presumably they could have stopped it from airing. I still like my “trial balloon” theory from way up top in this post better.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6 7

So you don’t like them. What do you think you’re going to do about them, anyway? I haven’t understood all the chatter over this at all. Like you can wish them gone?

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 12:43 PM

Maybe support our interests?

antisocial on February 11, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Ref: The Update with the FP link.

Duh. Seriously, who thought the Egyptian Army was going to resign as well?

BKeyser on February 11, 2011 at 1:02 PM

CCRWM on February 11, 2011 at 12:40 PM

Ahem.

There, I actually agree with you. I was out in Union Square demonstrating during the Iranian unrest, and would’ve appreciated support from the president.

ernesto on February 11, 2011 at 12:33 PM

ernesto on February 11, 2011 at 1:02 PM

And one of his BFFs, Geraldo Rivera, was just named “Senior War Correspondent” at Fox News.

Buy Danish on February 11, 2011 at 12:59 PM

LOL!

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:02 PM

okeydokey…off to slaughter a lamb and light incense. (what’s a neo-facist conservative suppose to do, anyway?)

Later. Canopfor, hold my chair for me.

Limerick on February 11, 2011 at 12:47 PM

Limerick:Done,I’ll keep da campfire from goin out!:)

canopfor on February 11, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Don’t think it will take that long!!

canopfor on February 11, 2011 at 12:59 PM

Good to see you friend!..:)..I agree with him..Israel is very worried..You need to read Double Tappers blog i posted up this thread if you haven’t already..:)

Dire Straits on February 11, 2011 at 1:03 PM

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 12:57 PM

This is the same Fox News that is in such a rush to grab viewers that it is abandoning reasoned analysis for follow-the-mob lunacy. “Freedom Square,” “Facebook Revolution,” “This is the day when democracy was born in Egypt,” yadda yadda yadda.

Not that Egypt is the first time they’ve done that. They’ve been playing up to Obama for quite a while — maybe a quid pro quo for the nauseating O’Reilly “interview?” — and seem increasingly willing to play along with the MSM crowd.

MrScribbler on February 11, 2011 at 1:03 PM

hillbillyjim on February 11, 2011 at 12:46 PM

Its good to learn something new everyday. No matter how trivial.

Thanks.

BobMbx on February 11, 2011 at 12:49 PM

You’re right about Coburn — I’ve never seen him in a bad movie.

hillbillyjim on February 11, 2011 at 1:04 PM

After spending the morning at the White House, ABC’s Jake Tapper issued the following tweet:

“Also worth keeping in mind: cant find anyone in O admin who thinks whatever comes next will be better for U.S. interests than Mubarak was”

tommyboy on February 11, 2011 at 1:04 PM

rrpjr on February 11, 2011 at 1:01 PM

You are assuming he can think for himself. Wrong assumption.

antisocial on February 11, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Maybe support our interests?

antisocial on February 11, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Well, we handed them Palestine in elections, but I don’t think there’s going to be a way to list who can or can’t run in these coming elections. We have influence, maybe. but we don’t have that kind of control.

I have to say, though, that I’m not sensing that’s what this rebellion is about. This is about democracy and bread. And in that order, I think. Hammas won by dealing out bread in Palestine.

And that’s the real danger, I suppose.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:05 PM

The Egyptian tea party? Why didn’t Barry resign then?

sandee on February 11, 2011 at 1:05 PM

Way to dump a strategic ally. Barry and Hillary get a good, solid B+ for their handling of all this.

Christien on February 11, 2011 at 1:05 PM

Guess you missed the exchange of gunfire between protestors in the Sinai and police as the protestors fire bombed a police station.

Limerick on February 11, 2011 at 12:43 PM

As of today? No I didn’t. Then I take that back. Been ill for a long time; weather doesn’t help either.

ProudPalinFan on February 11, 2011 at 1:06 PM

I was out in Union Square demonstrating during the Iranian unrest

So ernesto, what do you make of the fact that Ahmadinejad full-throatedly supports the Egyptian coup?

Missy on February 11, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Strange……………..and yet,inexplicable
Perplexing……………….

Hopey hates Tea Partiers……………………

Threw Iranians Green Party under da bus……

Poland gets no shield…………..

Georgians were on their own…from the USSR…..

