Message 28/88
Date: 12-Sep-04 @ 02:10 PM Edit: 12-Sep-04 | 02:20 PM -
RE: russia
quote
yes....true...all that...but they're still the same people we were calling freedom-fighters a decade ago.
Yes, much like the contras and other fascist/terrorist groups. Both the big 'empires' of that era (the Sovietbloc and the US/Nato) supported rebel groups which were not worthy of support. Why? To make sure that at least the other side wouldn't gain any support.
That's the way world politics work. It's that simple. Stalin was considered an *ally* as long as he fought against the Nazis. After that he quickly become 'our' enemy. And with good reason, I may add.
Was it truthful to call him an ally? No, not really, since his ideology probably was much closer to that of the enemy than to 'ours'.
Was it foolish to call him an ally? No, we needed him and his armies to keep up to 80% of the Nazi military machine occupied so the western forces could sweep up the western part of the Reich.
Should we have allied ourselves with the Contras, the Peshmerga or Mobutu? No, I don't think we should have. I think the labels terrorists/dictator are far more accurate.
quote
what happened between then and now which has caused them to resort to such unforgiveable tactics to achieve the same ends which we were appaluding not that long ago?
Because they've lost support from the west (if ever they had any) they are resorting to desparate tactics. Much like the increasing amount of cruelty the Nazis used to supress any thought of an uprising from within. Of course it is not Nazism that drives most of modern day terror, it is (mostly) Islamic fundamentalism which just like Stalinism and Fascism bears a cunning resemblence to Nazism which transcends the aparent superficialities. (virulent anti-semitism, strict dogmatism, cruelty, torture, violence, uebermensch-thinking, expansionism, total obedience to hierarchical structures, infallibilty of the ideology etc.etc.)
quote
you know...besides the fact that russia is our friend and brother now.
In all honesty I think this is a matter of chosing for the lesser of two evils.
Pure pragmatism.
Take Israel, India, Algeria, China, Thailand, the Philipines or Russia for example. There's no doubt in my mind that the Israelis and the Russians use cruelty and dirty tricks to (as they call it) protect their national integrity and citizens. There's no doubt in my mind that when amnesty is saying they are trampling all over the human rights of a lot of Palestinians, the Chechens, the Uygurs, Moronese, the Kashmiri and the Malays of Thailand.
But what's the alternative?
People that shoot kids in the back, Palestinians that vow to cleanse the middle east from every Jew and show (literally!) Nazi propaganda on daily television, and have no probelm blowing up a pizza parlor or to shoot an infant at close range the Milf that beheads Nuns, the FIS and the GIA that kill of entire villages and cut up pregnant women to replave the foetus with a plastic doll, or Muslims militants that blow up polling boots and behead villagers simply because they are Buddhists.
Yes, oppression is a terrible thing, but many of these countries are not in the oppression business. Several of them or functioning democracies, yet we still see that there are people who blow up schools, behead civilians and shoot children, nuns and tourists.
Give me one reason why we shouldn't call a spade a spade, why we shouldn't call a terrorist a terrorist?
As long as Putin, Megawatti or Bautaflika are hunting down these bastards they should have our fullest suppot, not our condemnation. If and when they deny journalists their rights, torture people or commit other acts of wickedness: they deserve nothing but our scorn and should be critisized to the fullest of our abilities.
p.s. MCC if this was a lame attempt to call me uninformed or indifferent...well...I guess were done talking then. If not, my sincere apologies.