Off-Topic Discussion > General Discussion

Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp down>half day-NOT RELATED: FB user info for sale.

<< < (3/3)

-Joshua-:

--- Quote ---While you're at it look up which Capitol bombers (yes the bomb went off) were pardoned by Clinton and where they are currently employed.
--- End quote ---

Interesting that you would mention this actually, I went to look for it after writing the previous posts. No perpetrators of the 1983 United States Senate bombing were pardoned by Clinton.

Linda Evans did have her sentence commuted by Bill Clinton, which is a significant difference - the difference between "You should not have been punished" and "You have been punished enough". In this case, Linda Evans had her sentenced commuted to 16 years, which means her punishment was two years longer then that of fellow perpetrator Laura Whitehorn, who was released on parole after 14 years of the bombing. Both of these people became politically active in arguing for the rights of political prisoners.

This happened in 1983. It's notable that the bombing in question was specifically targeted at an empty wing of the senate purposefully as to cause no casualties - and no one was injured. A week prior, during the invasion of Grenada, the US navy had bombed a mental hospital, killing 18 civilians. No one was punished for this, and although the invasion was condemned worldwide including by the US's closest allies of Canada and the UK, the architect of the invasion, Ronald Reagan, would go on to be re-elected - and supply the chemical ingreadients necessary for Iraq to produce checmical weapons to use against Iranian civilians. Two years later, Pensylvania police would conduct the 1985 MOVE bombing, for which no one person was punished even though 11 people were killed (although the city of Pensylvania did end up having to pay damages). And throughout it all, the Reagan administration was supporting Jihadists directly.

Again, very interesting who is considered a terrorist and who isn't.

jr2:
Most invasions are supported because the populace believes the nation being invaded is a threat to them and their own citizens.  Iraq, for instance.  But then after they've been occupied for 20 years you start wondering why the situation isn't improving like it did in West Germany and Japan after WWII.  Then you start wondering if those in government are keeping the situation from improving on purpose so their stocks in the weapons industry keep going up.  Life for citizens in the occupied country might be on average better than under the dictatorship, but ya know what, if they like being ruled by a jackboot, let 'em, not our problem.  If they want to be free, they're gonna have to figure something out I guess.  The whole situation feels like in Iron Man  when the big guy was cooperating with the terrorists using Stark's own equipment.  Else why wouldn't they have made their own stable(ish) government by now?  Someone's stirring the pot, either internally, externally, or both.  Methinks both.  Unless they really just like brutal regimes? 

I mean.  To be frank you could probably "help" them out of dictatorships but you'd have to be very oppressive, like a Roman Empire. Don't expect any thanks, and you'll have to brutally put down any opposition until you're done, and even then who's to say they won't fall back into the cycle?

It'd be nice to set up mini westernized territories that more sensible people could flee to and build their own successful countries from.  Problem is who do you take that territory from?  Subterranean?  Haha.  Underwater cities?  Artificial islands?

EDIT: I forgot to mention, the stupid dictator in charge was originally propped up by us... did the worst of the Nazis and Soviets all infiltrate the CIA or what?  Who is teaching these guys, they ****ing SUCK.

-Joshua-:
 Look into stuff like the Reagan Doctrine or just in general the history of Imperialism. This is all home-brew stuff. No Soviets or Nazis required, not even a bunch of confederates!

The US has a long history of overthrowing democracies. It's not that "these people want to live under the boot". Iran had a democratic government until Operation Ajax, Guatamala did until Operation PBSucces, and I could go on but honestly just read a Wikipedia article? You don't need to 'help' people out of dictatorships, you just need to stop putting people into them. Rojava is a good example of this, which only could happen when Assad withdrew and whilst Erdogan kept quiet.

The Iraq war was widely critiqued at the time. There were widespread protests, the US's allies had no interest in it (particularly the French, to which US Congress had the pettiest reaction). The onion was parodying the supporters of the war back in 2003. Saddam Hussein was never a threat to the US, and the vast majority of people worldwide knew it. It's just in the US itself where it went differently, which is an important aspect of this all. Even there, there were widespread protests.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[*] Previous page

Go to full version