> However, as Steven A. Cook of CFR says, all those soldiers “are not > there to project power, but to protect the regime.” He calls the > Egyptian military “the ultimate instrument of political control.” In > other words, all those weapons are bought to be used against Egyptians, > not to protect Egypt. > > This is exactly the sort of situation that fosters non-state terrorism: > a disempowered citizenry, kept in check by only the military might of > an unaccountable and corrupt dictator backed by a faraway country, > watching their future being destroyed one year at a time — all so that > that faraway country can have a "reliable friend" to support political > goals the nation opposes. This country profile fits both Saudi Arabia > and Egypt, as it has for decades. And, indeed, non-state terrorism has
...And I will say it, Pakistan as well. Blackmail and a suitable sob story can always squeeze money from stupid Gringos - who just have to print more money. Pakistan has got US$ 3 billion a year from 2001, of which 1.5 billion a year goes to the military. apart from "coalition support funds". Pakistan's military needs the money to fight India - whose Hindus are killing Muslims in fake encounters and in riots in Gujrat. That is why Pakistanis are united behind ther government and do not revolt. shiv
