Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#1
IN EGYPT the army has dismissed the government and taken over, supported by the police and cheered on by the crowds.
The outgoing president recently gave the impression he would support jihad against the Syrian state, and this was a tipping point for the Egyptian army.
The Egyptian army made clear it would not get involved in the war on Syria and did not want people going over to Syria to join terrorist groups and then return to Egypt with a renewed baggage of hatred and experience in bomb-making.
They did it in swift military fashion.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#2
Meanwhile, the Telegraph reports:
"The Syrian conflict has become a "profound game changer" and poses the biggest terror threat to the UK and Europe for a decade, the Home Office's terror chief has warned."
"Charles Farr said there are thousands of al-Qaeda-inspired fighters now operating in the war torn country with many wanting to attack the UK and other Western nations."
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10157825/Syria-a-game-changer-for-UK-terror-threat-warns-Home-Office-intelligence-chief.htmlGuest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#3
In conclusion, we may say that the Egyptian army and police are defending Egypt and Britain and other Western countries by preventing the recruitment of Jihadists in terrorist organisations that today are destroying Syria and tomorrow would be doing the same in Egypt and in Europe and in Britain.
The security forces in Egypt are doing this by clearing their own house of Jihadist extremists.
Of note that weapons coming from Libya are being used by terror groups operating in the Sinai against Egyptian security personnel, as well as in Syria.
So while the genie has left the bottle in Libya, perhaps it has been binned in Egypt.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#4
I don't enough about what happened in Egypt in recent elections where this guy was elected,
Did they have outside scrutineers?
if so, what did they think
Is it any better to have an UNELECTED army running the country?
lots to debate there
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#5
never a good idea to have the military in charge although the president was making decisions on his own without recourse to his government.
he was fairly elected in the first place but the population are fed up to the back teeth now with religion intermingled with politics,
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#6
well let the judge be the judge of that,one has been sworn in to take over.now watch the news bullitins.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
#7
An elected government has been toppled, maybe Cameron will be screaming to pump in guns ,,,,not
The problems in this country, are much the same in all Islamism countries, over overpopulation and a lack of resources and jobs
If you have 10 children in the family, and there all rushing of to wash there nuts 5 time a day, your goner struggle to make a living
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#8
the new head honcho seems to be a calming influence, hopefully egypt will get back to normal now without religious zealots trying to tell people what to do.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#9
We only ever see Cairo and Alexandria on the news unless a tourist bus is shot at in Luxor. The relatively sophisticated urban population will breathe a sigh of relief with the military in charge but rural areas, the Delta and Upper Egypt are a different kettle of fish. For the long term, Egypt needs to move to a more devolved model of government so that the conservative areas can have their Brotherhood overlords and the cities a more secular regime.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#10
One thing is for sure:
the vast majority of Egyptians do not want to get involved in the destruction through terrorism of their neighbours in Syria.
Many Turks appear to be of the same opinion.:
mass demonstrations against a government that is said to be supporting terrorists against Syria.
People expect their government to be there for the people they are supposed to serve, not to deflect attention elsewhere by getting involved in a war against another country.
Has anyone seen a dejected W. Hague anywhere of late?
He must be wondering what spanner got flung between his ugly plans!
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#11
The Lebanese and Iraqi governments, whose countries are both direct neighbours of Syria, will have nothing to do with supporting terrorist aggression in Syria.
Egypt, a neighbour but one, will have nothing to do with terrorism either.
As we can see, there are governments and people in the Middle East who WILL NOT SUPPORT TERRORISM!
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#12
While there are at least two governments in that region which actively practice terrorism.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson