A few thoughts on just possibly being wrong about Egypt and Tunisia.

I'm very happy over that possibility!

The "revolution" in Egypt just might have something to uphold. According to London's The Daily Telegraph, American diplomats have been fostering this result for the past three years....

Now this is Machiavellianism at its moral best. At least at first glance, we seem to have found a People's Revolution and supported it. Yes, in a sense we did depose the leader of a foreign land, but for once we just might have done so to enact the will of the people rather than simply the ambitions of that leader's rivals. Theoretically then, a setback in one life may have resulted in real relief for several million.

If Obama took this opportunity, we will at last be able to negotiate from a position of strength in the middle east, and to quell the source of our power, middle eastern leaders will at have to heed the will of their citizens. This sort of thing was the supposed reason for our invasions of Iraq and the now supposedly "nice" (previously unacceptable) Taliban previously ruling Afghanistan, and this time, given success, we just might not leave ground forces behind.

In this case, not actually a thought, but a hope....

PS: Of course--and this just came in--the news now claims The Muslim Brotherhood to be the cause of the Egyptian uprising. I don't know much about them, but the simple fact of their having an agenda other than that of service to the people of Egypt does not bode well. Oh well, I'll still hope for the best for Egypt, but then, I did that before

A few thoughts of revolt in Tunisia

According to one source:

(AP) TUNIS, Tunisia – After 23 years of iron-fisted rule, the president of Tunisia was driven from power Friday by violent protests over soaring unemployment and corruption. Virtually unprecedented in modern Arab history, the populist uprising sent an ominous message to authoritarian governments that dominate the region.

Well, Americans are once again welcoming a supposedly anti-despotic revolution in the Middle East. I do of course hope for the Tunisians to secure the blessings of liberty to themselves and their posterity, but unlike the the reporter above, I have some knowledge of such precedents for this event as the Shah's ouster and the Moroccans revolution against the French. None of these produced a one-man one-vote system of anything, and so, to judge from experience, even after this coup, Tunisia may well be in for more of the depressing same.

Certainly the Tunisians are not demonstrating enough love of freedom to inspire hope. They did not fight long or hard to remove their despot. They do not seem to have established militias or a secondary government. Instead, they just seem to have rioted in order to drive out a very driveable old man. Worse though, they did not fight to end over-government but to establish a government strong enough to control the economy and create jobs. In light of this apparent unconcern for their liberties then, the Tunisians are unlikely to make the many daily sacrifices necessary to maintain them, and their future government may well therefore be another unelected weight upon their lives. In fact, given their stated goals, a tyrant promising jobs, land and bread may find himself not simply unopposed but welcomed. Certainly current authorities are facing no real opposition:

(http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/A/AF_TUNISIA_RIOTS?SITE=NMALJ&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT), "plainclothes police were seen hustling some people off the streets of Tunis, which was under curfew. One was clubbed, another was dragged on the ground."