Saddam Hussein was supposed to be a destabilizing influence in the Middle East. We had to take him out, lest he crazy up the whole works and it all come crashing down. Now, it seems, we will have missed the call. It was liberty after all.
The statists were right . . . democracy is dangerous to the establishment . . . provided the establishment is autocratic . . . or anti-islamic (read: not a caliphate)?
Riots in Egypt against the dictator there follow unrest in Tunisia. Curiouser and curiouser. One wonders . . . do the People seek freedom, or do the muslims seek a Nation? What is the real source of agitation, and who will come out of the fray on top?
And when will the mainstream press see fit to report the story?
No comments:
Post a Comment
I will review your comments prior to publishing them. Almost all comments are approved and published within a day or two. When you post a comment, Please bear in mind that you are addressing me personally. To be clear: I generally prefer clarity to agreement. Make your point, but be nice about it and don't annoy me, and you will likely see your comments published here.
Comment Moderation Statement