Why is the US government not calling for free elections?

[XemaSab]

It really makes us look clueless to say "We support the government in instituting reforms." :P

[LiberalEsto]

1. Here or in Egypt?

snark

[Capitalocracy]

3. me snark too

+1

[DCKit]

4. Good one! nt

[valerief]

11. +1000

[Volaris]

20. if the impact of Citizens United goes full bore (like it surely will)

a snark tag might not be needed....

[Uzybone]

2. calling for free elections when?

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. threading a very narrow ledge

this was a little of you are on your buddy...

The message has changed in the last 24 hours. They are hedging their bets.

[EFerrari]

6. Because free elections are dangerous

and our owners aren't interested in the risk?

[humblebum]

7. We are supporting China, remember? The days of supporting democracy

are over.

[Uzybone]

8. when where those days where the US supported all democracies?

[humblebum]

22. Does it make sense to support China and not Cuba? nt

[kenny blankenship]

9. Because we support the right of the govt. to make a profit from elections?

Free elections are for pinkos. If you have to ask for "free" elections, then you obviously can't afford it.

[GodlessBiker]

10. Because corporations don't want to have to negotiate with all new people.

[Nihil]

12. It would make them look more than clueless if they called for "fair elections"!

Instant "pot meet kettle" moment!
:P

[Spider Jerusalem]

13. Very simple answer:

the US government has always found it easier to deal with dictators in parts of the world where "American interests" are usually divergent from the interests of the people who live there. This goes back a very long way; see FDR saying of Somoza "he may be a son of a bitch, but he's our son of a bitch". The US government doesn't want free elections in Egypt because of the perception that the expression of the popular will would lead to a markedly more Islamist, anti-Israel, and pro-Hamas Egyptian government (among other things). Repressive regimes are A-OK as long as they're repressing the right people and you can do business with them; SOP for American foreign policy since forever. See also: the Shah, Saddam Hussein in the early '80's, Batista in Cuba, Stroessner in Paraguay, Trujillo in the Dominican Republic, the Duvaliers in Haiti, Marcos in the Philippines...it's a very long list.

[treestar]

14. I'm sure we do, in every country where they don't have them

[sharesunited]

15. Elections in Gaza institutionalized Hamas. We view that as a bad outcome.

[XemaSab]

17. Repressing the people for decades is what made Hamas powerful in the first place

:shrug:

[sharesunited]

18. A charitable mission blended with age-old anti-Semiticism made it number one on the hit parade.

[Codeine]

25. True dat. nt

[DutchLiberal]

26. Hamas was made big because Israel itself supported it...

In its formative days, Hamas was sponsored by Israel because they were betting on Hamas and the PLO fighting it out among themselves. This 'divide and conquer' strategy has really come back to bite Israel in the ass.

[Johonny]

16. because it might be the kiss of death to those elected

The US name brand is has advantages and disadvantages. Clearly in the middle east due to our two land wars, backing to strongly "change" can be the kiss of death to whoever takes power. If the US shows too strongly we support riots, reformers, a new government. Those involved could easily be dismissed as part of an American conspiracy and could easily lose Egyptian public support. Thus we will likely try to remain publicly neutral until someone emerges as a clear winner. Move too soon and we could hurt the very people we want to win.

[Catherina]

19. What? And lose our grip on Egypt?

Imagine for a minute the Rafah border open and Gaza free. That's what the US and Israel are looking at if we don't have a dictator in there. We paid Mubarak over 60 BILLION to be nice to Israel and now what will happen?

One of the last straws that broke the people's back in Egypt was supplying Israel with natural gas. They bitterly complained about that during this uprising.

Adam Shatz recent work Mubarak’s Last Breath is a really good read.

Rec'd

[Hippo_Tron]

21. Because like all other nations, we place our own interests first

And Mubarak does our bidding.

[DutchLiberal]

23. Because other countries may want to get rid of their US-backed dictators, too!

Like the people in Honduras who are suffering since the Obama-administration decided to back the coup government of Pepe Lobo.

And that may mean US interests get threatened. Can't have that, now can we?

[upi402]

24. We're full of shit and lost all credibility for one! n/t