Kept his mouth shut. and let the Egyptians do what they had to do.
Well, we know what Reagan did when the Marine barracks were bombed in Lebanon. In the context of the times, it probably was the right decision. It certainly seemed the safe decision at the time. But, with the benefit of hindsight, we know a long and winding road led from there to 9/11/2001.
Outlaw radical Islam forever and begin bombing in five minutes.
Seriously, if the nutters don’t ever get to run the world, it won’t be because they don’t want to. Or because they aren’t trying. Optimism is a good thing. Confidence in the universal will to liberty is a good thing. So are wise strategic vision, good enough intelligence to sort the good guys from the bad guys...and the readiness, willingness and ability to kill the latter. Even if the current
administration has the first two things, I’m not at all confident they have the latter three. Hope is not a strategy.
Egypt is on a razor’s edge. We know there are people there who genuinely want freedom and democracy, but others like the Muslim Brotherhood want more tyranny. I feel like Reagan would have found a way to stand with those who want freedom.
Just how do you do that? Which "Egyptian People?" The MB? Other protestors?
Who are they, and what makes you think they have any intentions other than to be just as autocratic as Mubarak?
And btw, all your other examples had Reagan reaching out to people who were oppressed by sworn enemy regimes. Egypt has been a reliable ally regime. Do you think that might make some difference?
So you tell us-- how do you today "reach out and support the Egyptian people." Be concrete--who do you talk to, what do you say, what do you do?
I think you are wrong. I think Reagan would have initiated a vigorous back door diplomatic initiative to see what was actually going on, and then launch a strategy that sought to protect US interests-- a consideration sadly lacking in your screed.
Turkey is turning Islamist. You don’t know basic facts.