Where are the "America caused the Egyptian revolution" conspiracy theorists?

[carlos tevez]

Originally Posted by jerryjones

I mean, you could argue the the global recession was caused by America, which in turn harmed an emerging economy such as egypts, this was then exacerbated by global inflation, especially of food prices (which was a major reason for the Egypt revolt) which was probably caused at least in large part by America's quantitative easing program, and of course the U.S. has a long history of propping up figures in the middle east/ islamic world and helping them rise to power if they feel it will help them gain some level of control in the region, but I hardly see this as an conspiracy theory.

Egypt's GDP has actually grown SIGNIFICANTLY during the global recession:
http://www.telegraph.co.u...st-battered-economy.html

Therefore, unfortunately your argument lacks much merit.

Furthermore, these protests have not been sparked solely due to economic conditions within the region. For instance, the CIA Factbook ranks Bahrain as having the 14th highest GDP per capita in the world (higher than developed and democratic countries such as Austria, Canada, Sweden, Iceland, Belgium, Germany, UK, Denmark, Japan, France, Finland, Denmark, South Korea, Israel, etc) and yet people are demonstrating in the streets of Bahrain.

 

[carlos tevez]

Originally Posted by jerryjones

I mean, you could argue the the global recession was caused by America, which in turn harmed an emerging economy such as egypts, this was then exacerbated by global inflation, especially of food prices (which was a major reason for the Egypt revolt) which was probably caused at least in large part by America's quantitative easing program, and of course the U.S. has a long history of propping up figures in the middle east/ islamic world and helping them rise to power if they feel it will help them gain some level of control in the region, but I hardly see this as an conspiracy theory.

Egypt's GDP has actually grown SIGNIFICANTLY during the global recession:
http://www.telegraph.co.u...st-battered-economy.html

Therefore, unfortunately your argument lacks much merit.

Furthermore, these protests have not been sparked solely due to economic conditions within the region. For instance, the CIA Factbook ranks Bahrain as having the 14th highest GDP per capita in the world (higher than developed and democratic countries such as Austria, Canada, Sweden, Iceland, Belgium, Germany, UK, Denmark, Japan, France, Finland, Denmark, South Korea, Israel, etc) and yet people are demonstrating in the streets of Bahrain.

 

[ryda421]

Originally Posted by CallHimAR

Originally Posted by Ryda421

from what i have researched. AMERICA aka media makes it seem like the country is in chaos but it is just a little sector of the country. just like Afghanistan or IRAQ , they made it seem like the WHOLE country was in turmoil but in reality it's just a little part of the entire country. USA (media) did this in south america and central america during the 80's as well

When power in a country is extremely centralized in the capitol city, it make no difference whether the entire country is behind the revolution or not. Once the capitol falls the regime in power is on its way out. This is why revolution in America would be extremely complicated. 
But in any event, there were widespread protests through Egypt for the duration of the uprising. It wasn't just Cairo alone, although those are the images that were broadcast primarily because much of the action happened there or in Alexandria.

Also, Afghanistan and Iraq are two terrible examples. Before the war in Afghanistan the country had been in turmoil for a long, long time due to civil war and infighting between factions/ethnic groups. The Taliban gained control because they held Kabul and were welcomed as the only group strong enough to finally unite a war torn country.

Iraq was in a pretty bad state for a long time too after we invaded. The scenes you saw on the news the first night were Baghdad being bombed into oblivion, but afterwards it was a mess in many different areas.

watch @ 7:49

 

[ryda421]

Originally Posted by CallHimAR

Originally Posted by Ryda421

from what i have researched. AMERICA aka media makes it seem like the country is in chaos but it is just a little sector of the country. just like Afghanistan or IRAQ , they made it seem like the WHOLE country was in turmoil but in reality it's just a little part of the entire country. USA (media) did this in south america and central america during the 80's as well

When power in a country is extremely centralized in the capitol city, it make no difference whether the entire country is behind the revolution or not. Once the capitol falls the regime in power is on its way out. This is why revolution in America would be extremely complicated. 
But in any event, there were widespread protests through Egypt for the duration of the uprising. It wasn't just Cairo alone, although those are the images that were broadcast primarily because much of the action happened there or in Alexandria.

