I was watching Al Jazeera's live feed for hours last night. When those 12 M113s of some Guard formation arrived to secure the NDP HQ and the adjacent museum, I was quite surprised to see the protesters not only catch a ride and dance on 'em, but also apparently plead the soldiers for protection from the rozzers.

riveting footage.

I thought the same thing. What a strange dynamic. I hate to imagine what this would be like in the US.>> ^radx:

I was watching Al Jazeera's live feed for hours last night. When those 12 M113s of some Guard formation arrived to secure the NDP HQ and the adjacent museum, I was quite surprised to see the protesters not only catch a ride and dance on 'em, but also apparently plead the soldiers for protection from the rozzers.

How's this not the military trying to impede the advancements of the protesters and/or to keep the situation from escalating?

>> ^rottenseed:

How's this not the military trying to impede the advancements of the protesters and/or to keep the situation from escalating?

I was wondering the same thing, but even if that is the case then you've got to admire the calmness and restraint they are displaying. Plus, the crowd doesn't seem to be angry with the soldiers but instead are focusing their energy on the police.

Agreed, this looks to me like a genius tactic by the government - they keep the situation from escalating, and keep the civilians from meeting the police with violence, by having the military look like benevolent peace keepers between the two sides. The military may be holding back the protesters in a 'friendly' manner, but they are still holding back the protesters.
>> ^rottenseed:

How's this not the military trying to impede the advancements of the protesters and/or to keep the situation from escalating?

Very hard to tell what's going on here. I can't imagine any explanation that could make me think that this situation isn't fucked up. Is it just the army stopping people advancing? Don't know. The protesters seem pretty sure about who's side the army are on. There's a lot of anger surging around there against the government and it's very hard to imagine the army not being targeted by the protesters. The police are just as dangerous and aren't the easy target at all. If you're just a guy with a rock against a guy with a gun, it really doesn't matter what type of uniform the guy with the gun is wearing. It just doesn't sit right with me that the army are just doing their job as part of the establishment. We can see from the number of rocks being thrown what the protesters think of the establishment.>> ^rottenseed:

How's this not the military trying to impede the advancements of the protesters and/or to keep the situation from escalating?

From what I've been reading, the military in Egypt hasn't intervened domestically in decades and so is entirely disassociated from the government's repression. The last it was deployed, was in 1985 and that was ironically to quell police violence and rioting. As I understand it, the military is seen almost as a source of pride. Whether this plays in Mubarak's favor is hard to tell, I think it could go both ways although of course the decisions of high military officers will matter most.>> ^Skeeve:

Agreed, this looks to me like a genius tactic by the government - they keep the situation from escalating, and keep the civilians from meeting the police with violence, by having the military look like benevolent peace keepers between the two sides. The military may be holding back the protesters in a 'friendly' manner, but they are still holding back the protesters.
>> ^rottenseed:
How's this not the military trying to impede the advancements of the protesters and/or to keep the situation from escalating?

Wow. Really interesting the conclusions people are jumping to here. Some think this is a positive thing where the military is actually with the people and against the government (which is entirely true), while others are quick to condemn the Egyptian citizens as idiots who would fall so easily for an obvious tactic.

But, this is one of the wests biggest problems. Everyone looks at non-western movements through a western/American lens. Instead of realizing that this has absolutely fuckall to do with us, and that these people from all walks of life are determining their own destiny with our without our understanding or support.

Take the tinfoil hat off. I don't think Mubarak has a strong hold on the military.

Look at the military in Turkey -- they are something like protectors of the republic not protectors of the rulers. I think the military is doing absolutely the right thing -- trying to defuse the situation without picking sides.

And volumptuous, this does have plenty to do with the United States. One could claim that Mubarak still being in power has something to do with US support. One could also say the military being well equipped and well behaved has to do with the fact that the US supplied them and trained thousands of their officers.

>> ^Skeeve:

Agreed, this looks to me like a genius tactic by the government - they keep the situation from escalating, and keep the civilians from meeting the police with violence, by having the military look like benevolent peace keepers between the two sides. The military may be holding back the protesters in a 'friendly' manner, but they are still holding back the protesters.
>> ^rottenseed:
How's this not the military trying to impede the advancements of the protesters and/or to keep the situation from escalating?