But…Muslim BrotherHood gets a visit to the White House,
and supports the Jihadys,under da ruse of Freedom…..

canopfor on February 11, 2011 at 1:06 PM

Obama wants the Saudi Royal family P/O’d at the United States because another oil crisis and the attendant gas lines a la Jimmy Carter would justify his green energy agenda.

Skandia Recluse on February 11, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Hey, anyone interested in Ahmadinejad’s reaction to the Egyptian uprising?

Well, he’s quite happy, it turns out:

Ahmadinejad: Egyptian protests herald new Mideast

“Despite all the (West’s) complicated and satanic designs … a new Middle East is emerging without the Zionist regime and U.S. interference, a place where the arrogant powers will have no place,” Ahmadinejad told the crowd.

He also urged Egyptian protesters to persevere until there is a regime change. “It’s your right to be free. It’s your right to exercise your will and sovereignty … and choose the type of government and the rulers.”

After his address, Ahmadinejad carried a placard reading, “Death to Israel.”
[Note: the sentence about the "Death to Israel" placard (my bold) has been scrubbed from many versions of this AP story on the web. The link I provided still has it - for now.]

This is all going to be soooo groovy and democratic and everything. Congratulations, Barry!

Missy on February 11, 2011 at 12:58 PM

Israel is worried….

Update at 12:17 p.m. ET: Israel’s UN ambassador says “we hope Democracy will prevail and not another Islamic fundamentalist state.”

via AOL live updates from Weasel Zippers site.

sicoit on February 11, 2011 at 1:07 PM

Also worth keeping in mind: cant find anyone in O admin who thinks whatever comes next will be better for U.S. interests than Mubarak was

And yet they’re patting themselves on the back for Obama’s “success” anyway.

Incredible.

Missy on February 11, 2011 at 1:08 PM

After spending the morning at the White House, ABC’s Jake Tapper issued the following tweet:

“Also worth keeping in mind: cant find anyone in O admin who thinks whatever comes next will be better for U.S. interests than Mubarak was”
tommyboy on February 11, 2011 at 1:04 PM

Um, Jake, can you find anyone in the O-ministration who gives a pig’s patoot about American interests? This being bad for America and Israel is a plus in O’s eyes.

clnurnberg on February 11, 2011 at 1:08 PM

“Also worth keeping in mind: cant find anyone in O admin who thinks whatever comes next will be better for U.S. interests than Mubarak was”

tommyboy on February 11, 2011 at 1:04 PM

So, the rationale for pushing Mubarak towards the exit would have nothing to do with what is best for the U.S.? Do I have that right?

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:08 PM

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:08 PM

You gotta problem with a post_American world? Obama doesn’t

clnurnberg on February 11, 2011 at 1:10 PM

canopfor on February 11, 2011 at 12:59 PM
============================
Good to see you friend!..:)..I agree with him..Israel is very worried..You need to read Double Tappers blog i posted up this thread if you haven’t already..:)

Dire Straits on February 11, 2011 at 1:03 PM

Dire Straits:Nice to hear from you too Dire,I’m starting
my Theo intell run,Tapper is in Israel,I’ll
get to it–,thanks for da heads up!:)

canopfor on February 11, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Ernesto:

What do you believe will happen now? You’ve been champing at the bit, holding back, until you “saw” the emancipation of these Egyptians under Mubarak’s thumb. Now you chime in. Is everything copacetic in your world’s view?

betsyz on February 11, 2011 at 1:11 PM

The Left thrills to the orgiastic upheaval with absolutely no thought to its implications to anybody, even themselves.

rrpjr on February 11, 2011 at 1:01 PM

Not quite. The Left – or the activist Left, anyway – has a very goal that is being advanced with this upheaval: the destruction of Israel. And that is why the Ayers/Dohrn/Code Pink/union types are allied with the MB against Mubarak.

Missy on February 11, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Missy on February 11, 2011 at 1:11 PM

“has a very goal” s/b “has a very specific goal”, sorry

Missy on February 11, 2011 at 1:13 PM

This is the same Fox News that is in such a rush to grab viewers that it is abandoning reasoned analysis for follow-the-mob lunacy. “Freedom Square,” “Facebook Revolution,” “This is the day when democracy was born in Egypt,” yadda yadda yadda.

No media outlet has been fearmongering about these protests than Fox News. So, either they’re trying to have it both ways, or they finally realized that the events of the past two weeks had little to do with Islamism. What happens tomorrow, however…

YYZ on February 11, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Hey, anyone interested in Ahmadinejad’s reaction to the Egyptian uprising?