Also, Afghanistan and Iraq are two terrible examples. Before the war in Afghanistan the country had been in turmoil for a long, long time due to civil war and infighting between factions/ethnic groups. The Taliban gained control because they held Kabul and were welcomed as the only group strong enough to finally unite a war torn country.

Iraq was in a pretty bad state for a long time too after we invaded. The scenes you saw on the news the first night were Baghdad being bombed into oblivion, but afterwards it was a mess in many different areas.

watch @ 7:49

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by jerryjones

I mean, you could argue the the global recession was caused by America, which in turn harmed an emerging economy such as egypts, this was then exacerbated by global inflation, especially of food prices (which was a major reason for the Egypt revolt) which was probably caused at least in large part by America's quantitative easing program, and of course the U.S. has a long history of propping up figures in the middle east/ islamic world and helping them rise to power if they feel it will help them gain some level of control in the region, but I hardly see this as an conspiracy theory.

Egypt's GDP has actually grown SIGNIFICANTLY during the global recession:
http://www.telegraph.co.u...st-battered-economy.html

Therefore, unfortunately your argument lacks much merit.

Furthermore, these protests have not been sparked solely due to economic conditions within the region. For instance, the CIA Factbook ranks Bahrain as having the 14th highest GDP per capita in the world (higher than developed and democratic countries such as Austria, Canada, Sweden, Iceland, Belgium, Germany, UK, Denmark, Japan, France, Finland, Denmark, South Korea, Israel, etc) and yet people are demonstrating in the streets of Bahrain.

Calculation of GDP is a fraudulent statistic. GDP is calculated by CGI: Consumption, Government, and Investment.

Their people are poor and have no money, so there is not any Consumption and no Investment. So the only thing left is government spending which vastly increases the GDP. Proof of this is straight from the article you posted.

Egypt's military is the largest single institutional actor in the economy, running factories which produce everything from bread to bottled water, construction and consumer electronics.

In a leaked 2008 diplomatic cable, Margaret Scobey, the then-US ambassador to Egypt, had argued that "the military's role in the economy [w]as a force that generally stifles free market reform by increasing direct government involvement in the markets."

Gamal Mubarak, former President Hosni Mubarak's son, had incensed the military by pushing forward with an unpopular sell-off of public sector industries, were viewed as a threat by the military.


There you have it. So their government spurs the rising GDP by nationalizing basically every facet of peoples lives, but yet most of their population is poor.

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by jerryjones

I mean, you could argue the the global recession was caused by America, which in turn harmed an emerging economy such as egypts, this was then exacerbated by global inflation, especially of food prices (which was a major reason for the Egypt revolt) which was probably caused at least in large part by America's quantitative easing program, and of course the U.S. has a long history of propping up figures in the middle east/ islamic world and helping them rise to power if they feel it will help them gain some level of control in the region, but I hardly see this as an conspiracy theory.

Egypt's GDP has actually grown SIGNIFICANTLY during the global recession:
http://www.telegraph.co.u...st-battered-economy.html

Therefore, unfortunately your argument lacks much merit.

Furthermore, these protests have not been sparked solely due to economic conditions within the region. For instance, the CIA Factbook ranks Bahrain as having the 14th highest GDP per capita in the world (higher than developed and democratic countries such as Austria, Canada, Sweden, Iceland, Belgium, Germany, UK, Denmark, Japan, France, Finland, Denmark, South Korea, Israel, etc) and yet people are demonstrating in the streets of Bahrain.

Calculation of GDP is a fraudulent statistic. GDP is calculated by CGI: Consumption, Government, and Investment.

Their people are poor and have no money, so there is not any Consumption and no Investment. So the only thing left is government spending which vastly increases the GDP. Proof of this is straight from the article you posted.

Egypt's military is the largest single institutional actor in the economy, running factories which produce everything from bread to bottled water, construction and consumer electronics.

