Hosni Mubarak: "I do not intend to stand again"

[Vidboy10]

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has said he will not stand for re-election in September, as protests against his rule grow.
Speaking on state TV, Mr Mubarak promised constitutional reform, but said he wanted to stay until the end of his current presidential term.
The announcement came as hundreds of thousands rallied in central Cairo urging him to step down immediately.
Latest violent clashes erupted in the second city Alexandria.
Shots were fired, as al-Jazeera TV showed apparent street battles between Mubarak supporters and anti-government protesters, as a tank advanced towards them and then withdrew.
The Cairo and Alexandria demonstrations were the biggest since protests began last week.
The BBC's Yolande Knell in Cairo's Tahrir Square says it remains to be seen whether Mr Mubarak's statement is enough for protesters, and adds that it could divide Egyptians.
She says there are some determined to carry on, while others think these are major concessions and that the protests have gone far enough.[/p]

Source

 

[Sterling]

Well, not sure a Revolution is good for anyone. However, if he is as evil as they say, I doubt he'd step down.

 

[golden]

He is as evil and corrupt autocrats get just one level below Saddam status. However, he served as General in the Air Force and risked his life for his country for years so he feels that he cannot step down or leave the land he put his life on the line for. As terrible of a man as he is, I can see his reasoning for that. With that said, I too think he should step down and leave but he made it clear he will die before leaving the sands of Egypt.

 

[Jakob95]

He is as evil and corrupt autocrats get just one level below Saddam status. However, he served as General in the Air Force and risked his life for his country for years so he feels that he cannot step down or leave the land he put his life on the line for. As terrible of a man as he is, I can see his reasoning for that. With that said, I too think he should step down and leave but he made it clear he will die before leaving the sands of Egypt.

Not really sure but what was so bad about him. Not into politics and stuff. Who knows the next president could be worse!

 

[Uncle FEFL]

Well, not sure a Revolution is good for anyone. However, if he is as evil as they say, I doubt he'd step down.

Revolution is good for everyone. Bring down every oppressive regime, I say. Hell, I think the United States needs a revolution, and we have enough people with enough facts to start one.

The question is, should they be violent? I don't think so. A revolution, in the sense that I know of it, is a showcase of an angry oppressed people. The corrupt government should sit down at the start of one, or they'll risk their lives. Or at least promise reform...

 

[Jakob95]

Well, not sure a Revolution is good for anyone. However, if he is as evil as they say, I doubt he'd step down.

Revolution is good for everyone. Bring down every oppressive regime, I say. Hell, I think the United States needs a revolution, and we have enough people with enough facts to start one.

The question is, should they be violent? I don't think so. A revolution, in the sense that I know of it, is a showcase of an angry oppressed people. The corrupt government should sit down at the start of one, or they'll risk their lives. Or at least promise reform...

You think the United States has a corrupt government? I actually think so plus I don't see Obama doing shit. Only thing Obama could do is talk and talk and move his head around. The unemployment rate is still so high and the economy is complete crap.

 

[monkat]

Ah, yes, the USA: land of the harshly oppressive government, and home of over-inflated senses of entitlement.

What exactly do you expect a "revolution" to solve? Do you just want to be aimlessly angry? You want Obama out of office so that someone else can come in....and have nothing be changed?

The president of the USA is not a god. He can't wave a magic wand and make our problems go away.

 

[DeMoN]

This guy is just pathetic now. He'll do anything to cling to his office even though he has no power left. And he's planning on staying in Egypt rather than flee to a different country which is what most, if not all, ousted leaders do.

 

[Nathan Drake]

Well, not sure a Revolution is good for anyone. However, if he is as evil as they say, I doubt he'd step down.

Revolution is good for everyone. Bring down every oppressive regime, I say. Hell, I think the United States needs a revolution, and we have enough people with enough facts to start one.

The question is, should they be violent? I don't think so. A revolution, in the sense that I know of it, is a showcase of an angry oppressed people. The corrupt government should sit down at the start of one, or they'll risk their lives. Or at least promise reform...

You think the United States has a corrupt government? I actually think so plus I don't see Obama doing shit. Only thing Obama could do is talk and talk and move his head around. The unemployment rate is still so high and the economy is complete crap.

The economy was absolutely terrible before Obama got into office. That is not easy to fix and will take a very long time past Obama's presidency to correct. Hating the president for not fixing such a previously screwed up economy is just stupid. The unemployment rate is also something that is rising due to the poor economy. The money isn't there, so the jobs aren't there, so everybody is screwed. Unemployment rates and the state of the economy go hand in hand.

It also isn't just Obama that has the power to help the economy. Our entire government can play just as big of a role.

Revolution is just dirty though. It has never helped anybody and only serves to create more internal issues. It leaves countries in practically a chronic state of disrepair, crippling everything they try to do for many years past the time of the revolution. I can't think of one country that had a revolution that didn't have serious repercussions.

 

[Jakob95]

Well, not sure a Revolution is good for anyone. However, if he is as evil as they say, I doubt he'd step down.

Revolution is good for everyone. Bring down every oppressive regime, I say. Hell, I think the United States needs a revolution, and we have enough people with enough facts to start one.

The question is, should they be violent? I don't think so. A revolution, in the sense that I know of it, is a showcase of an angry oppressed people. The corrupt government should sit down at the start of one, or they'll risk their lives. Or at least promise reform...

You think the United States has a corrupt government? I actually think so plus I don't see Obama doing shit. Only thing Obama could do is talk and talk and move his head around. The unemployment rate is still so high and the economy is complete crap.

The economy was absolutely terrible before Obama got into office. That is not easy to fix and will take a very long time past Obama's presidency to correct. Hating the president for not fixing such a previously screwed up economy is just stupid. The unemployment rate is also something that is rising due to the poor economy. The money isn't there, so the jobs aren't there, so everybody is screwed. Unemployment rates and the state of the economy go hand in hand.

It also isn't just Obama that has the power to help the economy. Our entire government can play just as big of a role.

Revolution is just dirty though. It has never helped anybody and only serves to create more internal issues. It leaves countries in practically a chronic state of disrepair, crippling everything they try to do for many years past the time of the revolution. I can't think of one country that had a revolution that didn't have serious repercussions.

How about the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution? Also the Latin Revolution with Simon Bolivor.

 

[Uncle FEFL]

You think the United States has a corrupt government? I actually think so plus I don't see Obama doing shit. Only thing Obama could do is talk and talk and move his head around. The unemployment rate is still so high and the economy is complete crap.
Obama controls pretty much nothing in our economy. He doesn't put things into practice. That being said, an economy that has been going to shit ever since Clinton left office isn't going to be fixed in two years. Contrary to American ideals, the Congress, meaning not the people, fix an economy fiscally and monetarily. Cutting or raising taxes, raising or lowering interest rates, et cetera.

Ah, yes, the USA: land of the harshly oppressive government, and home of over-inflated senses of entitlement.

What exactly do you expect a "revolution" to solve? Do you just want to be aimlessly angry? You want Obama out of office so that someone else can come in....and have nothing be changed?

The president of the USA is not a god. He can't wave a magic wand and make our problems go away.
Oppressive? Yes. Harshly? Absolutely not. The people have the power to change this shit. As long as the Constitution is our government, that right will remain ours.

I'm surprised people have such low opinions on revolutions. Revolutions solve problems, if done "right." Obviously there are serious repercussions, but a country should be able to bounce back...eventually. I don't support ultraviolent revolution, as I want it done peacefully, but I'm not sure if that's possible.


QUOTE(Nathan Drake @ Feb 1 2011, 08:34 PM)

It also isn't just Obama that has the power to help the economy. Our entire government can play just as big of a role.

Revolution is just dirty though. It has never helped anybody and only serves to create more internal issues. It leaves countries in practically a chronic state of disrepair, crippling everything they try to do for many years past the time of the revolution. I can't think of one country that had a revolution that didn't have serious repercussions.

I'd argue Congress plays a much, much larger role. The judiciary branch plays a role, in the sense that they can interpret laws pertaining to the economy differently, so that's usually not very big.

