I heard today on cnn that the egyptian bortherhood has been stripped of power by the military, and that the house is basically controlled by the military. Now, is the military skilled in running a country? I suggest that the military appoint officials from the 'ruling party' to do thier dirtywork for them.
Who does the general serve? He has to serve someone or he is a ruler himself! If he was to answer to someone that is president, he gets paid. If he pays himself, he is ruler and this was a coup, not for the people or a party, but for the general in command.
Now, if this was a coup, then is this now a democracy like was intended? If the people don't get what they want, then what was the purpose of the 'coup?' Was it to replace a president merely? He is a hero, of some sort to be general in chief or whatever, and the people should be happy with that rather than another bought politician, but, what is happeneing? The people protested, the president resigned, now logically a new member of his cabinet takes over and then they wait for elections. Or they have an immediate vote. The general in charge will be hard pressed to rule himself, but, then the army gets paid extra, the soldiers remain to fend for thier families, and then nothing changes. This is not illegal mind you...
So, if the military wants to lead a peaceful happy country, where everything is secure, and nobody turns to terror, they should keep things the way they are, but, institue what the people voted for, sharia law. Or, they could face a new iraq terror zone, fearing for thier lives, dodging petrol bombs and such?
I am sure the new leader has accounted for all the factors, and the move to strip the president of his power is only temporary. If the military wants to keep the country safe for thier families, who are amoung the people, then they will want a happy nation.