In a leaked 2008 diplomatic cable, Margaret Scobey, the then-US ambassador to Egypt, had argued that "the military's role in the economy [w]as a force that generally stifles free market reform by increasing direct government involvement in the markets."

Gamal Mubarak, former President Hosni Mubarak's son, had incensed the military by pushing forward with an unpopular sell-off of public sector industries, were viewed as a threat by the military.


There you have it. So their government spurs the rising GDP by nationalizing basically every facet of peoples lives, but yet most of their population is poor.

 

[PatRiley]

whywesteppin wrote:

I also hope that the U.S. is involved not only to protect its (OUR) interests but also to further human rights in other countries (not necessarily democracy either but things like secularism).



Can't stand people like you.
Everyone needs to gather some common sense and realize that NONE of us know what is going on over there.  Sack up and get a plane ticket over there to see it yourself, then talk. 

 

[PatRiley]

whywesteppin wrote:

I also hope that the U.S. is involved not only to protect its (OUR) interests but also to further human rights in other countries (not necessarily democracy either but things like secularism).



Can't stand people like you.
Everyone needs to gather some common sense and realize that NONE of us know what is going on over there.  Sack up and get a plane ticket over there to see it yourself, then talk. 

 

[carlos tevez]

Rashi, you say there is no investment and yet the same article I posted (and the same one you used to try and make an argument) points out the following:

Panicked foreign investors are also estimated to have withdrawn up to £700 million a day during the crisis.
It's kind of strange that foreign investors have withdrawn money from a country you claim does not have any investment.

Then you have the fact that the Egyptian government has actually decreased its national spending and has been increasingly neo-liberal and sold off many national assets and institutions over the past 5-10 years as pointed out by the most neo-liberal institution of them all:
http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2010/021610.htm

Plus, the arguments you are trying to make about Egypt's GDP only rising due to government spending (which is false as pointed above) does not prove jerryjone's argument that the recent uprising in Egypt is tied to the United States and your arguments above certainly do not prove that the Egyptian revolution was U.S.-inspired.

I will give you some time to compose your thoughts although I am not expecting anything logical from you. After all, you said in the other thread that Nasser was U.S. backed

 

[carlos tevez]

Rashi, you say there is no investment and yet the same article I posted (and the same one you used to try and make an argument) points out the following:

Panicked foreign investors are also estimated to have withdrawn up to £700 million a day during the crisis.
It's kind of strange that foreign investors have withdrawn money from a country you claim does not have any investment.

Then you have the fact that the Egyptian government has actually decreased its national spending and has been increasingly neo-liberal and sold off many national assets and institutions over the past 5-10 years as pointed out by the most neo-liberal institution of them all:
http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2010/021610.htm

Plus, the arguments you are trying to make about Egypt's GDP only rising due to government spending (which is false as pointed above) does not prove jerryjone's argument that the recent uprising in Egypt is tied to the United States and your arguments above certainly do not prove that the Egyptian revolution was U.S.-inspired.

I will give you some time to compose your thoughts although I am not expecting anything logical from you. After all, you said in the other thread that Nasser was U.S. backed

 

[jerryjones]

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by jerryjones

I mean, you could argue the the global recession was caused by America, which in turn harmed an emerging economy such as egypts, this was then exacerbated by global inflation, especially of food prices (which was a major reason for the Egypt revolt) which was probably caused at least in large part by America's quantitative easing program, and of course the U.S. has a long history of propping up figures in the middle east/ islamic world and helping them rise to power if they feel it will help them gain some level of control in the region, but I hardly see this as an conspiracy theory.

Egypt's GDP has actually grown SIGNIFICANTLY during the global recession:
http://www.telegraph.co.u...st-battered-economy.html

Therefore, unfortunately your argument lacks much merit.

Furthermore, these protests have not been sparked solely due to economic conditions within the region. For instance, the CIA Factbook ranks Bahrain as having the 14th highest GDP per capita in the world (higher than developed and democratic countries such as Austria, Canada, Sweden, Iceland, Belgium, Germany, UK, Denmark, Japan, France, Finland, Denmark, South Korea, Israel, etc) and yet people are demonstrating in the streets of Bahrain.

