Historical details

Submitted by sara (United States), Mar 10, 2012 at 17:45

Hi DNM,

Of course you provide a much more detailed account of the events than I, but my point still stands. Egypt was doing quite well in their progression towards modernity (at least, as I conceded, from the standpoint of the ruling elites) and the Ikhwan was a thorn in their side that they were able to keep at bay for the most part (ok, except for the assassination of Nouqrashi). They were targeting the govt and became too much of a menace with the attempt on Nasser. But he had the power to deport them all (did us no favors at all but to spread the problem to Kuwait and KSA and form the alliance with the Wahhabis).

My point was that for the most part, prior to the great victory of Islam over the west (USSR), and then Khomeini's Iran, the Ikhwan was a nasty pest, but not the mainstream. Once the Islamists sold the Jihad story, the defense of arab land and the glorious victory over the west, they were able to make the sale to the masses. Ikhwan may be big trouble politically now in Egypt, no denying that; but it was the mass spread of Islamism and the new 'fight' that really ignited things. Nothing like a good victory to rally the faithful to the cause.

I have seen countless comments by Muslims who recite by rote all of the Muslim lands that must be liberated from the infidels. I am sure you are familiar with the list. For that reason alone, they will never settle peacefully with the west.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".