Star One Smart Blog's

Seems the policy choices Mr. Barack Hussein Obama chose firstly weren't to the liking of Noam Chomsky et al. Read the thing; it's exactly what George Bush and his group were promoting for years; the peaceful replacement of Arab strongmen with democracies. George Bush, in November 2003...

"Are the peoples of the Middle East somehow beyond the reach of liberty? Are millions of men and women and children condemned by history or culture to live in despotism? Are they alone never to know freedom and never even to have a choice in the matter?"

The third paragraph of this letter troubles me mostly...

There is another lesson from this crisis, a lesson not for the Egyptian government but for our own. In order for the United States to stand with the Egyptian people it must approach Egypt through a framework of shared values and hopes, not the prism of geostrategy. On Friday you rightly said that “suppressing ideas never succeeds in making them go away.” For that reason we urge your administration to seize this chance, turn away from the policies that brought us here, and embark on a new course toward peace, democracy and prosperity for the people of the Middle East. And we call on you to undertake a comprehensive review of US foreign policy on the major grievances voiced by the democratic opposition in Egypt and all other societies of the region.

Loosely translated:

"We’ve got to stop being so high-horsed like we’ve been since the end of WWII and encourage WHATEVER form of government decides to coalesce, even if said government is anathema to OUR economic well-being and (scoff!) Israel's existence, because for too many years we’ve caused brown people to SUFFER! just because we are so inconsiderate. Oh, and Israel and Herzl be damned for causing all these problems. OH, and be sure to remember to speak well of Mohammed (PBUH)."

You're welcome.

---

Speaking of Israel, Haaretz is harsh...

Obama will go down in history as the president who lost Egypt ...

The superficial circumstances are similar. In both cases, a United States in financial crisis and after failed wars loses global influence under a leftist president whose good intentions are interpreted abroad as expressions of weakness. The results are reflected in the fall of regimes that were dependent on their relationship with Washington for survival, or in a change in their orientation, as with Ankara.

America’s general weakness clearly affects its friends. But unlike Carter, who preached human rights even when it hurt allies, Obama sat on the fence and exercised caution. He neither embraced despised leaders nor evangelized for political freedom, for fear of undermining stability.

For the bleeding-edge breaking news, run the Twitter hashtag #Jan25.