By keeping Mubarek to lead to a transition government,

[mmonk]

what are the goals to this move? Is it to keep out influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, to keep the US's corporate power in place, to keep the peace accord with Israel, fear of radicalization based on Islam? What is your opinion and what has influenced it?

[habitual]

1. to me it's so obvious that they simply want time to ensure that

whoever the US, Israel, and finally Mubarak wants in power will be.

If things happen too fast, it will be out of their control. If they can somehow drag this out a bit, they win.

[kenny blankenship]

15. Done in One

Mubarak turned out to be uncooperative though.

[MissHoneychurch]

2. It's a long time till September

maybe he hopes to stay in power after all.

[mmonk]

3. And the possibility of more unrest?

[MissHoneychurch]

7. Suppression

it worked for Mubarak in the past.

What I am trying to say is: Mubarak is clinging to his power. People can't go to the streets for 7 months. I am sure if he stays in power till September that he won't leave in September.

[Bragi]

11. Very true

September will give him a lot of time to jail, torture and kill any pro-democracy leaders who might not be willing or able to escape once things "calm down."

It's not like Mubarak doesn't have a strong record in jailing, torturing and killing people.

Since this has worked for him for the past 30 years, why not stay with what works?

[mmonk]

14. True which makes a possibility of upheaval a possibilty at a later date.

The time he could step down gracefully is now. It is being missed.

[Bragi]

4. Why keep Mubarak in power for the transition?

I presume the reason for this either involves a) a mix of interests relating to Israel, oil and goepolitics, or b) that Obama erroneously thought there was some middle ground between supporting the protesters and supporting an "orderly transition" led by the Mubarak regime.

I tend to think it was more a mistake than deliberate policy.

Nonetheless, I think the refusal to support the demand for Mubarak's immediate departure is devastating in terms of anyone having confidence that the U.S will stand with people who are fighting tyranny.

[justiceischeap]

5. Several reasons and none as nefarious as many espouse

First, NO ONE wants to keep Mubarak anymore. Earlier in the week and last week, yes, they thought that the man could be reasoned with but they've since seen that he can't. If what's going on in Cairo RIGHT NOW is former government people Mubarak needs to step down anyway since he can't control his countries representative let alone his people. Second, the PEOPLE of Egypt want an all inclusive government, which includes the MB. They want a democracy like they think we have in America.

When you hear talk of "transition" that's a nice way of Western governments saying, "It's time to hand over the reigns" and that call is being very deliberately ignored by Mubarak. I find it amazing that the nuance and diplomacy being used by our government is lost on so many people.

Finally, someone has to transition the government, the people of Egypt can't just force out the entire regime and then have nothing to transition too. I'm guessing our government is working quietly, but diligently, behind the scenes to get some sort of interim government in place so the country isn't left in a power vacuum. If that happens, then that's when you worry about radicalism taking over but not before hand.

The people of Egypt have been VERY CLEAR about what they want and it isn't a fundamentalist take-over of their government, they want DEMOCRACY!

[Bragi]

8. Really?

You write: I find it amazing that the nuance and diplomacy being used by our government is lost on so many people.

I think the "nuance and diplomacy" you favour is especially lost on the pro-democracy protesters getting stoned, beaten up and killed in Tahrir square.

[justiceischeap]

10. Would you like America's forces to redeploy to yet another country and beat the shit out of Mubarak?

Is that the option that works for you? We've been asking Mubarak to stop this since last Friday. He isn't listening. Reports came out yesterday that since Tuesday, we've been talking to their military to end this. There is no known outcome from those talks at the moment. What else would you have us do? I suspect if the military doesn't force Mubarak down, our next action would be to end funding. If that doesn't make it stop, then what?

It's obvious we DO NOT have the power in the region everyone seems to think we do short of blowing the place off the map. Now, THAT, we can do and I'm sure the people of Egypt would LOVE that.

[Bragi]

13. Here's a better alternative to silly talk about invading

What would actually help is not foolish talk about invading, but a clear statement of support for the main demand of Egypt's already organized and very brave pro-democracy movement -- that Mubarak leave now, not months from now.

[justiceischeap]

16. You need to read more news because he's already done that. nt

[emulatorloo]

17. Don't confuse me with the facts n/t

[Bragi]

22. You mean like yesterday, when Gibbs clarified everything?

From yesterdays media briefing:

Q So you’re not satisfied with September as an out date for President Mubarak?

MR. GIBBS: If you’re asking if now is September, it is unseasonably warm, but it is not September. Now means now. The transition -- there are things that the government needs to do. There are reforms that need to be undertaken, and there are opposition entities that have to be included in the conversations as we move toward free and fair elections that we’ve advocated for quite some time. (Note that Gibbs' "things to do" list doesn't include Mubarak actually leaving now.)

Q So is the White House then satisfied with Mubarak in power until September?

MR. GIBBS: Again, I am not going to get into all the details of what they discussed. The conversation was frank and the transition must begin now. (Note again that those "transition" things that need to be started "now" don't include Mubarak having to actually step down now)

The full transcript of the WH's clear and ringing statement of non-support for the democracy movement's key demand is here:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/02/02/p...

[mmonk]

9. I agree in large part. However, there are people of power in the west

that are comfortable with Mubarek and are allies to him. It all seems to me to be long struggle by democracy groups in and outside Egypt culminating in the present protests. There is also some recognition in the west that Mubarek is a liability as well as an asset to some of its geopolitical interests. Thus much of the balancing act and careful wording.

[justiceischeap]

12. "Thus much of the balancing act and careful wording."

Hence, the nuance I was referring to. We've already pissed off Israel over the way we've "stabbed" this dictator in the back so it isn't like we're doing the popular thing with our most important ally in the Mid East (just ask Mubarak whom I'd assume was our second most important ally).

[NoPasaran]

6. He's waiting for his new luggage to be delivered

The uprising has played hell with UPS deliveries.

[Cleita]

18. All of the above, but mainly keeping US corporate

power in place and appeasing Israel. I think concerns about the Suez Canal are also in the mix from the international community.

[mmonk]

19. True.

I do think some fears are over blown though. I think Egyptians prefer a secular government.

[Oak2004]

23. TPTB are not really worried about the people of Egypt being Islamists

They're concerned that they are not neoliberal corporatists.

[arcane1]

20. On top of everything else mentioned so far

the transition period will likely see legal and economic changes that will tie the hands f any future democracy. They pulled the same shit in South Africa.

[L. Coyote]

21. Goal = SIMPLE: Keep the 40 billion dollars and stay out of jail for stealing it!