 

 Good try but thats a very misleading statement. All I said was that the global recession harmed Egypt's economy, and ironically the article you posted shows just that. Notice how the percentage of Egypt's GDP growth slumped significantly  during the tail end of the global recession. I never said Egypt's GDP didn't grow during this time. I called Egypt an emerging economy and of course emerging economies tend to grow. I simply said the global recession harmed  Egypt's growth, which your own source proves by showing around a 30 percent drop off of GDP growth during the end of  global recession, which was 2009. I agree with you that the revolt was not solely due to economic conditions, i never said that it was.

 

[jerryjones]

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Originally Posted by jerryjones

I mean, you could argue the the global recession was caused by America, which in turn harmed an emerging economy such as egypts, this was then exacerbated by global inflation, especially of food prices (which was a major reason for the Egypt revolt) which was probably caused at least in large part by America's quantitative easing program, and of course the U.S. has a long history of propping up figures in the middle east/ islamic world and helping them rise to power if they feel it will help them gain some level of control in the region, but I hardly see this as an conspiracy theory.

Egypt's GDP has actually grown SIGNIFICANTLY during the global recession:
http://www.telegraph.co.u...st-battered-economy.html

Therefore, unfortunately your argument lacks much merit.

Furthermore, these protests have not been sparked solely due to economic conditions within the region. For instance, the CIA Factbook ranks Bahrain as having the 14th highest GDP per capita in the world (higher than developed and democratic countries such as Austria, Canada, Sweden, Iceland, Belgium, Germany, UK, Denmark, Japan, France, Finland, Denmark, South Korea, Israel, etc) and yet people are demonstrating in the streets of Bahrain.

 

 Good try but thats a very misleading statement. All I said was that the global recession harmed Egypt's economy, and ironically the article you posted shows just that. Notice how the percentage of Egypt's GDP growth slumped significantly  during the tail end of the global recession. I never said Egypt's GDP didn't grow during this time. I called Egypt an emerging economy and of course emerging economies tend to grow. I simply said the global recession harmed  Egypt's growth, which your own source proves by showing around a 30 percent drop off of GDP growth during the end of  global recession, which was 2009. I agree with you that the revolt was not solely due to economic conditions, i never said that it was.

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Rashi, you say there is no investment and yet the same article I posted (and the same one you used to try and make an argument) points out the following:

Panicked foreign investors are also estimated to have withdrawn up to £700 million a day during the crisis.

It's kind of strange that foreign investors have withdrawn money from a country you claim does not have any investment.

Then you have the fact that the Egyptian government has actually decreased its national spending and has been increasingly neo-liberal and sold off many national assets and institutions over the past 5-10 years as pointed out by the most neo-liberal institution of them all:
http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2010/021610.htm

Plus, the arguments you are trying to make about Egypt's GDP only rising due to government spending (which is false as pointed above) does not prove jerryjone's argument that the recent uprising in Egypt is tied to the United States and your arguments above certainly do not prove that the Egyptian revolution was U.S.-inspired.

I will give you some time to compose your thoughts although I am not expecting anything logical from you. After all, you said in the other thread that Nasser was U.S. backed

You post the IMF fudgy accounting? Even though Egypt is selling their worthless central bank securities which they will only invest back into government doesn't mean a damn thing. Business cycles work by investment in capital goods, new technology, and entrepreneurship, which Egypt does not do. This Neo-Liberalism you speak of is jsut another fancy word for Keynesianism. They have high inflation and their government spending is a 1/3 of their GDP. 

 

[rashi]

Originally Posted by Carlos Tevez

Rashi, you say there is no investment and yet the same article I posted (and the same one you used to try and make an argument) points out the following:

Panicked foreign investors are also estimated to have withdrawn up to £700 million a day during the crisis.

It's kind of strange that foreign investors have withdrawn money from a country you claim does not have any investment.