Well, he’s quite happy, it turns out:

Missy on February 11, 2011 at 12:58 PM

This can’t be right. I’ve been assured on this very thread that Sunnis and Shia hate each other so much they could never work together to destroy Israel.

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:13 PM

canopfor on February 11, 2011 at 1:11 PM

Hotty totty..:)

Dire Straits on February 11, 2011 at 1:14 PM

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Heh!

Cindy Munford on February 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM

No media outlet has been fearmongering about these protests than Fox News. So, either they’re trying to have it both ways, or they finally realized that the events of the past two weeks had little to do with Islamism. What happens tomorrow, however…

YYZ on February 11, 2011 at 1:13 PM

One pundit certainly went overboard. And some of the analysts were, to me, not making alot of sense. I don’t see how conservatives can NOT support democracy movements.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM

Only in Obamaland is the establishment of a junta a good thing.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM

the moronic people on the tv is just staggering. Most of these people weren’t alive for the fall of the berlin wall. They just appropriate whatever imagery they think makes it more exiting and fun and go with it.

There are few similarities. Obama may love the image of “young people” (a lot don’t look that young to me) and “transform” but really, get a grip

The word “democracy” has been bastardized to the point of meaninglessness.

r keller on February 11, 2011 at 1:16 PM

Only in Obamaland is the establishment of a junta a good thing.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM

The people trust them more than they trust Suleiman. Apparently, that idea just wasn’t going to work.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:17 PM

YYZ on February 11, 2011 at 1:13 PM

Hey, fair and balanced! I doubt anybody knows what this is all about or what it will become. Do you think that crowd thinks as one? We are all just spectators. Some of us are more willing to admit it than others. Like our president.

Cindy Munford on February 11, 2011 at 1:17 PM

One pundit certainly went overboard. And some of the analysts were, to me, not making alot of sense. I don’t see how conservatives can NOT support democracy movements.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM

No Ann for the most part the analysts were making a lot of sense, especially Bolton. I wish I lived in your rosy World.

sandee on February 11, 2011 at 1:17 PM

the moronic people on the tv is just staggering. Most of these people weren’t alive for the fall of the berlin wall. They just appropriate whatever imagery they think makes it more exiting and fun and go with it.

I agree. Other than these were both historic events, there’s no real connection.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:17 PM

canopfor on February 11, 2011 at 1:11 PM
===========
Hotty totty..:)

Dire Straits on February 11, 2011 at 1:14 PM

Dire Straits:Hehe,Hubba-Hubba!!:)

canopfor on February 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM

Conservatives don’t have a problem with democracy. Are you guaranteeing that this is what we are watching. Sorry if history tends to color our outlooks.

Cindy Munford on February 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM

Sounds like Egypt is going the way of Turkey’s military rule before the Turks became ‘democratic’. How long did that last? The military will seek to keep their perogatives as long as they can.

Hopefully, they’ll maintain their relationships with the US vis a vis Isreal. But that’s probably predicated on continuing to receive handouts from the US, or barring that from the Saudis. If they don’t get the handouts, I’m guessing the Iranians will seek to fill the void. All depends on how Obambi plays it. My suspicion is he won’t be satisfied until the MBs take over. Speaking of which, expect El Baradei to get exiled or thrown in jail along with other leaders that could threaten the military’s rule.

AH_C on February 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM

Is anyone else worried that Egypt has lost the last vestiges of stability an has become a military state without a government or internal security apparatus? Methinks those military leaders might get a bit addicted to the power and may pull a Burma and stay in control.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM

No Ann for the most part the analysts were making a lot of sense, especially Bolton. I wish I lived in your rosy World.

sandee on February 11, 2011 at 1:17 PM

I thought Bolten was OK. He explained the fears or threats without resorting to predicting what would happen.

I meant some of the others. I personally thought Fox was a bit over-reactive in the approach. That’s all. All of the network channels were, though. Pick your preferred perspective and just know….it was going to be over-the-top.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:20 PM

Hey, fair and balanced! I doubt anybody knows what this is all about

Actually, most people do.

or what it will become.

True.

YYZ on February 11, 2011 at 1:20 PM

THE DEAR LEADER OBAMA (bow) MADE THE SUN RISE THIS MORNING!! HOW DARE YOU SAY HE DID NOT CAUSE MUBARAK TO STEP DOWN!! PRAISE TO THE DEAR LEADER!!!

