111 replies to this topic

[Helen of Annoy]

ExpandMyMind, on 22 February 2012 - 01:09 PM, said:

While they were shouting about how bad Milosevic was, we were actively supporting and arming regimes FAR worse ...

Shouting how bad he was? Maybe, but UK was his main sponsor and absurdities like “Serbia, the leading authority in the region”    or “West Balkan package” still originate from UK. For a set of reasons (which I’m not going to explain if there’s no need) Yugoslavia is still not abandoned British project.
And I wouldn’t be so offended with that ****en Yugoslavia that is so essential for some who have no right to look my way after 1990s, if it wasn’t meant to be Greater Serbia like in first two versions too.
Yuck.

[ExpandMyMind]

Ouch, the personal attacks are comin' at me noo, are they no (not directed at Helen)? Somebody's lookin' fur a malkie a think... Haha ;o)

I have nothing against English people and have had many English friends through the course of my life. My qualms are quite clearly with our government.

And just for the record: you went from justifying British atrocities - with me providing an analogy that rips a black hole in your void of morality opinion - to then trying to deflect crticism by bringing into the argument other regimes - an argument which I also showed the falacy of - to personal insults directed at my brethren. Kinda makes the weakness of your stance shine through, naw?

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 22 February 2012 - 07:28 PM.

[ExpandMyMind]

Helen of Annoy, on 22 February 2012 - 07:14 PM, said:

Shouting how bad he was? Maybe, but UK was his main sponsor and absurdities like “Serbia, the leading authority in the region”    or “West Balkan package” still originate from UK. For a set of reasons (which I’m not going to explain if there’s no need) Yugoslavia is still not abandoned British project.
And I wouldn’t be so offended with that ****en Yugoslavia that is so essential for some who have no right to look my way after 1990s, if it wasn’t meant to be Greater Serbia like in first two versions too.
Yuck.

Fair points, Helen. Indeed they are. Did you also know that (and let us all let go of the absurd notion that the intervention had anything to do with humanitarian issues, except to sell the war to the public) it was known that any intervention would precipitate more attacks and ethnic cleansing by Milosevic (which is exactly what happened)?

This country seems to love bombing places and leaving a horrible mess. Just look at Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya...

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 22 February 2012 - 07:24 PM.

[Mr Right Wing]

ExpandMyMind, on 22 February 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

Ouch, the personal attacks are comin' at me noo, are they no? somebody's lookin' fur a malkie a think... Haha ;o)

I have nothing against English people and have had many English friends through the course of my life. My qualms are quite clearly with our government.

And just for the record: you went from justifying British atrocities - with me providing an analogy that rips a black hole in your void of morality opinion - to then trying to deflect crticism by bringing into the argument other regimes - an argument which I also showed the falacy of - to personal insults directed at my brethren. Kinda makes the weakness of your stance shine through, naw?

Hey, I like Scots too even if you dont get English humour. Mind you I'm not too impressed at living next to a country where the men wear skirts but hey you cant have everything can you? Haha

When you say the British Government is immoral and quote examples the reason why I then talk about those 'regimes' as you call them is to show you they arent sweet and innocent. Gaddafi was a maddog who promoted terrorist attacks, plane hi-jackings and helped the IRA. He got what he deserved and I'm sure a great deal of your people living around the Lockerbie area hope he's burning in hell right now.

We live in a dog eat dog world where other nations will and do play games with us.

Edited by Mr Right Wing, 22 February 2012 - 07:32 PM.

[itsnotoutthere]

747400, on 22 February 2012 - 04:10 PM, said:

What is the purpose behind this, just to make everyone feel Guilty for not overthrowing the Elite?
If only the assassinations of Milosevic and gadaffi had been carried out, it might have saved a whole lot of trouble, i can't help thinking.
And really, supporting "US Atrocities" in Vietnam is stretching things a bit, surely. Frankly, i think Wilson was very brave to resist pressure to get involved. And "British government privately furious at US failure to consult in invasion of Commonwealth country, but publicly backs intervention."  That too goes on the Horrible Record? This very brave Journalist seems unfamiliar with the normal workings of Diplomacy.

And when did Britain actively support and arm Russia? How about a list of all the dodgy and dubious regimes that the USSR has armed and assisted?

And i'm afraid Godwin points are subtracted for "British forces conduct human rights atrocities, establish Nazi-style concentration camps".

Well that is the natural fall back position for hand ringing self loathing liberal socialists.

Edited by itsnotoutthere, 22 February 2012 - 07:40 PM.

[ExpandMyMind]

Mr Right Wing, on 22 February 2012 - 07:31 PM, said:

Hey, I like Scots too even if you dont get English humour. Mind you I'm not too impressed at living next to a country where the men wear skirts but hey you cant have everything can you? Haha

When you say the British Government is immoral and quote examples the reason why I then talk about those 'regimes' as you call them is to show you they arent sweet and innocent. Gaddafi was a maddog who promoted terrorist attacks, plane hi-jackings and helped the IRA. He got what he deserved and I'm sure a great deal of your people living around the Lockerbie area hope he's burning in hell right now.

We live in a dog eat dog world where other nations will and do play games with us.

The vast majority of examples given - and more so the others in the book - all the populations did was try to create nationalist based systems that looked after their own people and used their own resources for the good of said people - it just happened to be at the expense of British related corporations and therefore our government was then abused (by the people working in it) and our armed forces also used to further elites' agendas.

Let me be clear, for I feel there may be some misunderstanding: I did not selectively pick out the chronological events from the first three posts. They were not hand picked or any such thing, nor would they all have been bad if carried out (like Milosevic and Gadaffi attempts, though we would not have been carrying them out for the good of their people - anyone who thinks so is deluding themselves), I merely typed out a loose list of events found at the end of the book and supplied a link to text from the book from Google. Maybe people did not realise that? The mention of Milosevic and Gadaffi are references to events in the book that shows Blatant British double standards when it serves elitist agendas. Calling for gadaffi's head while committing and supporting far worse atrocities around the globe. Does that make things any clearer?

I think what needs concentrating on are the events that decimate populations of civilians and similar such things. Those events are why I starts this thread.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 22 February 2012 - 07:53 PM.

[ExpandMyMind]

itsnotoutthere, on 22 February 2012 - 07:38 PM, said:

Well that is the natural fall back position for hand ringing self loathing liberal socialists.

I would have thought yourself - a man who seems to be becoming one of the biggest critics of our government and elites on this forum
- would have been amongst the most outraged by these eventsURLur armed forces being used to make the rich richer and what-not, along with atrocities being carried out in our country's name.

I see I was mistaken.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 22 February 2012 - 07:55 PM.

[Helen of Annoy]

ExpandMyMind, on 22 February 2012 - 07:23 PM, said:

Fair points, Helen. Indeed they are. Did you also know that (and let us all let go of the absurd notion that the intervention had anything to do with humanitarian issues, except to sell the war to the public) it was known that any intervention would precipitate more attacks and ethnic cleansing by Milosevic (which is exactly what happened)?

This country seems to love bombing places and leaving a horrible mess. Just look at Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya...

Sure. And it gets better. Croatia was under arms embargo, we couldn’t buy weapons to defend ourselves and that was supposed to stop the war. Disarmed to ensure the Yugoslavian Army, seized by Serbia, third army in Europe, will somehow manage to crush country of 5 million people. Of course, that could have stopped the war since dead people don’t fight, but our determination to stay alive was underestimated.
Not to mention what happened later in B&H, in Srebrenica, where UN forces convinced Muslim population to give up the scarce weapons they had to ensure the massacre will go with minimal Serbian casualties. Brave chetniks, they prefer their victims unarmed.
Humanitarian efforts of various people, from Lord Oven to Mitterand (OK, that was not directly UK’s fault ) who personally flew to Sarajevo to prove it’s not under siege... unforgettable.
But it’s forgivable, believe it or not, most people I know, both from Croatia and Bosnia, would forgive if that bizarre sympathy for Greater Serbia would stop already.

Serbia as simultaneous British and Russian proxy in Balkans may have seemed like good idea in 1918, but I seriously think it’s time to move on now.
Besides, US is starting to notice what’s going on and it doesn’t fit in their idea of controlled mess. (That’s how this last war ended, by the way, and that’s why it ended in Dayton instead of any European city).    

But the cold-hearted and short-sighted politics is not British specialty. It’s just that UK still has influential position inherited from some other times and it’s not very likely that influence will last much longer.
In other words, I hope to see war criminal named Dragan Vasiljković extradited to Croatia finally. Australia is not extraditing him for unexplained reasons, though everyone over here knows it’s because of fear he might actually say too much on trial.
And so on, I don’t want to hijack the thread.
I’ll just add that thinking about UK role in ex-Yugoslavia made me realize they should make Serbia member of Commonwealth. Then Serbia can also become a part of Russian federation and if that doesn't create the ultimate mess ever I don't know what will. United Europe can drop dead just looking at that masterpiece of hypocrisy.

[ExpandMyMind]

Thank you for a perspective that is quite unique to the forums, Helen. I hope that things work out for the best, but the cynic In me (or could it even be the realist?) tells me that day could be quite some time in the future.

[and then]

itsnotoutthere, on 22 February 2012 - 07:38 PM, said:

Well that is the natural fall back position for hand ringing self loathing liberal socialists.

Well said oh how true.  Imagine if such was the PM?  Oh wait, I don't have to, in America that type IS president.

[itsnotoutthere]

ExpandMyMind, on 22 February 2012 - 07:51 PM, said:

I would have thought yourself - a man who seems to be becoming one of the biggest critics of our government and elites on this forum
- would have been amongst the most outraged by these eventsURLur armed forces being used to make the rich richer and what-not, along with atrocities being carried out in our country's name.

I see I was mistaken.

No i suppose you're right, but that's the trouble these days, where government is concerned it's not even a choice of the lesser of two evils, it seems to be same crap just a different colour rosette. It's becoming clear that it doesn't matter who you vote for because the government always gets in.

[ExpandMyMind]

I read about an accurate term to describe our form of government: elective dictatorship (i used the incorrect term tonight in another thread come to think about it). What it basically means is that, while we get to vote on one of two parties (or even the three), as soon as the voting is finished and the new one is in, all form of the democratic process has ended. They do whatever they want, whether it be go to war or pass self serving (elite-serving) policies, and often that is exactly the opposite of what they have said they would do, with no oversight or accountability whatsoever. It is a dictatorship we live in, albeit one we are fooled into thinking is a democracy.

http://en.m.wikipedi...ve_dictatorship

At least the Americans have congress, which, to an extent (granted, not a very large extent), represents the people. Though this often leads to the party in power being unable to do what they promised voters (and when it comes to war and foreign policy, it doesn't seem to make much of a difference either) - and they too are never held to account for their actions. Or maybe that particular part of their own democratic process has been shaped and moulded specifically with that in mind, and for that purpose?

It should be noted, that none of this would be possible, however, without the help of the media, who support any government and largely are responsible for shaping views and opinions, effectively indoctrinating the masses. This has been termed as 'manufacturing consent' - http://en.m.wikipedi...y_and_the_Media

Worth reading and the video worth watching (essential watching to be honest - and you can get it on Google videos).

When our governments spew nonsense about promoting democracy I really do have to laugh. After all, if you couldn't laugh, you'd cry.

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 22 February 2012 - 11:27 PM.

[itsnotoutthere]

"while we get to vote on one of two parties (or even the three), as soon as the voting is finished and the new one is in, all form of the democratic process has ended"

Bearing that in mind, watch this & then ask yourself, what if it's the same here :-

[ExpandMyMind]

That is the most truthful piece I've ever seen come from a corporate news company. I agreed with every bit of that. I'm surprised it was allowed to air, especially the bit on Ron Paul.

I've seen a few videos of that presenter and he always seems to go against the grain -which is always a good thing with political opinion shows on news stations (it makes people think) -but in that video he takes it to a whole new level.

Amazing. Thanks.

Oh, and yeah, I think that it applies to us as well, though it is probably slightly worse here (for the reason mentioned above).

Edited by ExpandMyMind, 23 February 2012 - 12:19 AM.

[hetrodoxly]

Produced by an extreme left wing activist so how much of it is true, just speculation, assumption or just lies i don't know? because there's no balance it makes one believe the OP has a great loathing for Britain

All countries at one time or another have tried to empire build, Britain just happened to be very good at it, the Op might be interested in this snippet

During the 19th century, the British Admiralty patrolled the African coast to catch illegal slave traders.^[10] The Swedish vessel Diana was intercepted by the British authorities close to the coast of Africa while engaged in carrying slaves from Africa to Saint Bartholomew during this period. The case was taken to court in order to test if the slave trade could be considered contrary to the general law of nations. However, the vessel was returned to the Swedish owners on the ground that Sweden had not prohibited the trade and tolerated it in practice.


Britain has given some wonderful discoveries and inventions to the world and made tremendous sacrifices.