Mubarak's appointment of military men to top posts continues Egypt's martial style of rule

I bet they wish they had guns. This revolution would be a bit more fair.

[redacted]

Thanks for that @sepatown. @rychan take a read of that and tell me I'm wearing a tinfoil hat again.

"Despite the warm greetings given to demonstrators by soldiers in the street, there were no signs that the generals had abandoned Mubarak, himself a former air force commander. Analysts said it appeared likely that the soldiers had been instructed to avoid the kinds of violent clashes mounted by police who had confronted the protesters with tear gas, rubber bullets and live ammunition."

So, while many of the protesters see the military as on their side (and they very well may be trying to protect the protesters from the police) they are likely still under the control of the repressive government.

>> ^sepatown:

Mubarak's appointment of military men to top posts continues Egypt's martial style of rule

I didn't mean that the US doesn't have direct historical significance to this situation and to our puppet dictator they're trying to oust, and I do know that many of the tear gas canisters have "Made in the USA" written on them, and Egypt is #2 in direct military aid from the US.

But for this specific revolution, the US really needs to back the fuck away and let things play out organically. At first I was upset with the Obama administration, but now they're really backing off and letting the people decide their own fate.

THAT is what I meant.

We need to realize that sometimes, the west has zero importance. And we keep asking questions like a) what should WE do? b) what does this mean for the US? The answer to both is, mostly nothing.


>> ^rychan:

Take the tinfoil hat off. I don't think Mubarak has a strong hold on the military.
Look at the military in Turkey -- they are something like protectors of the republic not protectors of the rulers. I think the military is doing absolutely the right thing -- trying to defuse the situation without picking sides.
And volumptuous, this does have plenty to do with the United States. One could claim that Mubarak still being in power has something to do with US support. One could also say the military being well equipped and well behaved has to do with the fact that the US supplied them and trained thousands of their officers.
>> ^Skeeve:
Agreed, this looks to me like a genius tactic by the government - they keep the situation from escalating, and keep the civilians from meeting the police with violence, by having the military look like benevolent peace keepers between the two sides. The military may be holding back the protesters in a 'friendly' manner, but they are still holding back the protesters.
>> ^rottenseed:
How's this not the military trying to impede the advancements of the protesters and/or to keep the situation from escalating?

If by fair you mean "a lot bloodier, and the protesters would now be "armed and dangerous" and the military would mow them down instantly"

Often, people don't think like you Blanky. Ghandi didn't want guns. These people most likely don't want them either. And it's so weird to me that you see every situation through the barrel of a gun.

>> ^blankfist:

I bet they wish they had guns. This revolution would be a bit more fair.

>> ^volumptuous:

If by fair you mean "a lot bloodier, and the protesters would now be "armed and dangerous" and the military would mow them down instantly"
Often, people don't think like you Blanky. Ghandi didn't want guns. These people most likely don't want them either. And it's so weird to me that you see every situation through the barrel of a gun.
>> ^blankfist:
I bet they wish they had guns. This revolution would be a bit more fair.



They're throwing rocks. I just assumed they'd want something a bit more effective at their disposal. Pardon me.

Questions that come to mind:

To what extent are the police still under central control, and whose control exactly? Same questions for the army.

>> ^rebuilder:

Questions that come to mind:
To what extent are the police still under central control, and whose control exactly? Same questions for the army.


Police and Central Services are still under Mubarak's control. The Army has never really been aligned with the government. They're basically there to keep the citizens from being mowed down by the police. They've even chased a lot of the police away at times.

Nighttime video footage that I've seen, shows people bringing tea and food to the Army's lorries, and climbing inside the tanks with them to have dinner. When the people surrounded the NDP headquarters, the Army surrounded them to create an iron wall that the police couldn't penetrate. It's a really interesting situation. The Army doesn't want a military coup, they just want the citizens to be safe, and to give them the space to create their own destiny.

Worth noting that there's been a draft for ages in Turkey (I know in the past, going to guess it's still on to some extent). More likely to have a "common man" feel in the army than in the career-ist/brutalist police side of things.

I would say that if you don't have a shitload of guns - protest peacefully. Throwing rocks is just the dumbest fucking thing you can do. The stupid little bastards in Palestine have been doing it for centuries with the expected reward of fuck all...