WannabeAnglican on February 11, 2011 at 1:20 PM

I still think it would have been better had Mubarak stayed until the end of his term–for everyone, especially the Egyptian people for whom self-governance is an untried thing. But, it looks as if the military saw it’s cahnce and took it. We can only watch and wait. As for Obama, they don’t care a fig for him or his opinion, they only want to be sure they keep the cash coming. Not generally in favor of sudden de-funding but I think Egypt may soon be a candidate.

jeanie on February 11, 2011 at 1:20 PM

Not quite. The Left – or the activist Left, anyway – has a very goal that is being advanced with this upheaval: the destruction of Israel. And that is why the Ayers/Dohrn/Code Pink/union types are allied with the MB against Mubarak.

Missy on February 11, 2011 at 1:11 PM

You’re right. My oversight. It helps explain the difference in reaction to the uprising in Iran. A rise of Islamism in Egypt is exciting to the Left.

rrpjr on February 11, 2011 at 1:21 PM

Conservatives don’t have a problem with democracy. Are you guaranteeing that this is what we are watching. Sorry if history tends to color our outlooks.

Cindy Munford on February 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM

Of course not. But then, we couldn’t guarantee our own revolution, either.

I do think that Egypt, maybe Jordan and the others, have had stability, so there’s room for optimism. (unlike the African countries that were constantly in coups mode).

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:22 PM

Is anyone else worried that Egypt has lost the last vestiges of stability an has become a military state without a government or internal security apparatus? Methinks those military leaders might get a bit addicted to the power and may pull a Burma and stay in control.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM

The military has been in charge since 1952 without a break.

lexhamfox on February 11, 2011 at 1:23 PM

I still think it would have been better had Mubarak stayed until the end of his term–for everyone, especially the Egyptian people for whom self-governance is an untried thing.

Hark, the defender of liberty speaks! Good job you weren’t around in 1776.

Grow Fins on February 11, 2011 at 1:24 PM

I’m not sure what Egyptians idea of Democracy is. There are too many different groups vying for control. To the Islamists and the muslin brotherhood it means sharia law, to the Christians it means freedom of worship, to the average “Joe’ on the street it sounds like it means free food, and Government handouts. I’m not so sure they can come together.

sandee on February 11, 2011 at 1:25 PM

Hopefully, they’ll maintain their relationships with the US vis a vis Isreal. But that’s probably predicated on continuing to receive handouts from the US, or barring that from the Saudis. If they don’t get the handouts, I’m guessing the Iranians will seek to fill the void. All depends on how Obambi plays it. My suspicion is he won’t be satisfied until the MBs take over. Speaking of which, expect El Baradei to get exiled or thrown in jail along with other leaders that could threaten the military’s rule.

AH_C on February 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM

It could turn into a bidding war between Iran and the U.S./Saudi side. If Iran could take over funding Egytian military needs, all bets are off, although the Shia/Sunni issue does certainly have some effect here.

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:25 PM

What I’ve discovered is that “world problems” just about boil down to personal reactions. As in: Obama struggles with his relationship with his whomp-a$$ wife. Everything else is a reaction, reflection, and his own need to take the reins away from her. Sharia law is his dream come true, even if he has to impose it on other countries. From what I’ve witnessed, especially regarding public figures, it is that simplistic.

betsyz on February 11, 2011 at 1:25 PM

Of course not. But then, we couldn’t guarantee our own revolution, either.

I do think that Egypt, maybe Jordan and the others, have had stability, so there’s room for optimism. (unlike the African countries that were constantly in coups mode).

Unless you regularly consume crack, there are few parallels between the Egyptian Revolution and ours.

1. Our revolution overthrew an entire country, this revolution overthrew two to three people.

2. Our revolution installed a republic, this revolution installs a junta.

3. Our revolution was headed by intelligent men, this revolution is headed by no one in particular.

4. Our revolution involved civilized armed conflict between two parties, this revolution involves violent maimings and rioting by the unruly masses.

5. Our revolution had a substantive goal, this revolution has no goal and will eventually lead to another military strongman taking charge as happened in 1981.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:26 PM

jeanie on February 11, 2011 at 1:20 PM

I personally didn’t buy a word he was saying. “My children,”…..

I couldn’t believe that speech. Could you? but then, he looked good, but he really was 82. I bet he still really thinks that type of talk works.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:27 PM

Jake Tapper: No one in Obama admin thinks U.S. better off after Mubarak overthrow

More lies from the WH.

