Skip to main content

Was the prosecution of Hosni Mubarak a good idea?

This is a real question, as I'm not dead-set on what I believe the answer is.  This man was a dictator for 30 years, and committed some human rights abuses, but no more than most other regimes in the region, and far less than some such as Saddam Hussein (whom I feel certain liberal people even felt sorry for - so-called rape rooms and all).  In general, Mubarak was a middle-of-the-road dictator, no worse than many people we regularly do business with TODAY.

During the overthrow, people were killed...but nowhere near the number of people killed in Syria or Libya or elsewhere.  He sent horsemen in to beat people, but there didn't seem to be a well-determined plan to kill off the protesters.

I was firmly on the side of the uprising a year ago, and I tuned in to see the progress.  At the time, it seemed like Mubarak would never leave.  But in the end, he did leave without a civil war...although the military twisted his arm.

With his prosecution and sentencing, I wonder what message is being sent.  If you leave the government due to pressure from protesters, you are certain to face criminal charges.  If Bashar Al-Assad of Syria cares anything about self preservation, he will not go down the route of that "wimp", Mubarak.  If he knows that he'll be prosecuted, there is really no chance that he'll leave voluntarily.  Neither will any other dictator.

Is the prosecution of one not-so-crazy dictator worth the hardening defiance of other more-crazy dictators?  Or would the other dictators not listen to reason to begin with?

Anyway, talking about Syria, I am very much against any kind of intervention, except for diplomatic overtures.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sokal-style hoaxes work for religious postmodernists, but (post) modernism is the real hoax Modernism in art and architecture, and postmodernism in philosophy are, like religion, insults to human intelligence.  Unfortunately, many people fall for their hollow propaganda. The "Sokal Affair" was a hoax whereby a man called Alan Sokal submitted a postmodern-sounding article to a postmodern journal.  It turns out that the English you hear isn't just unintelligible to you, but it's unintelligible to the people at the journal as well.  But if it's unintelligible, it must be profound, right?  The journal quickly accepted it, not knowing that it was all fake B.S.  They then got embarrassed when they were told that it was pompous-sounding drivel. Religion has done the same thing.  When people can't understand something, they generally think it's much more profound than if they can understand it.  If a priest speaks Latin, wears some weird costume, and sp...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Islamic State has beheaded at least 21 Christians in Libya.

Whenever a Muslim brings up the Crusades, I have to laugh to myself.  Christians have done horrible things, including in later crusades against Constantinople and the Cathars in particular.  However, get this.  The Islamic State militants said, "Safety for you crusaders is something you can only wish for" right before butchering Egyptian Christians. It seems that many Muslims haven't taken a single history class.  If they had, they would have known that Christians existed in Egypt for 400 years before Islam.  (Heck, they were even around to murder Hypatia, perhaps the last major ancient female philosopher.)  It was the Muslims who were the "Crusaders"...yet almost nobody will admit to this.  Muslims instigated a merciless war against Christian Egyptians until they were overcome and under Islamic domination.  They did this to people across the world, from Spain to India...massacring any who resisted.  They tried to destroy the Byzaintine Em...
Post a Comment
Read more
Fighting Klanophobia I'm always hurt when I see bigots offend groups of people.  All too often, people paint a group, "the other" with a broad brush and stereotype them as being evil, even though the crimes that are associated with them are only committed by a tiny minority fringe element within the larger group. Such is the case with the Ku Klux Klan.  Most people don't like to associate with them.  There is a lot of prejudice directed towards that group, particularly among blacks and Jews, but this hate is widespread.  If you see a klansman wearing his cultural garb, how do you feel?  Do you become nervous?  Do you think that he'll do something violent?  If so, you're part of the problem. The KKK is an organization of peace.  Most of its members are peaceful and only want to go about their lives without being harmed...like most people in this world.  Sure, there are a few members who preach hate, but that's true in almost every grou...
Post a Comment
Read more