Text 6785, 155 rader
Skriven 2010-04-09 13:43:29 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
     Kommentar till en text av Robert Bashe (2:2448/44)
Ärende: Question about democracy
================================
Hello Robert,

On Thursday April 08 2010 15:04, you wrote to me:

 RB>>> been a time when they didn't bitch about "those crooks in
 RB>>> Washington" or want to "throw the bums out". It's in the
 RB>>> mentality, and shouldn't be talen too literally.

 MV>> Then why limit it to US Americans? Why not extend the courtesy of
 MV>> "not taking too litereal" to some others as well? Why for example
 MV>> do nt the same when that Iranian character says something about
 MV>> "driving Isra‰l into the sea"?

 RB> Try as I may, I can't for the life of me see how you can compare
 RB> criticism of one's own government - even loud criticism - with the
 RB> kind of things the arab states have been saying

You are getting too predictable Bob. You demand that I do not take US
Amercicans too literal when they say some things. And then when I point out
that they may not have a monopoly on it abd that soem others shpould not be
taken too literal as well, you reject it out of hand. "Can't be, they are the
bad giysm they muist mean it when they say nasty things." You are measuring
with two sticks again.

 RB>>> Would you prefer to live in a country like Zimbabwe or the
 RB>>> "Democratic" Republic of Congo?

 MV>> No, but then there are so many places I would not want to live.
 MV>> Including the USA. Should we impose a regime change on the people
 MV>> of the USA, just because *I* do not want to live there?

 RB> Does that have anything to do with the subject? To remind you, it was
 RB> "free speech"

No it was about imposing a system on others that for oneself is not happy with.

 RB> and the various limitations on it in various parts of the world. And
 RB> then you started to weep and wail about the USA "imposing" democracy
 RB> on other countries,

I asked why they do it, when they themselves are not satisfied with it.

 RB> which was ridiculous from the beginning, as such a thing is patently
 RB> impossible.

And yet they keep trying....

 MV>> The problem is that you do not know if they really want the help.

 RB> And if you just stand by and wait until you're called, they'll never
 RB> call. Logical, if they'd have to risk their lives to do so.

And so you decide for them.  <sigh>

 RB> So then we have situations like in Hungary in 1956 and Czechoslovakia
 RB> in 1968 - or for that matter Georgia or the Ukraine in more modern
 RB> times - where we just stand by, weeping and wailing.

Which ever so often is the best one can do...

 RB> Many people criticized the USA for not helping in Hungary and
 RB> Czechoslovakia. You appear to think such inaction was not only right,
 RB> but the only proper thing to (not) do.

Exactly!

Any "cure" would have been far worse that the disease. A US intervention would
porobably have meant the start of WWIII and nuclear holocaust for Europe.
Millions of people might have died and left Europe a nuclear desert for
decades.

It so happens that I WAS in Czechoslaovakia several times. Both before and
after the Sovjet intervention. I had friends there, stayed in their houses and
got drunk with them in the pub. Life was not so bad as your propaganda machine
would have you believe. Not before and noat after the "Prague Spring".  I can
tell you that for most of the people the Sovjet invasion had little or no
effect in their daily lives. When I stayed with friends in Ondrejov in 1968 I
asked them what they had seen of the invasion. "We saw a Russian army
helicopter fly by" was the answer.

And in the end they solved it themselves....

 RB> I was an American at the time, and frankly, I was ashamed - the same
 RB> way I was ashamed when the USA sold out a friend - Taiwan (R.O.C.) -
 RB> for the sake of good relations with economically powerful mainland
 RB> China.

One may ask why Taiwan was a friend in the first place? Because they were the
enemy of san enemy? Becuase the US could establish a military base there?

 RB> Maybe many people have forgotten that, but I haven't. And don't
 RB> lecture me about how the USA is helping Taiwan with defence - the
 RB> shame of the sellout alone should force the Americans to do that, just
 RB> to save their own face.

So what would you say if Alaska left the United States of America and Russia
started to "help their Alaskan friends" by providing them with (nuclear) arms
to defend themselves against any attempts from the USA to get Alaska back into
the union?

I would say the Russians have a far better claim on Alaska then the USA on
Taiwan.

 RB> As for Iraq, some people might have been better off under Saddam, but
 RB> your idea that it was heaven on earth for _all_ seems a bit extreme to
 RB> me.

I never said "haven on earth", those are your words. But I will say that indeed
most people were better off before the US invasion that they are now.

 RB> I can and could read the news even back when Saddam was in power,
 RB> and it didn't look like he did anyone except his own Tikritis much
 RB> good. The only "advantage" to Saddam was that he kept the country
 RB> quiet - but that's something all dictators who stay in power manage.
 RB> Should we therefore support dictators who are nice enough to keep
 RB> their people quiet?

No, we should not support them. But perhaps we should learn to leave things
alone and let them sort out things themselves. Instead of making things worse
with our constant meddling into the affairs of others.

 RB> That's done often enough, and could have been continued in Saddam's
 RB> case if he hadn't been so stupid as to boast of his weapons,

He didn't boast of hois weapons, That was all a fabrication of GWB.

 RB> his good connections with the Islamists, obstruct the inspections

He did NOT obstruct onspections. Not ine the end anyway.

 RB> _and_ to try to kill George Jr.'s dad in Kuweit.

At the time Bush sr. was the leader of a nation that had attacked him.
Attempting to kill the leader of the enemy is perfectly OK by YOUR standards.
You applaude when the US manages to shoot down a Taliban leader...

 RB> The Americans could perhaps have accepted one, maybe two of those, but
 RB> all four were just too much. Stupidity is punished in this world, and
 RB> even dictators aren't immune.

That does not change the fact that the intervention made thing a lot worse.

 MV>> Look at history Bob. The US has a lot in common with the Roman
 MV>> empire...

 RB> If it did, Western Europe would nowadays be a group of U.S. states,

We almost are...

It is often said that The Netherlands is a vasal state of the US.

Cheers, Michiel

--- GoldED+/W32-MINGW 1.1.5-b20070503
 * Origin: http://www.vlist.org (2:280/5555)