Egyptian Protests

Dear god, this guy's still in power? And he's now running over protesters in big vans? F*ck you, Mubarak.

In other news, Mubarak has started sacking government officials, including his own son, in a desperate attempt to prove that his regime is serious about reform.
 
Last edited:
PaperBiro said:
In other news, Mubarak has started sacking government officials, including his own son, in a desperate attempt to prove that his regime is serious about reform.
Click to expand...

That's gonna have about as much effect on the situation as hitting a mile-wide meteor with a flyswatter.

In fact that may just make the protesters angrier. They want Mubarak himself.
 
Cobol74 said:
That Dick Head Antony Eden's fault. Still they nationalised significant commercial interests of the French and British governments and companies without compensation, so we should have treated them - via the UN obviously, like the US treats Cuba - obviously.
Click to expand...
Eden wasn't alone. The French were just as (perhaps even a little more) enthusiastic about the plan, and ben Gurion didn't exactly hesitate either.

And you shouldn't. I'm no enemy of property rights. But you have to look at where the right to property derives from. In the case of old colonial posessions of the European big powers, the ownership of certain industries (like the canal) isn't as clear cut. Heck, I'm sure Nasser should have given the owners some sort of compensation.. but then again, why pay a thief to get what's yours back?

The colonial powers, and those given property by them, really had no moral right to any of it. Pragmatism dictates that you don't mess with all of it. But the Suez canal was really a no brainer.
 
They did build the canal after all, so this is a bit different to a mine or an oil field. The canal was only opened in 1869 and the original contract was for 99 years, so the british and the french were robbed of 13 years of income.
 
Yeah, but how free do you think the people who signed the contract were to decline to sign?
 
It was signed by Sa'id of Egypt, not so sure how legitimate he was as a leader back then. Egypt even had a share in the canal in the beginning, which they then sold to the British.
 
I never feel all that easy with colonial powers getting on high horses about property rights..
 
nomix said:
I never feel all that easy with colonial powers getting on high horses about property rights..
Click to expand...

They stole it all fare and square. :p
 
Though the cunning use of flags.
 
And if flags didn't work, some blankets and gunpowder did the job.
 
Well, I can see his position, but that is NOT the way to deal with angry protesters who have endured many days of violence and anarchy.
 
/me looks at the fan and at the walls and the overflowing shit recepticles.

A bit late for that.
 
Heathrow said:
BBC News - Egypt's Mubarak refuses to quit



Well that's a surprise and not what the Tahrir Square protesters were expecting or wanted.

He's is right that someone needs to be in charge, but its not him.
:?
Click to expand...

The idea is to placate most of those angry with the government enough to prevent them from joining the protesters. It isn't the protesters themselves the government fears, it is those of the general public who would support and/or join them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top