Dream on - Dictators don't just stop

[SolarPlexus]

Dear The Sky Scanner,

Having the "fluidity" of the term during past decades in mind, like you nicely put, it is fairly mundane to determine what constitutes a genocide. Lemkin was referring to millions of Jews when he has coined the term.

Regards,

SolarPlexus

[TSS]

Dear The Sky Scanner,

Having the "fluidity" of the term during past decades in mind, like you nicely put, it is fairly mundane to determine what constitutes a genocide. Lemkin was referring to millions of Jews when he has coined the term.

Regards,

SolarPlexus

Terms evolve. The point though is you made the case against genocide based on numbers, it's a moot point though, intention is the factor as shown in points a-e in post 72. That was what I was referring too when commenting on what you said. Hope that clarifies it.

[MichaelW]

Dear MichaelW,

I am, in fact, *eager* to discuss what you had in mind in an appropriate place (another thread). The one we're currently posting in does touch onto the Yugoslav Wars only as much as to include the replacement of Milosevic regime (the 1999 NATO Bombing of Yugoslavia), which I will cover shortly. Previous events, such as those you are insisting on, were a part of another conflict, the Bosnian War, which did not as directly involve the neo-colonial powers.

Regards,

SolarPlexus

Thing is, SP, you fail to understand what neo-colonialism is. My entire post was about how you accuse (and wrongly) and claim the west of committing said colonialism when in fact Serbia did so itself.

Either you answer for it or don't bring it up. You are ready to launch rhetoric about the West with regards to Kosovo so why can we not comment on Serbia's actions a few years previously? Oh that's right. Because you can't answer for them.

SP, we see this same attitude with everything you post. Here's some advice. If you don't want to talk about Bosnia, don't bring it up. Don't bring up subjects like Kosovo which will result in the mention of Bosnia and Croatia.

[SolarPlexus]

Terms evolve.

No, they are abused.

The point though is you made the case against genocide based on numbers, it's a moot point though, intention is the factor as shown in in post 72.

Siding with intention (a mundane term in this matter) over intensity (casualties i.e. "numbers") as the decisive symptom of genocide, would in fact reduce the Holocaust to the same level as common murder. If you wish to demonstrate such an inability in judgment you are by no means restrained.

Thing is, SP, you fail to understand what neo-colonialism is. My entire post was about how you accuse (and wrongly) and claim the west of committing said colonialism when in fact Serbia did so itself.

Dear MichaelW,

neo-colonialism being a distinctive policy from irredentism you're referring to, maybe you "could" enlighten me on the subject?

Either you answer for it or don't bring it up. You are ready to launch rhetoric about the West with regards to Kosovo so why can we not comment on Serbia's actions a few years previously? Oh that's right. Because you can't answer for them.

If you insist, you're welcome at any time to present arguments in terms of specific incidents.

Don't bring up subjects like Kosovo which will result in the mention of Bosnia and Croatia.

Apparently, thanks to some easily combustible forum posters. Do choose your topic wisely.

Regards,

SolarPlexus

Edited April 23, 2012 by SolarPlexus

[TSS]

No, they are abused.

No, they evolve.

Siding with intention (a mundane term in this matter) over intensity (casualties i.e. "numbers") as the decisive symptom of genocide, would in fact reduce the Holocaust to the same level as common murder. If you wish to demonstrate such an inability in judgment you are by no means restrained.

Why is intention a mundane term in this matter?

It wouldn't reduce the Holocaust to the same level as common murder either, it would remain genocide under term C in article II. This one here:

© Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

[MichaelW]

neo-colonialism being a distinctive policy from irredentism you're referring to, maybe you "could" enlighten me on the subject?

Colonialism is about a country exerting control over another country or entity purely for the purpose of making it a part of that country as well as establishing new settlements for settlers from the country imposing its will. Neo-colonialism is apparently about using capitalism, globalisation and cultural forces to control nations.

However, it doesn't have to be capitalism. The Soviet Union used communism and emerging globalisation as well as cultural forces to control client states. Serbia used exactly the same policies in its attempt to create lebensraum for Serbians in the former Yugoslavia.

If you insist, you're welcome at any time to present arguments in terms of specific incidents.

Vukovar. Serbia's involvement in Bosnia. Serbian actions which can be described as neo-colonialism.

Apparently, thanks to some easily combustible forum posters. Do choose your topic wisely

.

I know which topics to put and which to avoid. You don't. Hence why we are having this dicussion.

[RavenHawk]

Lmao!!! Of Course saddam had WMD's he was hiding with them when we found him! lol

If you are not going to bother understanding anything I say, then why bother at all? I say again, the 2005 revised NIE did not refute that he had them. It only questioned the quantities. No doubt that you can fool the world’s intelligence community a little bit once in a while but never do you fool them so completely.

Only jesting, ofcourse Blair and Bush were right to invade Iraq for those WMDs, we dint see the proof but Bush and Blair had the receipts for those WMD's!

Actually, it was Chirac that had the receipts. Why do you think France made such a stink over the invasion? Here is a nation with a long history of being behind the genocide in Africa (including Rwanda) during at least a 30 year period (bad colonialism gone amok) and *they* are indignant over any deaths that may have occurred during the invasion as opposed to those that died due to Saddam allowing his people to starve to death or those that he had killed? No, France is p***ed because we cut off their arms (WMDs) deal with Saddam.

As for American being some sort of balance in the world and trying to justify by using an analogy with thermodynamics..,..wtf! Are for you for real? The whole balance is ****** up cause of the USA!

Oh? So what do you think the world would be like if America hadn’t taken a leading role? Without her industrial might, Nazi Germany would have conquered Europe, White Russia, North Africa, and much of the Middle East. Then after the war, the Marshall Plan rebuilt Europe so that it wouldn’t fall under Communism. But Communism became the new threat. And now that that threat is gone, Islam has replaced it as a threat to peace on this planet. And the US has stood steadfast against that.

You need to consider the mechanics involved here. There are such things as good and evil in this world. But how do you define that? This is the realm of the supernatural. There is no empirical proof of the supernatural in the natural world. But you can see the physical manifestation of the interaction of the supernatural with the natural. Kind of like gravity. We can’t see gravity, but we can see how it affects the world around us. Perhaps gravity is part of the supernatural? Evil would then be the same way and Thermodynamics is the physical definition of evil interacting with the natural world. It really is quite logical. There are just some mindsets that facilitate Maximum Entropy. Islam is one of those. It poisons the mind.

[RavenHawk]

I'm afraid such a clear distinction cannot be made. If you're asking me for my opinion, I'd say I have no choice than to agree with the facts.

Then we agree. It is always best to go with the facts. The leader is ultimately responsible for the condition of his people. Saddam neglected that responsibility. That is fact!

The Saddam Hussein regime, as any other dictatorial regime, exercised its power recklessly and has definitely made serious mistakes. On the other hand, UN resolution 687's devastating sanctions prevented Iraq from rebuilding and caused some 500.000 deaths as estimated by UNICEF (collateral damage included). This is not surprising as the Iraq sanctions lasted for nearly 13 years. My point being that any crimes of the regime, due to exercising its power recklessly and irresponsibly, fade in comparison to the long-running "sanctions of mass destruction" enforced chiefly by the US and British governments.

Because he was reckless does not excuse his responsibility to his people. Resolution 687 wasn’t what prevented Iraq from rebuilding. It was Saddam. He was ultimately responsible. The US and Britain enforced the Resolution. It was Saddam that brought on the "sanctions of mass destruction". Those are the facts, PERIOD.

Assuming you're serious, evil (or "Dark Energy" if you prefer) is entirely relative to one's point of view.

Oh, I am very serious. Only the way in which I express it is relative to my point of view. That you’ve never experienced DE or didn’t perceive it as such, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. That is your point of view. And naïve at that.

You're entitled to your opinion that the rest of

the world is "evil", and must be "purified" by NATO.

The world is full of evil but you don’t “purify” it. That was the mistake that the allies made in after WWI. Most wanted to “purify” Germany for the evil it did. What the allies should have done was make it so undesirable to make war but encourage rebuilding the economy. Purify doesn’t work in this model. You can only confront it when it raises its head. When it does, then pummel it. That is what NATO has been doing. Almost all the trouble makers on this planet today are pretty much Muslim. How do you explain that?

However may I remind you that for the majority of planet's population the case is quite the opposite.

I would think the majority are quite aware that there is evil in this world. If there wasn’t then why do you think that many try to immigrate to this country to escape it? It’s not just in the people, it’s also in institutions. America isn’t immune. The curse of Ignorance and Apathy ravages this country too, i.e. My Lai or Abu Ghraib. But unlike Islam, we do fight it.

In any case, I would refrain from these black&white,

The battle between good and evil *IS* black&white. When it interacts with the natural world, we see shades of grey.

manichean sentiments.

I would think that Mani was on the right track. Mohammed must have known about his teachings. He didn’t think that God was omnipotent but rather superior and in opposition to Lucifer. When in actuality, evil is just the absence of good. Just as darkness is the absence of light. Just as cold is the absence of heat. Just as Chaos is the absence of order.

Such was the nature of western foreign policy and its media apparatus

for the last several decades

And what of the nature of Islamic policy toward the non believer and the “Right of Arrogance”?

i.e. "good guys" and "bad guys", which largely contributed to the state we are in today as a society.

FYI, it’s been the good guys verses the bad guys since the beginning of time. If you don’t think it’s been good guy verses bad guy, then what has it been?

Then I'm afraid you have missed the entire point of the war.

The point of war is to win. How can you miss that?

[RavenHawk]

Also, RavenHawk, no WMD were found in Iraq.

And what do you suppose that means? Just because none were found does not mean that they were not there. Saddam was a master at the shell game. He utilized his network of trucking to disperse what he had. America has a much more extensive network. I have relatives that are truckers. They hold a top secret clearance to haul for the US government. You dont get a TS clearance to haul toilet paper. At any time, a portion of our WMD stockpile is on the move going through any number of major cities. Along with decoy trucks. Hundreds if not thousands of trucks constantly on the move. If inspectors were to come here looking for them, theyd never find anything. Their communications would be tapped. Their movement hindered. And their attention distracted. All under the guise of compliance. Stop being so naïve. Dictators don't just stop.

Edited April 24, 2012 by RavenHawk

[RavenHawk]

Albeit both represent the extension of a nations power, there are differences throughout. May I remind you, the British during the Raj have helped build the 4th greatest railroad network in the world at the time, as well as establish "princely states". The form we have today cannot be more different. Neocolonialism would be more extreme in using globalist policies and the monetary system to take control of resources and terrirory, while providing nearly nothing in return. Therefore this assimilation-like practice would mainly be the result of... corporate interests.

Yes, the Brits built the railroad, but it still remained under British control for many years to come. British corporations used this railroad to exploit the resources. How is that any different than today? Today you look at the oil fields of the ME, being developed by the West. The profit remains with the native nation but the world requires the right to free access to those resources. It’s beneficial to everyone and it is neo colonialism. The main difference is that the requirement to hang onto territory is no longer important.

[odas]

They *are* dictators and no one is claiming they're perfect. However western "imported democracy" often makes more damage in total than these dictators have had, with very few exceptions.

What can be said of the most recent foreign intervention, the Libya NATO bombing, which killed so many people indiscriminately as collateral damage and not to mention the staggering damage to infrastructure which will take decades to repair, inflicting even more damage to the Libyan citizen in the process. The spoils of war were hastily divided between the European powers and the Libyan people are now forgotten, left to manage themselves in the ruins, while tribes and former "rebels" now fight among themselves. Plus the consequences of DU are yet to be felt by the Libyan people, just as in Fallujah and (in lesser degree) Bosnia and Kosovo. If the West really cared about democracy and human life, it would not act so.

Dictators? Tito was a dictator. Milosevic, Karadzic, Mladic, Saddam, Ghaddafie are massmurderes, genocidal fanatics, war criminals.

They got(almost)what they diserve.

[odas]

Totally agree with you solar! Most people are oblivious to reality due to the steady drip feed of BS they take daily from the mass media!

Noticed how you don't hear anything about libya anymore, their dictator was funded and armed by the very people who then armed the rebels to take him out. Allegedly they bring peace to these nations, lmao! Like Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya, Syria or Sudan next

Oh little lion cub. What a disgrasse you are. Here is a message from a Bosnian muslim: People like you deserve friends like Milosevic, Saddam, Ghaddafi..... Where is your pride man? Where is your sense of reality? Where is your sense of what is right and wrong?

Please do not call yourself a muslim or remotley educated and intelligent.

Long live America, long live Bosnia. Freeedooooom.