Now that Mubarak is gone, Obama and his admin put forth more mealy-mouthed platitude. That was Obama’s hope since day 1 of this ‘people’s uprising’.

Sir Napsalot on February 11, 2011 at 1:29 PM

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:22 PM

Compare the worst that could have happened if the Founders had not succeeded in giving us a Republic and the worst case scenario of Egypt and Jordan no longer being our allies. I don’t believe the outcomes for the world are comparable. Like it or not Islam is the wild card.

Cindy Munford on February 11, 2011 at 1:29 PM

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:26 PM

Hey!!! Is revolution off the filter list?

Cindy Munford on February 11, 2011 at 1:30 PM

AH_C on February 11, 2011 at 1:19 PM

It could turn into a bidding war between Iran and the U.S./Saudi side. If Iran could take over funding Egytian military needs, all bets are off, although the Shia/Sunni issue does certainly have some effect here.

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:25 PM

Valid point about the Shia/Sunni dynamic, however, if Iran can find common cause with the Taliban & Al Queda, they won’t find working with the Egyptians. Moreover, count on sympatheic Egyptian officers funneling some of our hardware to the Iranians for ‘research’.

AH_C on February 11, 2011 at 1:30 PM

Any reactions from France/Spain/Portugal/the UK/Italy/Mexico/etc. etc.? Merkel already spoke.

ProudPalinFan on February 11, 2011 at 1:31 PM

1. Our revolution overthrew an entire country, this revolution overthrew two to three people.

Not really. The King ordered the attacks.

2. Our revolution installed a republic, this revolution installs a junta.

This is promised to be a transition to the September election. It’s honestly the people’s obvious belief that they can trust this promise far, far more than Suleiman.

3. Our revolution was headed by intelligent men, this revolution is headed by no one in particular.

Good point. But the motives were pretty darn similar.

4. Our revolution had a substantive goal, this revolution has no goal and will eventually lead to another military strongman taking charge as happened in 1981.

I think the goals were actually very clear and stated over and over. The military sure didn’t have a problem getting the message.

End the emergency rule.
Establish a fair and open election process.
Provide constitutional changes that allow participation.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Ah, if I had only thought ahead. I’m thinking a vuvuzela stand would have done well.

Oh well, another lost opportunity.

Fallon on February 11, 2011 at 1:32 PM

I think something went dolally with the BBC live news feed. They’ve posted this:

1825: President of the Islamic Republic of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad tweets: “Youth of Iran! Anybody who promises not to protest will receive 1900 Microsoft Points.”

It’s not like them to have a sense of humor.

ExPat on February 11, 2011 at 1:34 PM

1. Our revolution overthrew an entire country, this revolution overthrew two to three people.

2. Our revolution installed a republic, this revolution installs a junta.

3. Our revolution was headed by intelligent men, this revolution is headed by no one in particular.

4. Our revolution involved civilized armed conflict between two parties, this revolution involves violent maimings and rioting by the unruly masses.

you don’t know much about our revolution, obviously. The same ruling elites held power in places like Boston in 1777 as did in 1775. they just didn’t have to deal with the British. And as for “unruly masses,” you’ve clearly never heard of Shay’s Rebellion etc., have you?

Grow Fins on February 11, 2011 at 1:35 PM

Uh oh, The Won’s speech has been postponed.

Cindy Munford on February 11, 2011 at 1:37 PM

Uh oh, The Won’s speech has been postponed.

Cindy Munford on February 11, 2011 at 1:37 PM

He is listening to Rush and is gonna quit?/sarc

ProudPalinFan on February 11, 2011 at 1:38 PM

Ah, the Israeli ambassador agrees with me. Obama actually backed Mubarak up to the point he didn’t step down.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:38 PM

So what is it, a military coup or a peoples’ r-word? Which is better for Egypt? For the rest of the world?

slickwillie2001 on February 11, 2011 at 1:39 PM

ExPat on February 11, 2011 at 1:34 PM

That is truly funny!

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Uh oh, The Won’s speech has been postponed.

Cindy Munford on February 11, 2011 at 1:37 PM
Totus tongue tied?

sandee on February 11, 2011 at 1:39 PM

Establish a fair and open election process.
AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:32 PM

Y’mean like here? Photo IDs, proof of citizenship,..like that?

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:40 PM

1. Our revolution overthrew an entire country, this revolution overthrew two to three people.

Not really. The King ordered the attacks.

2. Our revolution installed a republic, this revolution installs a junta.

This is promised to be a transition to the September election. It’s honestly the people’s obvious belief that they can trust this promise far, far more than Suleiman.

3. Our revolution was headed by intelligent men, this revolution is headed by no one in particular.

Good point. But the motives were pretty darn similar.

4. Our revolution had a substantive goal, this revolution has no goal and will eventually lead to another military strongman taking charge as happened in 1981.

I think the goals were actually very clear and stated over and over. The military sure didn’t have a problem getting the message.

End the emergency rule.
Establish a fair and open election process.
Provide constitutional changes that allow participation.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:32 PM

And if you belief the military is going to cede power through FAIR and OPEN elections, I have some seaside Tucson property to sell you.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Grow Fins on February 11, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Tea Party haters suddenly all into 1776 now

Missy on February 11, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Y’mean like here? Photo IDs, proof of citizenship,..like that?

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:40 PM

We have gone overboard on denying states the right to establish some basics. It doesn’t need to be a DL. It can be a state ID. And that suffices.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:42 PM

And if you belief the military is going to cede power through FAIR and OPEN elections, I have some seaside Tucson property to sell you.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:41 PM

yeah, I do. The military is supposedly the “good guys” in this story.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:43 PM

1. Our revolution overthrew an entire country, this revolution overthrew two to three people.

2. Our revolution installed a republic, this revolution installs a junta.

3. Our revolution was headed by intelligent men, this revolution is headed by no one in particular.

4. Our revolution involved civilized armed conflict between two parties, this revolution involves violent maimings and rioting by the unruly masses.

you don’t know much about our revolution, obviously. The same ruling elites held power in places like Boston in 1777 as did in 1775. they just didn’t have to deal with the British. And as for “unruly masses,” you’ve clearly never heard of Shay’s Rebellion etc., have you?

Grow Fins on February 11, 2011 at 1:35 PM

I have heard of Shay’s Rebellion. Notice how Washington road in to squelch it? As for the Boston Massacre, notice how John Adams defended the soldiers and most of them were acquitted?

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:43 PM

“This is promised to be a transition to the September election.”

Has there ever been a temporary transitory revolutionary dictatorship that willing let go of power? There is nothing so permanent as a temporary dictatorship of the proltariat.

tommyboy on February 11, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Boy, I wonder how long those people are going to celebrate. This is something to watch.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Tea Party haters suddenly all into 1776 now

Missy on February 11, 2011 at 1:41 PM

Selective memory. It’s handy for those awkward conversational moments. Keep it it your back pocket, just in case.

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:44 PM

I’ve been out most of the day. Has Clapper been fired yet?

d1carter on February 11, 2011 at 1:45 PM

yeah, I do. The military is supposedly the “good guys” in this story.

So was Hosni Mubarak, a liberal military officer appointed in the 80s after the last leader was assassinated.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Only in Obamaland is the establishment of a junta a good thing.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:15 PM

You are all invited over to Casa Ayers-Dohrn for a victory dinner of Koushari and Shai!!! The One will be there to give the traditional blessing to Sutech!

Roy Rogers on February 11, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Me thinks we should be up for a drinking me on the Obama speech: Me, myself and I…and also, “As the President Of The United States”-as if anybody has forgotten/I wish.

ProudPalinFan on February 11, 2011 at 1:47 PM

Why would anyone mind obama taking credit? Let obama, and obama alone, hold the bag for pushing mubarak out. obama’s actions have resulted in denying Egypyt the open elections that mubarak promised upon his retirement in September; caused what appears to be a military coup, and have friend and foe alike around the world realizing with finality that America’s foreign policy is in the hands of George Soros.
This is good news and bad news, depending on your friendship or foeship with the late, great U.S.A.

tigerlily on February 11, 2011 at 1:47 PM

So was Hosni Mubarak, a liberal military officer appointed in the 80s after the last leader was assassinated.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:46 PM

This is a different era, really. I wasn’t kidding when I suggested Iran should be worried, too. Even the Iranian revolution happened in an era where the name of the game was create chaos, then go in and just kick as much butt as you can.

We’ll have to watch and see, but I “think” that this uprising knows all about Iran, doesn’t want that, and knows what they do want. And they want real democracy and freedoms.

You just can’t deny the influence of Facebook, etc., on this generation of Egyptians. They absolutely know what’s possible, now. A state TV station just won’t work.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:49 PM

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:26 PM

One more comparison: Egpyt and the United States threw off the chains of colonialism from the same country, Great Britain.