The point of a revolution is to bring down a perceived (by the people, obviously) tyrannical government. There's also serious consequences when bringing down a GOVERNMENT, so what is expected? Revolutions are not dirty, they are a source progress, though I do disagree with the violence of them. The Revolutions of 1848 were a destructive force against the rules of kings autocratic regimes, even though most of them failed.

 

[Nathan Drake]

How about the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution? Also the Latin Revolution with Simon Bolivor.

Are....are you going to tell me the Russian Revolution wasn't nearly as, if not more harmful to Russia than the government that was ruling it beforehand? Russia hasn't had a stable government for a very long time. I would say since, huh, I dunno, probably since right before the Russian Revolution.

The other revolutions I don't know, nor do I really care about. I'm sure with a bit of research, I could find an assload of reasons why the revolution harmed the country. Except maybe in the case of the French Revolution if it is primarily actually based in France. Like I said, I don't really know about the other two mentioned though.

I feel like we're straying severely off topic. Should probably get this back on track.

 

[monkat]

I'm surprised people have such low opinions on revolutions. Revolutions solve problems, if done "right." Obviously there are serious repercussions, but a country should be able to bounce back...eventually. I don't support ultraviolent revolution, as I want it done peacefully, but I'm not sure if that's possible.

Ok. How about using some logic here and answer my questions. What do you plan to solve other than getting a bunch of angry people in a room? How do you plan to accomplish it?

OH HEY! Here's an idea! You can come up with an idea to solve the problems with the government that you have a problem with, and then impliment it! There's nothing stopping you! At all!

Oh, wait? What's that? You're just blindly angry and have no idea what you want? Oh, ok then.

 

[Jakob95]

How about the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution? Also the Latin Revolution with Simon Bolivor.

Are....are you going to tell me the Russian Revolution wasn't nearly as, if not more harmful to Russia than the government that was ruling it beforehand? Russia hasn't had a stable government for a very long time. I would say since, huh, I dunno, probably since right before the Russian Revolution.

The other revolutions I don't know, nor do I really care about. I'm sure with a bit of research, I could find an assload of reasons why the revolution harmed the country. Except maybe in the case of the French Revolution if it is primarily actually based in France. Like I said, I don't really know about the other two mentioned though.

I feel like we're straying severely off topic. Should probably get this back on track.

What are you saying? The Russian Revolution DID benefit the people of russia. There were a large number of peasants in Russia that were poor and had no food and the czar didn't give a shit about them so they decided to overthrow him. The bolsheviks(if I remember it correctly) came with Lenin and killed the czar and they became into power. Russia then got industrialized, and people actually did have something to eat. Remember Lenins slogin? (Peace, bread, and something else forgot).

 

[monkat]

What are you saying? The Russian Revolution DID benefit the people of russia. There were a large number of peasants in Russia that were poor and had no food and the czar didn't give a shit about them so they decided to overthrow him. The bolsheviks(if I remember it correctly) came with Lenin and killed the czar and they became into power. Russia then got industrialized, and people actually did have something to eat. Remember Lenins slogin? (Peace, bread, and something else forgot).

Most of Russia is still incredibly poverty-stricken, and have no food to eat.

 

[Nathan Drake]

How about the French Revolution and the Russian Revolution? Also the Latin Revolution with Simon Bolivor.

Are....are you going to tell me the Russian Revolution wasn't nearly as, if not more harmful to Russia than the government that was ruling it beforehand? Russia hasn't had a stable government for a very long time. I would say since, huh, I dunno, probably since right before the Russian Revolution.

The other revolutions I don't know, nor do I really care about. I'm sure with a bit of research, I could find an assload of reasons why the revolution harmed the country. Except maybe in the case of the French Revolution if it is primarily actually based in France. Like I said, I don't really know about the other two mentioned though.

I feel like we're straying severely off topic. Should probably get this back on track.

