What we do with despots
POSTED BY: SignyM
UPDATED: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 19:33
VIEWED: 7760
PAGE 5 of 9
When it comes to the after-effects of US support for despots I just have one word:
Pupusas!!!
Okay. More detail.
Country: El Salvador
One of our buddies: Roberto D'Aubuisson
Result: Destabilize region, thousands flee, many end up illegally immigrating to the US and settling in Southern California, bringing regional recipes with them, one of them being pupusas.
*editted to add: Just for clarity, this was my response to SignyM's earlier question:
Quote:
Originally posted by SignyM
So tell me, why do we support despots? Trace that out for me step by step, listing all the despots that we supported, and show me what advatnage it has gained us in the long run (within a 30-year time frame.)
Just my attempt to inject levity into a discussion about a topic that saddens me (our ongoing by-any-means-necessary approach to foreign policy).
*editted once again
And while I'm digressing from the thread...
Quote:
originally posted by MacBaker
Just so you know, yes I do own my own business (actually one of three partners). I'm a filmmaker/producer, and our production company just finished our first feature length film.
Congrats!
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:At one point the US had the clever idea to help Afghanistan's mujaheddin against Russia with money and arms. Eventually one portion of the now well-armed (Thanks! USA!) mujaheddin became the Taliban, took over the country, and provided a safe harbor for bin Laden. Afghanistan became a terrorist stronghold with HELP from the US, not b/c of US inattention.
Our presence in Uzbekistan also means that Uzbekistan is less likely to simply fall off the map and become another terrorist stronghold, as Afghanistan once did.
Quote:First mistake is saying that the Islamic faction is trying to 'reestablish the oppressive Islamic regime'. Uzbekistan is a former Soviet Republic and has never had an 'oppressive Islamic regime'. Second one is trying to pass off Karimov's policies as a reaction to Islamicism. From the start he has taken brutal action against ALL political opponents, including intellectuals and those looking for democratic reforms. It's just naked despotism, which you are trying to excuse for some obscure reason. Finally, calling Karimov's reign 'illiberal' is so inaccurate, it's a lie.
Uzbekistan’s internal politics are shaky at best, with a violent faction seeking to reestablish the oppressive Islamic regime and a secular but illiberal government taking oppressive reactionary measures to Islamic extremists.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by danfan:
This is off topic... but then so was the original comment about Bush's dad. So sue me.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/27/bush.war.talk/
http://www.ipsnews.net/new_nota.asp?idnews=25915
The younger Bush didn't say "He beat my dad." He said "He tried to kill my dad"... referring to the alleged assassination attempt by Hussein supporters following the war to liberate Kuwait. This claim has been vigorously debated. Some say the 11 confessions and convictions are compelling evidence that the plot was real. Some say Hussein wasn't crazy enough to do such a thing and the confessions were beaten out of the accused. And on it goes... depends on which axe you want to grind.
To both MacBaker and Sigmanunki... I googled "bush hussein dad" and got a wad of hits on the first page. Took me 2 seconds. Everyone, lighten up a little.
OK... back on topic and resume the bar fight.
Actually danfan, I knew this. Like you said, it was easy to find if one bothered doing some simple research. I was hoping Sigmanunki would at least attempt to back up his quote by looking it up himself, but he was too busy repeating the same rhetoric over and over, without sources and facts to back him up. Funny how expecting accountablity for one's statements makes me a troll to some.
BTW, it ain't a real bar fight until a chair is thown through the mirror on the back of the bar.
I'd given some thought to movin' off the edge -- not an ideal location -- thinkin' a place in the middle.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:No. Afghanistan was liberated from Soviet Occupation with HELP from the US. The terrorist stronghold part didn’t come until we left the country to fend for itself with no one but Pakistan to overlook the re-establishing of its infrastructure.
Originally posted by rue:
At one point the US had the clever idea to help Afghanistan's mujaheddin against Russia with money and arms. Eventually one portion of the now well-armed (Thanks! USA!) mujaheddin became the Taliban, took over the country, and provided a safe harbor for bin Laden. Afghanistan became a terrorist stronghold with HELP from the US, not b/c of US inattention.
Quote:The world existed prior to the Soviets. Uzbek territory was under the rule an ‘oppressive Islamic regime’ from the eight century until the Russian Czars invaded in the 19th century.
Originally posted by rue:
First mistake is saying that the Islamic faction is trying to 'reestablish the oppressive Islamic regime'. Uzbekistan is a former Soviet Republic and has never had an 'oppressive Islamic regime'.
Quote:I’m not excusing anything. It is perfectly accurate to describe the Uzbek government as illiberal. Actually, it may be inaccurate to describe it as “naked despotism.” A despotism is a government by the absolute rule by a despot. Uzbekistan on the other hand has a constitution, a legislature, a court system, a President and even universal suffrage. In practice most of the power rest in the executive branch, so one can draw an analogy to despotism, but that doesn’t mean it’s a lie to call it illiberal. I don’t even know what the hell that means. Even if it were a “naked despotism” how is that not illiberal?