Then you have the fact that the Egyptian government has actually decreased its national spending and has been increasingly neo-liberal and sold off many national assets and institutions over the past 5-10 years as pointed out by the most neo-liberal institution of them all:
http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2010/021610.htm

Plus, the arguments you are trying to make about Egypt's GDP only rising due to government spending (which is false as pointed above) does not prove jerryjone's argument that the recent uprising in Egypt is tied to the United States and your arguments above certainly do not prove that the Egyptian revolution was U.S.-inspired.

I will give you some time to compose your thoughts although I am not expecting anything logical from you. After all, you said in the other thread that Nasser was U.S. backed

You post the IMF fudgy accounting? Even though Egypt is selling their worthless central bank securities which they will only invest back into government doesn't mean a damn thing. Business cycles work by investment in capital goods, new technology, and entrepreneurship, which Egypt does not do. This Neo-Liberalism you speak of is jsut another fancy word for Keynesianism. They have high inflation and their government spending is a 1/3 of their GDP. 

 

[whywesteppin]

Originally Posted by rashi

whywesteppin wrote:

I also hope that the U.S. is involved not only to protect its (OUR) interests but also to further human rights in other countries (not necessarily democracy either but things like secularism).

Our rights? What do you think this is?

These people can careless about your rights. What incentive do they have to protect your rights?

Who said "our rights"? I sure as hell did not. I said "our interests."
I realize it's a fine line... But, assuming our government represents the people, then I would hope our government does things like protect our citizens who are living in some of these countries... Or those who visit those countries and have family back there.

heirjordan15 wrote:

---

whywesteppin wrote:

I also hope that the U.S. is involved not only to protect its (OUR) interests but also to further human rights in other countries (not necessarily democracy either but things like secularism).

Can't stand people like you.
Everyone needs to gather some common sense and realize that NONE of us know what is going on over there.  Sack up and get a plane ticket over there to see it yourself, then talk. 



I guess you're saying that the U.S. should do nothing at all in relation to other countries? .... Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. There are positive ways and negative ways of interacting with other countries. True, the U.S. has done a lot of negative things in the past, but that shouldn't mean we should do nothing at all.

For those Americans with family back there (or who work there or visit there), so that the  

  that happens back there actually

 matters, I think they have a right to talk, at least more than those of us just trying to push whatever agenda we have. I'm not asking for American troops to be deployed and to risk their lives, but, if Obama can influence who takes over by who we support politically and financially, then I hope he acts to support the rights/safety/freedoms of the people there, the rights/safety/freedoms of Americans in those countries, etc. To what degree we should do this and how much we should weigh each factor, that's a tricky issue. But it doesn't mean we should do nothing.

 

[whywesteppin]

Originally Posted by rashi

whywesteppin wrote:

I also hope that the U.S. is involved not only to protect its (OUR) interests but also to further human rights in other countries (not necessarily democracy either but things like secularism).

Our rights? What do you think this is?

These people can careless about your rights. What incentive do they have to protect your rights?

Who said "our rights"? I sure as hell did not. I said "our interests."
I realize it's a fine line... But, assuming our government represents the people, then I would hope our government does things like protect our citizens who are living in some of these countries... Or those who visit those countries and have family back there.

heirjordan15 wrote:

---

whywesteppin wrote:

I also hope that the U.S. is involved not only to protect its (OUR) interests but also to further human rights in other countries (not necessarily democracy either but things like secularism).

Can't stand people like you.
Everyone needs to gather some common sense and realize that NONE of us know what is going on over there.  Sack up and get a plane ticket over there to see it yourself, then talk. 



I guess you're saying that the U.S. should do nothing at all in relation to other countries? .... Let's not throw the baby out with the bath water. There are positive ways and negative ways of interacting with other countries. True, the U.S. has done a lot of negative things in the past, but that shouldn't mean we should do nothing at all.