What are you saying? The Russian Revolution DID benefit the people of russia. There were a large number of peasants in Russia that were poor and had no food and the czar didn't give a shit about them so they decided to overthrow him. The bolsheviks(if I remember it correctly) came with Lenin and killed the czar and they became into power. Russia then got industrialized, and people actually did have something to eat. Remember Lenins slogin? (Peace, bread, and something else forgot).

Lets not forget that Lenin ended up failing as a leader leaving Stalin in power, and to this day Russia is struggling to adapt to yet another new form of government for themselves. The workers revolting left Russia in a state of confusion. There was no master plan. The implementation of Marxism and Socialism failed terribly, as the ideals of Marxism were morphed. Those that were of the upper class before the revolution were not willing to just drop to the status of all of those around them to conform to the new socialist economy.

Revolution is a double edged sword. Saying that Russia's revolution didn't hurt the country horribly is a misconception.

 

[Uncle FEFL]

I'm surprised people have such low opinions on revolutions. Revolutions solve problems, if done "right." Obviously there are serious repercussions, but a country should be able to bounce back...eventually. I don't support ultraviolent revolution, as I want it done peacefully, but I'm not sure if that's possible.

Ok. How about using some logic here and answer my questions. What do you plan to solve other than getting a bunch of angry people in a room? How do you plan to accomplish it?

OH HEY! Here's an idea! You can come up with an idea to solve the problems with the government that you have a problem with, and then impliment it! There's nothing stopping you! At all!

Oh, wait? What's that? You're just blindly angry and have no idea what you want? Oh, ok then.

I know it's hard to think about, since it's never happened, but I was talking about a peaceful revolution. Or at least for the most part peaceful. Perhaps a revolution is possible where at least a majority of people know why they're angry, and what they want changed.

Revolutions bring change, by definition anyway. The people may not be entirely happy, but for a revolution to work in the first place, something HAS to be agreed on. Successful revolutions don't exist where there were one million people who had differing opinions tried to unite and solve one problem. Hell, revolts like that don't exist. There's a reason why the White Army couldn't defeat the Red: they were unorganized.

Revolutions aren't a "mobocracy" that bring little to no change. They've been, time and time again, progressive events in history.

 

[monkat]

Completely random lecture on the definition of a revolution

K.

You never answered my question(s).

 

[Sterling]

I'm surprised people have such low opinions on revolutions. Revolutions solve problems, if done "right." Obviously there are serious repercussions, but a country should be able to bounce back...eventually. I don't support ultraviolent revolution, as I want it done peacefully, but I'm not sure if that's possible.

Ok. How about using some logic here and answer my questions. What do you plan to solve other than getting a bunch of angry people in a room? How do you plan to accomplish it?

OH HEY! Here's an idea! You can come up with an idea to solve the problems with the government that you have a problem with, and then impliment it! There's nothing stopping you! At all!

Oh, wait? What's that? You're just blindly angry and have no idea what you want? Oh, ok then.

You ever tried getting the government to listen to you? Didn't think so. Being blindly angry, and rallying people to hatred is one thing, but 3000 like minded individuals working as one? They all have the same idea of the change they want. 3000 people working together can do anything they want. They could cut off a highway (Most people wouldn't run them over), they could block doors to government buildings. Non violent civil disobedience is a very powerful thing when organized. (that's what face book is for right)

 

[monkat]

You ever tried getting the government to listen to you? Didn't think so.
Have you?

Being blindly angry, and rallying people to hatred is one thing, but 3000 like minded individuals working as one? They all have the same idea of the change they want.
What is it? I still have no idea. I just hear people whining about how things are bad, and they want magic through revolt to fix everything.

3000 people working together can do anything they want. They could cut off a highway (Most people wouldn't run them over)

In which case, all business in a populated area would cease, causing quite a bit more harm than good. Eventually people would just keep driving and hope people move out of the way.


QUOTE(Argentum Vir @ Feb 2 2011, 12:33 AM)

they could block doors to government buildings. Non violent civil disobedience is a very powerful thing when organized. (that's what face book is for right)

You can block the doors to government buildings, yeah. Not forever, though. Either way, a building is just that - a building. Meetings can be held elsewhere.