Posted By: zisk
We can pretend all we want, but in the end it was a military coup. Without the military forcing Mubarak out, he never would have left. So while "the people" did not need any guns personally, they did need the guns of the military to back them up and take action.
Pretty good summary :
Quote:
The end of President Hosni Mubarak's reign over Egypt is a more of a military succession than a popular revolution .
CNN will love this one

Quote:
Unlike previous days where protesters concentrated on Tahrir Square, on Feb. 11 they were more dispersed, with the 6th of October bridge, state television headquarters and the presidential palace also seeing considerable activity. However, despite the broader geography of protests, it appears that the total number of protesters did not appreciably increase: perhaps only from 200,000 previously to 250,000 today (out of a metropolitan population of about 17 million). While it is significant that large protests are occurring at all in an Arab state where anti-regime protests are normally quickly quelled, the demonstrations simply did not reach critical mass to overwhelm the regime.
Quote:
Now the protesters on the streets — not to mention the international media — obviously see this differently. They see this as very similar to those other “revolutions” and are going to be on quite a bit of a high. So far their numbers have not proven sufficient to force the military to do anything in particular (as opposed to being just large enough to be used by the military to press Mubarak), but nothing tends to put people into the streets like a sense of momentum.
http://www.stratfor.com/theme/egypt-unrestQuote:
They wanted the elder Mubarak to leave not only because he had ambitions for his son but also because he didn’t want to leave after more than a quarter century of pressure. Mubarak wanted guarantees that, if he left, his possessions, in addition to his honor, would remain intact. If Gamal could not be president, then no one’s promise had value. So Mubarak locked himself into position.
Quote:
We assume that for the next few weeks military rule will be based on the 1952 model when Gamal Abdel Nasser overthrew the government, with the ruling council composed of mostly if not entirely military officers.
Quote:
If this follows the patterns of similar evolutions elsewhere, direct military rule means that the parliament will be dissolved (in name if not in fact) and the military will (at least nominally) preside over a transitional system until civilian rule can be reintroduced. But Mubarak’s government was never civilian in the first place. There certainly may be some rearrangements of titles and offices, but at its core this is cosmetic. The military was in charge before military rule was declared. The military is obviously in charge now that military rule has been declared. And so it is up to the military to determine what happens when military rule “ends.”
-- Modified on 2/12/2011 12:20:08 AM