
Letter: Military Aid to Egypt
• To the editor, New York TimesThe power grab of Egypt’s military is repulsive. The United States must state unequivocally that military aid to Egypt will stop. Continuing aid to dictators would make a mockery of our traditional values.
Balderdash! If Egypt's military falls then the Islamists get control of the country, impose Sharia Law while persecuting the country's Christian population. Is that what the people who run this website want? I am not saying Egypt's military is any better than the Islamists, but they at least want to keep the country somewhat secular as opposed to the Muslim Brotherhood who wants to impose things like "sin-free tourism".
The main interest of the United States in pumping billions of dollars to this so-called "military aid" to Egypt for so many years now -- let us not forget -- has always been two-pronged: [1]To keep Mubarak's or Egypt's Military as strong as it is permissible, so that renegade Arab countries that still want to re-invade Israel are held at bay; [2] To prevent Egypt from falling into Islamic rule, and for the established Western-type of Democracy not to be overan by Islam's Sharia Law or by The Brotherhood's Islamic regime. Anyone who makes any comment contrary to or outside of this parameter, is purely self-serving propaganda if not too ignorant -- just a waste of time for anyone to listen to.
The situation there is so volative it is hard to predict what's going to happen next. But the bottomline is clear: I don't think the United States will allow Democracy in Egypt to be replaced by Islamic Rule or Sharia Dictatorship. Let us not kid ourselves of "democracy" The Brotherhood promised to establish under Sharia Law once they win the struggle against the Military for complete control of Egypt. That would be contradictory ... and confrontations still continue, which means many more changes of events are going to take place. That's how volatile the situation in Egypt is.
The word volative should spell volatile.
This is a very tricky subject to talk about correctly. Inside the basics of Islam are attempts to "force" righteousness into existence among the people. Yet, it is that same forcing which is itself attempting to break the laws of nature that offer freedom to all people.
Conversely, where do the boundaries lie the other way? When is it breaking the laws of freedom for all people, when WE force Islam to abandon its ideals? If Muslims freely decide they like their Islamic religious government, when is it wrong for us to keep them from having it?
Further, when is it wrong for me to force you to pay for a war (police action) that you may not agree with? Suppose that you are against messing in Egypt's problems, but I am in favor of it. Is it right for me to force you to help pay for things that mess with Egypt? Or should I go only to fellow countrymen who agree with me that we should police Egypt, for funding to do so?
The point is, the whole principle of the U.S. using forced taxation of its people to pay for things that they are not in agreement with is wrong. It is as wrong as Islam trying to conquer the world for the purposes of righteousness. It involves treachery against the people of the United States, and treachery against the people of the world.
Both are going to fail, you know. Both, Islamic force attempting to make people righteous, and democracy attempting to make people do its will... both are going to fail.