Argues that Obama's choice of Cairo to make his address to the "Muslim world" is misguided. The author makes a strong case that speaking in Egypt will reward President Hosni Mubarak's dictatorial government, but other points here are over the top. Yes, Obama could have chosen Indonesia as his first stop -- or the administration's PR people could have been more careful and framed this as an address to the Middle East or Middle Eastern Muslims. Recommended.

A strongly worded, but well-argued criticism of Obama's choice of Cairo to make his address to the Muslim world.

The post-speech update adds flavor. Aslan's critique of the government of Egypt is on point, but the critique of location is off base. The core problem festering is Palestine/Israel, and Egypt is close to that hotbed, with some ability to affect Gaza. Indonesia is half a world away.

This writer will never be hear by listeners of MSM.... too close to truth. The US involvement in financing and arming dictatorships has a long a glorious track record. So, Good journalism ...so what!

A great piece that underscores the diversity of the Muslim world. My only quarrel with Reza Aslan is that I think he misinterprets the intent of Obama's appearance in Cairo: first and foremost this appearance was symbolic of Obama's desire to forge peace in the Middle East. No doubt Obama should follow up with visits to Indonesia, where he might appropriately applaud the moderate tenor of that nation and their commitment to democracy. Of course any emphasis on the Muslim world renders Obama's right-wing critics apoplectic and fuels chants of "We told you so--a Muslim all along." But this article operates on a higher plane, that of well-informed reason.

Let me begin by stating that I DO NOT share the writer's opinion. Not that it is critical of Obama - I have my own 'fighting list' with the Obama administration, albeit not vetted. My contention is also irrelevant in this case because the article builds a reasonable rationale, in fact a rationale that I would love to argue because all the way-points are defensible. It was very well written. One point that flaws the writers theory and loses points is the fact that in comparing Bush v. Obama tactics for the region, Aslan compares how Bush dealt with Israeal "blank check" to what Netanyahu reacting to Obama's pressure - but never did he make a point of Obama's demands to Israel that inspired the response. That was curious ... More »

Yes. However, the writer does not seem to consider why Obama chose Egypt denigrating it to a mere photo op before it has even occurred.