One country became a world power through democracy. The other continues to believe stoning women to death is appropriate.

BobMbx on February 11, 2011 at 1:49 PM

Mark Steyn on FOX schooling Megyn Kelly.

ProudPalinFan on February 11, 2011 at 1:50 PM

So was Hosni Mubarak, a liberal military officer appointed in the 80s after the last leader was assassinated.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Help me out here. Who was it that assassinated Saddat? A secular, nonviolent group who was in favor of peace with Israel?

a capella on February 11, 2011 at 1:50 PM

“The mystique of America’s superpower status has been shattered.”

Obama at the helm, NEVER forget, never, never, never.

“Tear down this wall, Mr. Gorbachev” — Ronald Reagan

“Bla, bla, bla, I, bla, bla, bla…whatever the wind was at that moment” — Barack Obama

Schadenfreude on February 11, 2011 at 1:50 PM

Mark Steyn is ripping BHO and his advisers on Fox now…

d1carter on February 11, 2011 at 1:50 PM

ALLAHPUNDIT: CORRECTION NEEDED

Ellis Goldberg’s piece is at the *Foreign Affairs* website, not Foreign Policy.

JM Hanes on February 11, 2011 at 1:52 PM

“The situation remains complicated and delicate going forward, but this is a huge affirmation of the President’s leadership on the international stage.”

Since no one really knows what is going to happen in the coming days, especially Obowma…

… I want this MSM quote written in stone.

Seven Percent Solution on February 11, 2011 at 1:53 PM

Boy, I wonder how long those people are going to celebrate. This is something to watch.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:44 PM

Till the shooting starts. Which will happen moments after the video feed stops.

BobMbx on February 11, 2011 at 1:54 PM

Hark, the defender of liberty speaks! Good job you weren’t around in 1776.

Grow Fins on February 11, 2011 at 1:24 PM

Yeah, military juntas tend to be bastions of democratic, egalitarian values.

Good Solid B-Plus on February 11, 2011 at 1:54 PM

American Exceptionalism, Foreign Policy Initiatives, Foreign Affairs, Diplomatic, Intelligence and Military Analysis
============

Friday, February 11, 2011

End Of Despotry
****************

http://greatsatansgirlfriend.blogspot.com/2011/02/end-of-despotry.html
===============

Thursday, February 10, 2011

Coup d’état Egypt?
********************
http://greatsatansgirlfriend.blogspot.com/2011/02/coup-degyptat.html

canopfor on February 11, 2011 at 1:54 PM

Why would anyone mind obama taking credit?

Because it’s absurd. Bush pushed for reforms. We have influence. But we can’t tell other sovereign nations what to do.

His entire posturing in this event even made me feel bad for Mubarak. What a dufus.

AnninCA on February 11, 2011 at 1:54 PM

From the BBC live feed:

1850: The BBC’s Matt Frei in Washington says the repercussions now also depend on what the US administration says to the Israelis, hunkering down nervously, and a host of Arab princes, emirs and presidents, who will be nervously twitching their embroidered curtains to see what’s happening on the Arab Street. Suffice it to say, it is time for President Obama to earn his Nobel Peace Prize.

Emphasis mine.

ExPat on February 11, 2011 at 1:54 PM

Steyn, as ever, manages to make mincemeat of the “meme of the day” and bring some sober analysis into the mix, that has thus far been hooked on “historic”, and deluded with the “democratic” dogma and “free and fair” fairy tales.

hillbillyjim on February 11, 2011 at 1:54 PM

So was Hosni Mubarak, a liberal military officer appointed in the 80s after the last leader was assassinated.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:46 PM

This is a different era, really. I wasn’t kidding when I suggested Iran should be worried, too. Even the Iranian revolution happened in an era where the name of the game was create chaos, then go in and just kick as much butt as you can.

We’ll have to watch and see, but I “think” that this uprising knows all about Iran, doesn’t want that, and knows what they do want. And they want real democracy and freedoms.

You just can’t deny the influence of Facebook, etc., on this generation of Egyptians. They absolutely know what’s possible, now. A state TV station just won’t work.

Yes, tell that to the Burmese, North Koreans, Latvians, etc.

andy85719 on February 11, 2011 at 1:54 PM

Someone should medicate Shep before he goes on later…

hillbillyjim on February 11, 2011 at 1:55 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5 6 7