The Mess in Egypt

[CK86]

Curious what are everyone's thoughts on the disaster that is Egypt? As many smart and intelligent people as there are in this country, how in the hell are we wrong on just about EVERY SINGLE foreign policy decision that we make? With the comments by both President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry, some think that we're pushing Egypt away from us and towards Russia or China.

At what point do we entirely rethink our foreign policy in general given the last decade's worth of decisions coming back to bite us in the ass?

[BedellBrave]

Mess indeed.

Link

[CK86]

Hundreds of people killed, buildings and churches burned down, and we're responding by trying to alienate one of our closest allies in the region. Sounds like we're winning.

[BedellBrave]

Yep - and another link

[BedellBrave]

To your point:

Link

I can't figure out the administration's moves in Egypt or in Syria.

[goldfly]

I don't think we should be doing anything in Egypt

we should let Egypt handle Egypt and shut the **** up about it

[Julio3000]

This is certainly sad, but it's at least mildly entertaining to watch conservatives continue to hold their fingers to the wind and decide how they feel about the Middle East this week. If you're scoring at home, here's a hint:

Spoiler: 

Whatever Obama does is wrong. Advocate something different...without giving any specifics.

I'm interested to know what BB and the OP would rather see us doing in Egypt (and Syria, for that matter).

[The Chosen One]

To add on to Julio's point, BO has no winning strategy for Syra or Egypt with conservatives.

Option A: Sit and do nothing.

Result - Painted as weak leader, who is giving away influence and leadership to the East.

Option B: Send a few troops to try and do something.

Result - Painted as weak leader, should've sent MORE troops to intervene.

Option C: Sends a bunch of troops, nothing works and violence continues.

Result - Painted as erratic, with no leadership. Should've sent thousands of troops from the get go to try and "prevent" the violence.

Down the Line Result - We send in troops earlier, violence erupts, he's painted as wreckless for sending in troops in a hopeless situation and should've let the people of Egypt solve it. OR violence erupts and we leave, he's painted as a cowardly leader who doesn't love Israel (how that relates to Egypt, I have no clue, just know it'll be a GOP talking point).

I mean look at Iraq. We left at a high point when sectarian violence was lowering, and even then he got criticized for not leaving our guys in there to keep dying.

[sturg33]

Obama is somehow worse on foreign policy than Bush - and I didn't think that was possible.

We arm our enemies, and then fight them. It's really pretty funny if it weren't so sad.

The military industrial complex is thriving, that's for sure.

[BedellBrave]

This is certainly sad, but it's at least mildly entertaining to watch conservatives continue to hold their fingers to the wind and decide how they feel about the Middle East this week. If you're scoring at home, here's a hint:

Spoiler: 

Whatever Obama does is wrong. Advocate something different...without giving any specifics.

I'm interested to know what BB and the OP would rather see us doing in Egypt (and Syria, for that matter).

I've been consistent since Libya and the Arab Spring - if you are going to promote something, don't promote Muslim parties like the Brotherhood. I understand why they thought that might be a good idea (i.e., change the narrative about the US in the Arab & Muslim world) but it's a losing game.

The better policy is to consistently stay out of the affairs or back a secular-military-Christian coalition. And if the later do it entirely behind the scenes.

[BedellBrave]

Obama is somehow worse on foreign policy than Bush - and I didn't think that was possible.

We arm our enemies, and then fight them. It's really pretty funny if it weren't so sad.

The military industrial complex is thriving, that's for sure.

And then run guns for/to them. And then change course. And then...

[BedellBrave]

I'm interested in knowing what the Obama guys on here, who always rush to his defense by mocking his critics, would suggest the administration should do?

[CK86]

This is certainly sad, but it's at least mildly entertaining to watch conservatives continue to hold their fingers to the wind and decide how they feel about the Middle East this week. If you're scoring at home, here's a hint:

Spoiler: 

Whatever Obama does is wrong. Advocate something different...without giving any specifics.

I'm interested to know what BB and the OP would rather see us doing in Egypt (and Syria, for that matter).

Why not just stay the hell out of the middle east and let them sort their crap out themselves? We've gotten involved in all sorts of affairs in the last decade plus, what do we have to show for it exactly? The drone strikes are especially going to bite us in the ass in the next 10-20 years as young kids that had their parents/brothers/cousins/friends who more than likely had no ties to any terrorist organization are blown to bits and decide they want to get revenge.

