General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsEgypt General to US: "You turned your back on the Egyptians, and they won’t forget that"
You left the Egyptians. You turned your back on the Egyptians, and they wont forget that, said an indignant Gen. Abdel Fatah al-Sissi, speaking of the U.S. government. Now you want to continue turning your backs on Egyptians?
Sissi is widely considered the most powerful man in Egypt, wielding more control than anyone over the countrys direction after a tumultuous two and a half years in which the military has shoved aside two presidents following popular uprisings. He denied interest in running for president himself but did not rule it out.
http://tinyurl.com/kn3y3pt
Igel
(35,270 posts)"The Egyptians" includes those protesting the coup and those that the Army and police killed.
You don't get "back turning" much worse than that. So the Army turned it's back on "the Egyptians." Again--a silly word game.
It works like this.
The Egyptians voted. Morsi won. Then some Egyptians protested Morsi. Now, the Egyptians that protested Morsi wanted his government out. So the Army, backing the Egyptians, staged a coup.
Having done what the Egyptians wanted, the Army, the Egyptians' representative and also Egyptians, installed a judge. Having placed that man in a position of power, the Egyptians responsible wanted him to be recognized. By not recognizing him immediately, the US snubbed the Egyptians and their will.
In the first paragraph, "The Egyptians" is the electorate--still not all the Egyptians. At the start of the second paragraph, "the Egyptians" are just those who protested Morsi. By the end of the second paragraph, "the Egyptians" are just the Army officers--but what the writer wants the reader to understand is that it refers to all Egyptians. That's blatantly false. I keep changing the definition as I go to manipulate the reader.
Hat tip to Petr Fidelius, whoever he was, and his book "Jazyk a moc," "Language and Power."
curlyred
(1,879 posts)Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)bunnies
(15,859 posts)We're damned if we do and damned if we dont. If everybody wants us to get involved in their shit then they should give US aid, not the other way around.
curlyred
(1,879 posts)roamer65
(36,744 posts)I feel sorry for the Egyptian people.
Two choices now...Sharia law scumbags vs a pro-Nasserist nutbag.
What a choice.
Benton D Struckcheon
(2,347 posts)Sooner or later we'd get it for this too. So, if we'd stopped sending money to the military they'd blame us for backing Morsi. We keep sending that aid, and they blame us for backing Morsi anyway. SOP.
Over in Syria, Assad and the Russians blame us for backing the rebels, and the rebels blame us for not arming them sufficiently or quickly enough. And so on.