U.S. quietly allows military aid to Egypt despite rights concerns

[jakeXT]

Source: Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Secretary of State John Kerry quietly acted last month to give Egypt $1.3 billion in U.S. military aid, deciding that this was in the national interest despite Egypt's failure to meet democracy standards.

Kerry made the decision well before an Egyptian court this week convicted 43 democracy workers, including 16 Americans, in what the United States regards as a politically motivated case against pro-democracy non-governmental organizations.

Rights groups believe Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi is retreating from democratic freedoms, notably in a new civil society law and in proposals for judicial reform that critics see as a way to purge judges perceived as hostile to the government.

Despite stating in a May 9 memo that "we are not satisfied with the extent of Egypt's progress and are pressing for a more inclusive democratic process and the strengthening of key democratic institutions," Kerry said the aid should go forward.



Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/u-quietly-allows-military-aid-egypt-despite-rights-001011083.html

[Kelvin Mace]

1. Here is how this plays out:

1) The current regime starts slaughtering its people wholesale.

2) The U.S. steps up aid.

3) People whose families are murdered, having no other weapon, begin terrorist attacks against local and U.S. targets.

4) The U.S. backed government falls and is replaced by a new government utterly hostile to the U.S.

5) The U.S. then starts trying to destabilize the government, or provoke a war.

6) More terrorist attacks against the U.S.

7) Finally war, invasion, and occupation followed by years of insurgency, terrorism and massacres.

8) After a decade of occupation, tens of thousands of US dead and a trillion dollars, the U.S. pulls out declares victory, and leaves yet another country without a functioning government that descends into civil war and anarchy.

9) More terrorist attacks against the U.S.

10) U.S. moves to drone warfare killing anyone it deems a threat along with all the innocent people in the area. Each drone strike is a recruiting tool for more terrorists, and the U.S. adds another country dedicated to murdering Americans.

Meanwhile, in the U.S., war hawks, Republicans and Democrats (and some on this board), defend the never ending murder cycles as justified because "they are terrorists", all the while refusing to admit that #1-#10 is the driving reason for the situation.

[Arctic Dave]

2. You forgot one step.

The MIC keeps selling weapons to both sides and makes billions.


I believe this has nothing to do with diplomacy or democracy but all about keeping customers for our war profiteers.

[geek tragedy]

3. the current regime is very much anti-American, but we have a treaty obligation

to provide this weaponry to them--essentially a bribe to stop them from going to war with Israel.

Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

[Comrade Grumpy]

4. I'm not sure the Morsi government is "anti-American;" more like "pro-Egyptian."

And perhaps less likely to quietly go along with US foreign policy imperatives.

[geek tragedy]

5. They got busted cheering on the people who were sacking the US embassy.

Thought they were being real clever by expressing their regrets (48 hours later) over attacks on the US embassy in their English twitter feed while high-fiving the thugs who carried out the assault in their Arabic twitter-feed.

The Muslim Brotherhood is what it always has been.

So, yes, there's this game where US arms get traded for them not starting a war with Israel.

They're free to abrogate the Camp David accords and resume things as they were in the early 70's if they don't want any strings attached.

[Kelvin Mace]

6. Treaty obligation?

Seriously? A treaty obligation?



Ask the Cherokee, or the any other Native American tribe how serious the U.S. Gov takes treaty obligations.

[geek tragedy]

7. Treaty obligations to foreign nations who can create a lot of problems

for us are treated with greater diligence than those whom we have conquered and assimilated.

But, if you think Camp David is a dead letter, then you'd have no problem with Israel publicly renouncing it, right?

[Kelvin Mace]

8. Treaty obligations only mean something

if corporations can make a buck off of it. Once it becomes unprofitable, treaties mean nothing.

I believe we are also signatories of the Geneva Convention, a supposedly serious treaty with a lot of foreign nations that could give us trouble. It became profitable to violate the treaty so defense/prison/security contractors could get very rich.

[geek tragedy]

9. So your position is that the US shouldn't bother with any treaties nt

[Kelvin Mace]

10. No

It is my observation of history that the US adhere's to treaties when it in its best interest and discarded when inconvenient.

Me? I would obey the rule of law.

[geek tragedy]

11. The Camp David accords are the law in the US, correct? nt

[Kelvin Mace]

12. Until such time they become more liability

than asset, then they will be discarded, just like the Geneva Convention has been.

[geek tragedy]

13. Geneva Convention is still US law nt

[Kelvin Mace]

14. Sure it is the law,

but not so you would notice.

That is my point, we stopped complying with the Geneva Convention 11 years ago when it became inconvenient.