Conservative or Democrat, they've all been the same when it comes to foreign policy. It's not working, why not try something different?

Also I identify more as liberal than I do conservative anymore with the stupid policies they've attempted to implement the last few years.

[AerchAngel]

Why not just stay the hell out of the middle east and let them sort their crap out themselves? We've gotten involved in all sorts of affairs in the last decade plus, what do we have to show for it exactly? The drone strikes are especially going to bite us in the ass in the next 10-20 years as young kids that had their parents/brothers/cousins/friends who more than likely had no ties to any terrorist organization are blown to bits and decide they want to get revenge.

Conservative or Democrat, they've all been the same when it comes to foreign policy. It's not working, why not try something different?

Also I identify more as liberal than I do conservative anymore with the stupid policies they've attempted to implement the last few years.

Who the hell are you and why do you make so much sense?

[mossy]

If we play the knight in shining armor routine, where does the money come from to pay for it? If we do go, won't Obama's critics whip up the hysteria that he's purposely trying to bankrupt our country?

I say we stay the hell out of the Middle East. They don't want us there anyway.

Why can't some other country step in and figure it out? For example, If we have problems on our own soil, should the Russians spill their own blood to sort out our messes?

Between Iraq and Afganistan, I think we should be done with the sandbox.

[The Chosen One]

The middle East is a convenience for us to drill and import oil, so we don't have to drill and destroy our beautiful landscape here.

Nobody wants another gulf coast spill, and even the Republican Governor of Nebraska didn't want the pipeline because it ran right over a huge aquifer.

We can drill and buy oil there, let them screw up their environment, and go on with our daily lives there. So for us to stay the hell out of the middle east, that wouldn't be so good for our current economy.

[goldfly]

a small percentage of our oil comes from there

and "their environment" is all of our environment

[Coredor]

We need to work behind the scenes to try to make sure the Islamic Brotherhood doesn't get power back, but we need to see if we can get the military government to tone it down at least as far as stuff that makes it into the news. I'm for the military's people or the secular types can win it. I don't care if it's rigged either as long as it doesn't get screwed up.

[thethe]

They are animals in the middle east. NOthing has changed since the Persians.

[50PoundHead]

It's a new world out there and I'd say we've been feeling our way through things internationally since the fall of the Soviet Union. I would say all three of the post-Cold War presidents have dithered with the only departure being W's more aggressive tone. Of course, in the wake of 9/11, a more aggressive posture became necessary. I thought the war in Iraq would be a disaster because I figured winning the "war" would be easy, but keeping the peace would not. I'm not going to give W a pass, but, again, in the absence of an enemy we know how to fight, it's all going to be trial-and-error to some extent. Makes caution a more operative watchword.

I don't know what you do in Syria. Arm the rebels and topple Assad and every Christian in the country is either dead or in hiding. Egypt? I agree with Glenn Beck once every five years and I guess I'm good for a bit because I agreed with him when he predicted that Egypt was going to be a mess after the fall of Mubarak. I'm not apologizing for repressive dictators and I think the Arab Spring will be a positive development in the long run, but anyone who thought the situation was magically going to transform into a mature democracy without some major stumbling was kidding themselves. The Morsi government was democratically elected, but you know those guys were going to overreach and Egypt, if not as secular in tone as some believe, has had extensive contact with the West going back to the Roman Empire. It sits at a crossroads and because of that, it will be very difficult for a political party similar to the Muslim Brotherhood to institute and maintain the kind of regime they likely envision.

Foreign policy ain't for sissies. Woodrow Wilson's legacy has been a lot of intemperate moralizing on our part without much consideration of realpolitik. I know that sounds bloodless, but it's a dangerous world out there (even when you lap the field about five times in terms of military power). But all that power doesn't mean much in a world of skirmishes. One of the areas where I thought Rumsfeld was right was in his attempt to transform our military strategy and tactics for a more mobile world that probably isn't going to see traditional battlefronts. Of course, then he guesses wrong on the force levels needed to the "peace" part of the Iran situation and we all have witnessed what happened there.

Don't think I'm letting Obama off the hook. I don't like the drone position, but I guess it beats more kids coming home in boxes. I don't know if he's being tough enough on Iran, but what option do we have beyond the sanctions. I don't think a "hot" war in the region really helps keep things stable at a time when stability is going to be needed. Like I said, it's a new world with new types of challenges and it's probably going to be a couple of decades before the foreign policy/defense superstructure knows how to proceed with greater confidence.