For those Americans with family back there (or who work there or visit there), so that the  

  that happens back there actually

 matters, I think they have a right to talk, at least more than those of us just trying to push whatever agenda we have. I'm not asking for American troops to be deployed and to risk their lives, but, if Obama can influence who takes over by who we support politically and financially, then I hope he acts to support the rights/safety/freedoms of the people there, the rights/safety/freedoms of Americans in those countries, etc. To what degree we should do this and how much we should weigh each factor, that's a tricky issue. But it doesn't mean we should do nothing.

 

[blazinjkid]

My dad and I had a long conversation this morning about this.
I truly feel that this is something organic and of the people...but I'm still interested to see what comes out of this thread.

This was destined to happen. Get ready for more, because the ride is just beginning.

 

[blazinjkid]

My dad and I had a long conversation this morning about this.
I truly feel that this is something organic and of the people...but I'm still interested to see what comes out of this thread.

This was destined to happen. Get ready for more, because the ride is just beginning.

 

[gtek]

This situation nags me from more then just a political/territorial stand point. Often I've been approached to speak upon this revolt by my peers because of my avid connection and endowness in Ancient Egypt (and people automatically assume my passion for the old correlates with that of modern Egypt) This not so for quite a few reasons....first would be lack of respect that the indigenous people of Africa receive due to the caste system implemented by the foreign Arab population. To read a first hand account: http://www.theroot.com/views/egypt-s-race-problem ) Second would be that the Arab populace of Egypt have revolted (and may I add rightly so) Mubarak for crimes of injustice and inequality but in the same light they act discriminatively towards the black minority of Egypt. Seeing the castely-hood and separatism beckons is this really a true revolution or is it just the transition of oppression and the pro-longing of a discriminate foreign domination? For me to be pro of this "liberation" would to be further scoff the freedom and culture of my ancestors. This is an Arab revolution in every sense of the word, not an Egyptian one. The U.S. media continues to project this flash in a pan "revolution" as if it has had an overwhelming effect, when in actuality what simply has been achieved is that Mubarak's public face has been removed from office only to be replaced by his military (or another "pro-american" puppet) which governs with the same morals and intentions as he does. Raping and pillaging Africa (yes Egypt is apart of Africa remember?) to wealthen the "middle-east" Ultimately fattening the pig for the U.S. Congrats.

 

[gtek]

This situation nags me from more then just a political/territorial stand point. Often I've been approached to speak upon this revolt by my peers because of my avid connection and endowness in Ancient Egypt (and people automatically assume my passion for the old correlates with that of modern Egypt) This not so for quite a few reasons....first would be lack of respect that the indigenous people of Africa receive due to the caste system implemented by the foreign Arab population. To read a first hand account: http://www.theroot.com/views/egypt-s-race-problem ) Second would be that the Arab populace of Egypt have revolted (and may I add rightly so) Mubarak for crimes of injustice and inequality but in the same light they act discriminatively towards the black minority of Egypt. Seeing the castely-hood and separatism beckons is this really a true revolution or is it just the transition of oppression and the pro-longing of a discriminate foreign domination? For me to be pro of this "liberation" would to be further scoff the freedom and culture of my ancestors. This is an Arab revolution in every sense of the word, not an Egyptian one. The U.S. media continues to project this flash in a pan "revolution" as if it has had an overwhelming effect, when in actuality what simply has been achieved is that Mubarak's public face has been removed from office only to be replaced by his military (or another "pro-american" puppet) which governs with the same morals and intentions as he does. Raping and pillaging Africa (yes Egypt is apart of Africa remember?) to wealthen the "middle-east" Ultimately fattening the pig for the U.S. Congrats.

 

[Nike Jordan]

We're always the bad guy. No matter what.

 

[Nike Jordan]

We're always the bad guy. No matter what.

 

[hankmoody]

It's been 8 days.

 

[hankmoody]

It's been 8 days.

 

[gtek]

What some people in this thread fail to realize is NOTHING HAS CHANGED. It was in Americas favor for Mubarak to be in office. Thats why there is always a "office" for people like him to be in. All the U.S. has to dictate is the "form" of government. The economy and the revolting of citizens are inevitable consequences of ill-advised actions.