Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options

One tyrannical dictatorship you won't hear the neocons complain about

Chaos, killing and endless misery in Uzbekistan
If only the poor oppressed citizens of that nation had had even 1% of the attention and the foul cries about 'torture', 'killings' and 'persecution' the neocons and warmongers of this world have devoted to Iraq.

And why, I hear you ask, the double standards?

Because butcher Karimov is best friends with the chimp, of course!

k-bush-ap-pic.jpg

The hypocrisy is, as always, indescribable.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
«134

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The Straussian view is to react against unfriendly non-democratic regimes after all.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Also a friend of Tony's, won't hear a bad word said against him.

    As the Ambassador found out.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    BlackArab wrote:
    Also a friend of Tony's, won't hear a bad word said against him.

    As the Ambassador found out.
    Too true.
  • Options
    Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Im more pissed off about the worst human rights abuser, China. They get nicley ignored by everyone too!
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Shall we compile a list of nations that abuse its people? Can I start:

    1) Britain in Northern Ireland - right on our doorstep.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Meh, its an unimportant country anyway.

    You sort out the big ones first, then move onto the little ones.

    It makes strategic sense.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Meh, its an unimportant country anyway.

    You sort out the big ones first, then move onto the little ones.

    It makes strategic sense.
    So we're invading the US tomorrow?

    1. It's important.
    2. It'as undemocratic.
    3. It's run by religious extremists.
    4. It has loads of oil.
  • Options
    Teh_GerbilTeh_Gerbil Posts: 13,332 Born on Earth, Raised by The Mix
    Kermit wrote:
    So we're invading the US tomorrow?

    1. It's important.
    2. It'as undemocratic.
    3. It's run by religious extremists.
    4. It has loads of oil.

    Yeah, ok. Im for that, lets liberate an oppressed people woh had their land stolen. The Native Americans.

    Who's with me? If we all move over there and buy some guns, we could easily arm ourselves. I got first dibs on this, mind.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Obviously Not.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It makes strategic sense.

    Only in the short-term.

    Lon-term it will see an increase in anti-US/UK feeling in that country as the population sees us supporting an unpopular, totalitarian state.

    A little laughable, wouldn't you say, to be using that country to launch attacks against another on the basis that the second is run by a dictator...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Foreign policy must contain a certain amount of pragmatism.

    Yes, the US is committed to the spread of democratic institutions around the globe, but there is only so much that can be done at a given time.

    You have to prioritise.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Meh, its an unimportant country anyway.

    You sort out the big ones first, then move onto the little ones.

    It makes strategic sense.
    Love the way you so easliy dismiss the abuse right on your door-step, yet bore people to death with your superficial concern over foreign situations. Sort out your own problems before trying to sort out the rest of the worlds.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Ths USA has a duty to intervene in other nations affairs as the pre-eminent power in the world.

    Believe me, things ended up a lot worse when the US was isolationist. (League of Nations).
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    LoN was more than just the US being isolationist.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Wrong. If Hitler had thought the US would come in and knock some heads around if the peace in Europe was broken, he wouldnt have invaded Poland.

    The Generals only supported him because heand they thought Germany could win.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    LoN wasn't just germany either. You're over-simplifing things.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    LoN wasn't just germany either. You're over-simplifing things

    Whats your point? If Hitler had received assurances from the USA that an invasion of Poland would mean the full force of the USA coming across the Atlantic he wouldnt have been able to do it. His Generals wouldnt have let him.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whats your point? If Hitler had received assurances from the USA that an invasion of Poland would mean the full force of the USA coming across the Atlantic he wouldnt have been able to do it. His Generals wouldnt have let him.

    haha. hitler would have easily held his own against the USA without Russia to fight.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Whats your point? If Hitler had received assurances from the USA that an invasion of Poland would mean the full force of the USA coming across the Atlantic he wouldnt have been able to do it. His Generals wouldnt have let him.
    My point is you're wrong.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    No but thats just it. WW2 wouldnt have happened if Hitler hadnt invaded Poland.

    And for the record, No, Hitler couldnt have held out against the USA if it was allied with the UK and a free France.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    My point is you're wrong.

    Pretty rubbish point if you ask me. :rolleyes:
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It took the USA 2 years to muster the tanks, planes and troops to attack france garissoned by a 10th of the wehrmach after it was bled dry on the eastern front and no luftwaffe. never would have happened.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Yeah, and Germany wouldnt have had access to the level of resource necessary to take on the USA, France and the UK and probably Russia at some point.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    gycuytu
    BS, we'd of been invaded, theyd have had nowhere to attack europe from and most likely russia would of signed deal to protect germanys back, USA would have been totally pwned, shame i'd love to of seen new york blitzd instead of london, might have make their nation grown up by now
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    And for the record, No, Hitler couldnt have held out against the USA if it was allied with the UK and a free France.

    That's rubbish. Proof is that for most of the war he did- as always it was the dual-front war that scuppered the German war.

    When it was a direct German-UK/US fight, the Germans won comfortably. To try and claim anything else is entirely wrong.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Pretty rubbish point if you ask me. :rolleyes:
    You being wrong is a rubbish point? Yeah, that's true isn't it.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    the russians effectively "won" the war at the battle of kursk...the US were no match for hitler, cold weather and hundreds of thousands of russians were apparently...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    That's rubbish. Proof is that for most of the war he did- as always it was the dual-front war that scuppered the German war.

    Yes, but the situation I am speaking of is one where Germany lacks the resources of Eastern Europe and faces a fully armed France, uk and USA.
    When it was a direct German-UK/US fight, the Germans won comfortably. To try and claim anything else is entirely wrong.

    Thats not what is being suggested. Read my posts more carefully.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    turlough wrote:
    the russians effectively "won" the war at the battle of kursk...the US were no match for hitler, cold weather and hundreds of thousands of russians were apparently...

    Nah. Neither side really won that.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Teh_Gerbil wrote:
    Yeah, ok. Im for that, lets liberate an oppressed people woh had their land stolen. The Native Americans.

    Who's with me? If we all move over there and buy some guns, we could easily arm ourselves. I got first dibs on this, mind.
    If you are going to liberate a country you might need a couple of these as well.
Sign In or Register to comment.