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^volumptuous:
If by fair you mean "a lot bloodier, and the protesters would now be "armed and dangerous" and the military would mow them down instantly"
Often, people don't think like you Blanky. Ghandi didn't want guns. These people most likely don't want them either. And it's so weird to me that you see every situation through the barrel of a gun.
>> ^blankfist:
I bet they wish they had guns. This revolution would be a bit more fair.


They're throwing rocks. I just assumed they'd want something a bit more effective at their disposal. Pardon me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emergency_law_in_Egypt

From what I got, the police are usually the ones to carry out such emergency law powers and would thus be the primary targets of anger.

Straight from Al Jazeera's news ticker:

Egypt army says won't use violence against citizens staging protests against President Hosni Mubarak.

Mubarak leave the country! Democracy for Egypt!

People want to bad mouth the police and yes their gov may have alot of problems... but it is the citizens themselves that are destroying their own city. I'm sorry but anyone who decides to torch their home doesn't deserve to live in mine.. and my home is the planet earth.

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^volumptuous:
If by fair you mean "a lot bloodier, and the protesters would now be "armed and dangerous" and the military would mow them down instantly"
Often, people don't think like you Blanky. Ghandi didn't want guns. These people most likely don't want them either. And it's so weird to me that you see every situation through the barrel of a gun.
>> ^blankfist:
I bet they wish they had guns. This revolution would be a bit more fair.


They're throwing rocks. I just assumed they'd want something a bit more effective at their disposal. Pardon me.


Throwing rocks is still a way of showing you being angry, but not wanting to do serious damage.

As stated, all guns would do is provide a medium for someone to do something really stupid.

Essentially, think the cascading events of V for Vendetta, and take this exact video as our grounds.

People are angry, some are protesting non-violently, some are throwing rocks (To me that says they're still disgruntled and showing it, but not wanting to do serious harm).

Then you get one or two idiots, who do something really stupid. Weather that's shooting a cop, or shooting another protester. This leads to someone else doing something stupid, be it the rest of the protesters who grow more violent due to the first stupid act, or the corrupt cops.

Either way, the other side is just going to arm themselves and get involved (Police to take down rioters, rioters to take down police).

The entire situation would become all out chaos.

I really can't see how having guns in this fight would cause it to go any other way. What else are you going to do? Stand there and wave them about saying "Hey look, I have a gun!"?

The fact that there's a lack thereof is probably saving dozens of lives.

So impressed with how the Egyptian Military are handling this. Even the way they physically handle the protesters is in a most professional manner, firm but not overpowering. They are protecting the people, both the protesters, and the police, which is what a nations armed force is for. Top score

The army's happy to do something, anything really, to look good after years of having their ass handed to them by a bunch of Kurd hillbillies.

I say God bless the Egyptian military for their non-violent efforts. They are so un-like the pig cops who have been murdering people in the streets.

Who would have thought that the military of a country like this would actually care about the people?

>> ^Shepppard:
Throwing rocks is still a way of showing you being angry, but not wanting to do serious damage.


I bet the Palestinians are just angry at the Israeli forces and don't want to do serious damage.

>> ^blankfist:

>> ^Shepppard:
Throwing rocks is still a way of showing you being angry, but not wanting to do serious damage.

I bet the Palestinians are just angry at the Israeli forces and don't want to do serious damage.


I bet there's a difference between disgruntled people taking on its homeland and a hatred that's been ongoing for over 100 years.

>> ^Shepppard:

>> ^blankfist:
>> ^Shepppard:
Throwing rocks is still a way of showing you being angry, but not wanting to do serious damage.

I bet the Palestinians are just angry at the Israeli forces and don't want to do serious damage.

I bet there's a difference between disgruntled people taking on its homeland and a hatred that's been ongoing for over 100 years.


Still, both Egypt and Palestine are comparable in their guns-to-civilian ratio of 3 1/2 guns to 100 civillians. I'd wonder who owns those 3.5 guns out of a hundred people, but notwithstanding knowing that I'd bet the majority of the people on the streets are not part of the group that's "privileged" enough to own the 3.5. Obviously. And I bet this little tizzy in Egypt is bigger than just a few townspeople grumbling about their government. This could very well be a revolution, and right now they're greatly outnumbered because they have rocks instead of guns.

Cited:
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/palestine
http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/egypt

*africa

Adding video to channels (Africa) - requested by longde.