The Copts have probably the highest life expectancy if they emigrate, which is more likely under MB.
More seriously; why do you think these (supposed to be rhetorical) questions are a good idea while seemingly addressing me?
My stance is that the Egypts have the choice between the devil and the deep sea. Their military is horrible. It's not clear which of their options is the least horrible one.
Sure, people with ingrained anti-Muslim stance will intuitively side against the MB, but that doesn't make this stance correct.
And it's outright embarrassing to see how easily some people get manipulated into cheerleading for one team. Their susceptibility to even modestly powerful propaganda is really, really embarrassing and disconcerting.
I didn't get my annual infraction yet, so I feel free to express my opinion about people who already jumped into one team's boat on the Egyptian conflict: They're tools.
They're the kind of people which can get talked into attacking a distant foreign country under entirely wrong pretences.*
... and the Democrats were pro-segregation. Stances from a generation or more ago are hardly relevant any more.
But I already understood; you're exclusively cherry-picking bits which please your opinion, and not really looking at the whole picture any more (or ever).
*: Which, embarrassingly, happened to me in '99 as well, but I suppose I have worked successfully against my gullibility.
Bookmarks