Originally posted by rue:
Second one is trying to pass off Karimov's policies as a reaction to Islamicism. From the start he has taken brutal action against ALL political opponents, including intellectuals and those looking for democratic reforms. It's just naked despotism, which you are trying to excuse for some obscure reason. Finally, calling Karimov's reign 'illiberal' is so inaccurate, it's a lie.
For crying out loud, did you get up on the wrong side of the bed?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by MacBaker:
BTW, it ain't a real bar fight until a chair is thown through the mirror on the back of the bar.
And then you get thrown through the energy window on the front of the bar and your spaceship has to swoop in to rescue you from the Alliance supporters on Unification Day...
[heavy sigh]
can't hardly wait for the movie...
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Finn- I hope you get to that worst-case scenario. I know what MY worst-case scenario is, but I don't want to put words in your mouth. TTUL
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
1) How am I not following my own rules? Statment is not truth.
2) I answered your question. My original post was just stating that this is in character for this administration and more specifically a certain person. This is on topic which was followed by your tantrum (continued is subsequent posts) which was not. Read the thread title, this isn't a thread on the Iraq war.
3) You are not defending your views in a way that I have dictated that I will respond in kind.
4) If you want to know what this all has to do with this thread title read my original post.
5) I will not be further pulled off topic. Any parting remarks will be ignored until you can respond within my outlined parameters.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
One last note before I go (just read this now).
Quote:
Originally posted by danfan:
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/ALLPOLITICS/09/27/bush.war.talk/
http://www.ipsnews.net/new_nota.asp?idnews=25915
The younger Bush didn't say "He beat my dad." He said "He tried to kill my dad"... referring to the alleged assassination attempt by Hussein supporters following the war to liberate Kuwait.
Thank you for the links.
But, I did admitt to not knowing the exact quote and did label my "quote" as a paraphrase. My conclusion was that this was (in part at least) a revenge thing. This is supported by the information posted and linked to. MacBaker, there's you go.
Now I resume my off topic silence to not be interupted again.
Quote:
Originally posted by danfan:
Everyone, lighten up a little.
I will speak generally here. Not pointing anyone in particular (seriously).
I won't speak for anyone else, but quite frankly I'm rather tired of fighting when I should be debated. And the only reason why is that people have blinders to what is actually going on. They read and listen to spin and belief instead of facts.
So, I'm just stating that I'm not going to participate in the crap anymore. I have more inportant things to do than to try to talk reason into some that is delusional. EDIT: Or someone that is just going to spout insults.
And now back to those more important things.
----
"Canada being mad at you is like Mr. Rogers throwing a brick through your window." -Jon Stewart, The Daily Show
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Post-Soviet lawlessness (GO USA!!) and a country awash with US arms were the foundations for US approval of, and later relations with, the Taliban - on the theory that it didn't matter how brutal they were as dictators, they were the only group that might stabilize the country enough for business to be conducted. The US was willing to invest in Afghanistan (pipeline, infrastructure) and was in the active process of negotiating with the Taliban. I won't be tedious about the back and forth. The whole scheme broke down when the Taliban went with Petrobas. Up to that point, the US was friendly with them.
The terrorist stronghold part didn’t come until we left the country to fend for itself with no one but Pakistan to overlook the re-establishing of its infrastructure.
Quote:Really. WHICH 'oppressive Islamic regime' ruled Uzbekistan between the 8th and 19th centuries?
The world existed prior to the Soviets. Uzbek territory was under the rule an ‘oppressive Islamic regime’ from the eight century until the Russian Czars invaded in the 19th century.
Quote:Then it must be perfectly accurate to describe the surface of the sun as 'warm'. Words exist because people need to communicate accurate distinctions.
It is perfectly accurate to describe the Uzbek government as illiberal.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Well the short answer is that I don’t know what the worst scenario is. It’s almost impossible to say. It depends on too many variables, so at the very best I would be speculating. But if I were to speculate, I would say that a worse case scenario would be Uzbekistan ending up like Afghanistan was prior to the US lead liberation from the Taliban. If, for instance, the Hizb ut Tahrir were to gain control and reestablish the Caliphate, it may look every much like Afghanistan under the Taliban. It could offer a place where al Qaeda or al Qaeda like Islamic terrorist organizations could operate unobstructed. That’s particularly likely if the US were to ignore Uzbekistan, as if ignored Afghanistan, but that’s just one of many possibilities.
Originally posted by SignyM:
Finn- I hope you get to that worst-case scenario. I know what MY worst-case scenario is, but I don't want to put words in your mouth. TTUL
Quote:Arab Caliphs? Samanid Turks? Temur Dynasty? The Kokand Khanate? Bukhara Emirate? All were oppressive to one degree or another. By today’s standards they would be considered despotisms.
Originally posted by rue:
Really. WHICH 'oppressive Islamic regime' ruled Uzbekistan between the 8th and 19th centuries?
Quote:Yeah, you’re right. It’s such a liberal regime. God, you’re kooky.
Originally posted by rue:
Then it must be perfectly accurate to describe the surface of the sun as 'warm'. Words exist because people need to communicate accurate distinctions.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME