Picking Up in the Middle of the Argument...

[tw]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

What I see the neocon agenda doing is moving global politics in a more libertarian direction, democracies being generally understood to be more libertarian than the autocracies they should supplant.

Well there we have it. The enrichment of Halliburton and the mortgaging of the US government to enrich the elite few ... that is libertarian. Didn't Stalin also do same for the benefit of the people? Weren't his supporters also Urbane?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by tw

Well there we have it. The enrichment of Halliburton and the mortgaging of the US government to enrich the elite few ... that is libertarian. Didn't Stalin also do same for the benefit of the people? Weren't his supporters also Urbane?

That sentence can be dismissed as conspiracy theory, to which tw is prey and I... well, call me immune.

Pooh pooh.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

There may be something to be said for the strategy of the salami game. But don't salami-slice strategies tend to suddenly change over into campaigns of sweeping change, generally decided by campaigns of a military nature?

And frankly, removing totalitarianisms and redressing the trouble they invariably cause, is, as I have said before, our business whether some of us want it or not. Recall that totalitarians resist better examples a outrance. Thus, we should expect, and train, to remove them whether they voluntarily surrender their privilege of oppression or not. Killing off totalitarians to make democracy just can't be wrong, Griff. Accept this morality, for killing totalitarians prevents totalitarian evil. Bad must die, good must prevail, and good better have the bullets and bayonets for the job, or good is totally fucked. This is not a condition I'd permit, but it is one you explicitly do, and I think that's colossally stupid of you.

[Ibby]

OHHHHHHH! BUUURN!

[BigV]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

...Killing off totalitarians to make democracy just can't be wrong, Griff. Accept this morality, for killing totalitarians prevents totalitarian evil. Bad must die, good must prevail, and good better have the bullets and bayonets for the job, or good is totally fucked. This is not a condition I'd permit, but it is one you explicitly do, and I think that's colossally stupid of you.

You just don't get it, do you?

Killing off totalitarians to make democracy just can't be wrong, Griff.

Yes, it can be wrong. For one colossal reason, that's not how you "make democracy", you idiot. You can't push on a rope. "Killing totalitarians" just makes room for the next totalitarian. Better you should learn to pull on a rope and let the people (demos) decide (-cracy). I leave as an exercise for the student to name "choosing a style of government for others", (hint: it's not democracy).

Bad must die, good must prevail, and good better have the bullets and bayonets for the job, or good is totally fucked.

A good end cannot sanctify evil means; nor must we ever do evil, that good
may come of it. -William Penn, Quaker, founder of Pennsylvania (1644-1718)

Stupid hypocrite.

Obviously, as a Libertarian, I do not agree with intervening with other governments.
Also, as someone who believes that the ends does not justify the means... if we act like them, we are them.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

V, I like you for things you do when you're not giving me a hard time. That said, just what is the "it" you think I should get? Generally it sounds like leaving bad governance alone that it may the more conveniently make extra trouble for the rest of us.

Crummy foreign policy -- helps antidemocrats win wars with us, and that is purely stupid, as well as wasting lives. Also stupid, no?

It's unduly difficult to make democracy if the totalitarians are organized, motivated, and armed. Why can't you get it that I understand this to be a two-step process? It's remove the threat, then construct the democracy. It helps everything if the threat removal has been sufficient. So, we should at least disorganize and demotivate the anti-democrats, as disarming alone isn't a thorough enough solution.

When, V, are you ever going to get that it isn't, and by definition cannot be, evil to remove oppressive, totalitarian governance? Augustine of Hippo figured it out before the friggin' DARK AGES!! What is your major malfunction, son?? Just how do you explain not understanding this??? Can you explain it?

I don't think you can manage it to someone of better moral understanding than you're showing. All unknowing, you shall reveal only your terrible error.

I've seen un-democracies. It's left an impression: even the ones that aren't materially too bad have to go -- by the cross or the sword.

Sure, call me a fanatic if you'd like -- it'd be with some justice. It's just better to be my kind of fanatic than your kind, see?

[yesman065]

Aren't we as humans responsible for each other? Is it right for us to knowingly sit by and let innocent people be tortured and killed? At what point do we have some sort of moral responsibility to help?

Originally Posted by yesman065

Aren't we as humans responsible for each other? Is it right for us to knowingly sit by and let innocent people be tortured and killed? At what point do we have some sort of moral responsibility to help?

Only if those people want what we are trying to "help" them with
We fucked-over the only people who were willing to fight Saddam the first time. We promised to take him out and we LIED, Bush Sr. knew he was lying and knew he was going to abandon them to death and torture. It is why so many of the Army and Marine senior staff quit after Desert Storm... they were humiliated at being told to lose that war and leave their rebel partners to be hunted down like animals. A black spot on our history we can never live down. Typical Bush family. That whole line about taking him out harming "relations" with the neighbors is Bull-Shit, pure Bull-Shit.
This time, there was no uprising, we are not being helped by massive popular support. If so the locals would have narced out all of the insurgents and we would have them all by now... but we do not because we are not welcome because we are imperial invaders and need to get out.
Iraq, this time, was not the "bleeding man on the street" scenario and they were not a threat to us... it was all lies and still is.

Sure, if there is a popular uprising against a tyrant, help em' out, but we should not be creating them... no.

Again, there is not a nation out there that the people cannot remove the government if they choose/want to. What we know is often not scary enough to get us to act to wards the unknown fear. Still no excuse.

Democracy is a terrible government... I am very glad the US is not one.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

I've seen un-democracies. It's left an impression: even the ones that aren't materially too bad have to go -- by the cross or the sword.

Since the only un-democracy you've admitted experience with is the US Navy, can I assume you intend to dismantle that institution as well?

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Since the only un-democracy you've admitted experience with is the US Navy, can I assume you intend to dismantle that institution as well?

I've also been on the ground in Arap Moi's Kenya. If I made even the most mildly critical remark concerning this strongman, my hearers became nervous. I know what that meant.

[Aliantha]

But they have guns!

[DanaC]

Self government is better than good government. Every time.

[yesman065]

Originally Posted by DanaC

Self government is better than good government. Every time.

Hmm, really? What if the elf governing ones judgement is biased? Is it therefore still good?

[Sundae]

Originally Posted by yesman065

What if the elf governing ones judgement is biased?

Please don't bring the elves into it - it's complicated enough as it is.