Fluke Skywalker
Posts: 9540
Joined: 23/4/2006
From: the dark side of the sun
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Deviation
Also, I'm personally fucking sick of this, so I'm going to stop after this because I'm tired and annoyed of this. I apologize for the annoyance caused to other forumites.
Yeah it's getting boring now, I always seem to get into these longwinded discussions, my last one was about cops being sent down the sewers in The Dark Knight Rises, at least this one has some relevance to the real world 
quote:
No a puppet - you would have called Saddam Hussein an ally in the past, or Mubarak as well because they were once on the side of the Americans. That is the extent of your confused thinking.
Oh I would, doesn't mean I agree with it either, but I can understand why. Individuals are not a nation or the government btw.
quote:
You what? Individuals in the Saudi Arabia are pumping so much money into terrorism that they are considered the no.1 financiers in the world? And yet you still defend this dictatorship as an ally? You are a massive hypocrit.
Yes, THEY. ARE. STILL ALLIES. For reasons explained again and again.
quote:
No what we've been discussing is the backing of dictators, destabilisation of countries in the middle east. You brought up the point about about the brotherhood to make it look like I know nothing about the region - your comments show that you are wilfully ignorant about the actions of countries like America - you are typical of the double standards that some western commentators and politicians apply to foreign policy
It's as much of part of the whole thing as the backing is. You cannot just view this from one side.
quote:
What a pro-Bush NY Times article? You are a Neocon aren't you.
Wait, The New-York Times is Neo-Con now? Oh well, at least it differs from always being called liberal.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
That's post invasion figures
Even with the other sources, there's still been more deaths recorded than the war and it's aftermath.
quote:
Iraq-Iran war killed a lot of people but that was a western backed war to weaken two powerful middle eastern nations. Sanctions on Iraq killed 1,000,000 people after GW1 killed 100,000. Last ten years have killed at least another 100,000. All of this has taken place since America helped the Ba'ath party to power. The blood is on their hands as much as Hussein. Hussein didn't systematically kill hundreds of thousands of his own people as you claim - it's a lie.
Erm, no.
http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Saddam_Hussein%27s_Iraq#Documented_human_rights_violations_1979.E2.80.932003
Really, then what did he do with the rebellion? Those who criticized him. THE BLOODY KURDS. The Americans didn't systematically murder the Iraqis either if we;re using this argument. Also, the Ba'ath Party has its own responsibility for doing what it did. What the Americans did was in my opinion, bad, but it was still the Ba'ath Party who did it. You were shifting blame only on the Americans.
Fair enough on the body count - but you have to put the majority of the blame on the Americans. Quite simply if America had not helped the Ba'ath party to power in the 60s it would have saved the lives of a good couple of million people. It's no good saying 'but the American's didn't know it would turn out like this' because they've done the same thing with the same horrific loss of life more than once, in Indonesia for example. And America don't care about Kurds, their allies the Turks have been dropping bombs on them for years - however they are a useful tool now in splitting up Iraqi oil.
quote:
For you the subtleties mean acceptance of abhorrent actions - for me it's disgusting and inhuman. But that's where we differ don't we? You think it's acceptable because everyone does it and it's part of the Great Game - except you haven't seen your society destabilised in the way so many have by countries like America so you can sit on your high horse and defend evil actions.
Not exactly acceptance, to a degree yes, but understanding what caused them. I can understand why Hussien did what he did, I can still be abhored by it, but I can also understand them. Also, if we're talking societies destabilized, as much as I louthe, and I mean, louthe Pinochet, his actions have directly affected my family he did give Chile an economic boom and it's still the most functional part of South America. Also, I'm just accepting that they happen, you're the one being on a high horse on this.
Are you honestly defending the replacement of a democratically elected leadership with a repressive dictatorship because of perceived economic benefits?
quote:
So no criticism of America destabilising Iraq in the 60s then? There's a suprise - it's ok coz everyone does it. And I know the UK and the Soviets have done the same but were discussing the middle east in this region and the primary culprit has been America.
If somebody claims that America never aided Hussien I will attack him, if somebody makes it look as if America is pure evil, nothing like this ever happens and the focus is only in America, then I will criticize him as well. You've been doing Part 2.
Well I'm just giving them a hard time because they have been one of the primary causes of instability in the world over the last 50-60 years. And as far as I'm concerned if you inflict dictatorships on people you are far closer to the evil end of the moral scale. You can't defend it I'm afraid.
Oh and I don't like it, but it happens.
quote:
None of those are defending dictators whatsoever!
It does, it is saying that Hussien and Assad aren't at fault. When they are, they are a lot or saying they should stay there. I wouldn't necessarly saying as backing up, but you've made it look like it is.
If I said 'Saddam Hussein was a good bloke' that's defending him and I haven't said - I've just been trying to get to the bottom of some of the facts.
quote:
What are you talking about now, your saying that Saudi Arabia's shouldn't be deposed because it would cause chaos - but you back the invasion of Iraq and destabilisation of Syria? You are contradicting yourself.
No, you missed the point spectacularly. What I'm saying is that your same argument applies to Yemen and Saudi Arabia. Even if it happens through their own populace deposing their own governments, the results will be similar. So, do you agree on keeping dictatorships there because of your same reasoning with Iraq post-Operation Iraqi Freedom, or will you change it?
If we don't arm and train fighters to start a civil war is it going to be the same result? How about we just try and put pressure on countries to move towards democracy without helping them tear their own societies apart.
quote:
What is radicalisation? Funding Mudrassars to get people to fight a holy war against Russian? What the hell are you talking about.
Radicalisation is teaching the muhajedeen the teaching that would lead to the Taliban. This isn't hard.
quote:
LOL Saudi Arabia isn't a dictatorship? What they have free and fair elections there. Are you taking the piss - and all the evidence you need about these puppets and a lack of an arab spring is there in front of you - NO ARAB SPRING IN SAUDI OR BAHRAIN, while other parts of the middle east have been destabilised and bombed. They are protected.
It is an absolute monarchy, different if not totally dissimilar from how dictorships work. Assad is a dictatorship, King Saud isn't. I didn't claim they are a democracy. Oh and I'm not repeating the Saudi Arabia and Bahrain did. wiggum did it ages ago but it seems to have been to no avail.
Come on a powerful elite control the country with no democratic elections? It's a dictatorship
quote:
Actions speak louder than words - the recent moves in the middle east against Libya and Syria for example smack of Neoconservatism - that said he is not directly invading anyone like Bush. He's not an innocent do-gooder by any means and anyone who thinks he is is naive to the extreme.
Noe-Con, for going agaisnt Assad? Something many people in the West, including the UN, have criticized for not doing? FUCKING LIBYA, where he was brought there because it was a Nato intervention. This has only been a year, you should remember. It's still silly to call him NeoCon.
Regime change to bring 'democracy' to the middle east is pure Neocon. And America were there in Libya but they didn't want to make it obvious. One thing you have to realise is NATO is a tool of the western foreign policy. I've been focusing on America but we're involved and so are the French to name a couple.
quote:
Lol did a spot of googling did you? the 'social/ political atmosphere' of the era - what America fighting commies by backing brutal right-wing dictatorships? But of course you see this an acceptable course of action because you are a hypocrit. And I'm not absolving the UK at all - we've done our fair share to help this all along.
Right-wing? Shah Pahlavi was right wing? And yes, that happens. Do you know who the commies were aiding? They evebn helped with the Islamic governments.
Oh and I did not do searching, I've known them for some time (including the actions done on Mossadegh), what I'm asking is direct evidence that the US INSTALLED a dictatorship. Aiding it being installed and Installing it are two different things.
Eh? Aiding a dictatorship to power is installing it? In Iraq for example the CIA handed over an assassination list to empty the upper reaches of Iraqi society leaving a power vaccum for the Ba'ath party to move into. This involved the assassination of 5000 people, intellectuals, lawyers, professors. As far as I'm concerned this is a perfect example. Apart from that you have Iran 1953, swathes South and Central America, Southeast Asia - you think helping a dictatorship to power is not the same as installing it into power?
quote:
'The world is shit and you must be shit to work in it' - this essentially sums up your viewpoint. The truth is 'the world is shit because powerful countries fuck it up royally - then they go to work in this shit'. This applies to the west, Russia, China anyone who has decided upon themselves to focus on fucking up someone weaker - the reason I focus on America is that they have attacked more countries than anyone else over the last 50 years - fact.
But again, what do you suggest to do? How to do or in what way to do it that can operate in the real world? Oh and I suggest to you who some of China's allies and who they aid. One of the few true enemies they have is still Taiwan. This is a rhetorical question.
In terms of China yes they are also a dodgy superpower but in reality if you take into account the last 100 years their impact has been nowhere near as damaging on a global scale as the West's - they have actually caused themselves more pain under the likes of Mao than anyone else for the most part. That said I'm sure if they had the chance they may well have acted as badly as the US.
I've said this before, we have to basically stop pretending to be the good guys and start acting like them. Everything we do is based on maintaining our economic and military superiority but in the end is the cost in lives really worth it? It literally does run into the millions. The problem lies in the fact that if we give the world real equality and freedom, they will become as economically powerful as us and this means less profit, potentially more expensive resources and ultimately a decline in the overall power of the west and it's corporations. But is this really a bad thing for the sake of a peaceful world?
quote:
I want you to tell me your view on US foreign policy - on a moral or religious scale do you believe it to be good or evil?
Not a fan of it, I understand it and its actions and would never do them myself. Well done on bringing "good and evil" back into discussion, when the entire thing is a huge shades of grey.
I think it really as simple as good and evil though. Harming people's societies for the sake of wealth and power is really what most of this boils down to.
|
Printable Version
RE: The Race for the White House - 2008 Election - 
Mod Candidate 2013
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread