Reply
Tue 19 Oct, 2004 01:14 pm
Since when did Russia become such a darling of the right.
Russia has used brutal force in their fight against "terrorism" since the time when we were arming the "terrorists" in their stuggle against the old villian - "communism". And somehow now, Russia is now a valliant protagonist in the struggle against evil.
What changed?
The US supposedly won the cold war. This meant that Russia would end its brutal policies of repression and become more like the United States.
Somehow the reverse seems to be happening. Russia is returning to its roots of brutal repression in ethnic conflicts, limits on rights and autocratic control of the press.
Strangely the US is following.
Amazing how a little thing like terrorism can bring people together isn't it?
Just who has it brought together?
Bush and Putin do make a sweet couple, but I don't see either the country or the world any more unitified.
ebrown_p wrote: What changed?
Russia now has a small plutocratic elite presiding over a population mired in abject poverty and economic disfunction and the US is moving in that direction.
McGentrix's avatar is wildly ironic as well...
It was Reagan who observed "One man's terrorist is another mans freedom fighter."
Viva!
I guess I am one man, and you must be the other.
If you call blowing up a car in a crowded market freedom fighting, I guess that's your choice and someday you will be able to face your god and explain your beliefs to him. Me, I'll just let my karma be my guide.
Is an attack on a military target that kills civilians terrorism?
No, an attack on civilians that kills civilians is terrorism.
..and IF the country isn't at war WITH you and hasn't actually attacked your nation or citizens, even covertly?
How do you mean Mr. S?
Are you referring to Iraq somehow?
Does "terrorist" or otherwise illegal actions of a number of fighters in a military force mean that everyone in that force is a "terrorist"?
There is a huge difference between a county's military actions during a war and the actions of illegal enemy combatants. Do not try to compare them.
InfraBlue wrote:McG wrote:There is a huge difference between a county's military actions during a war and the actions of illegal enemy combatants. Do not try to compare them.
How so?
Yeah, How so? Were the American Minutemen (from the Revolution) illegal enemy combatants?
McGentrix wrote:How do you mean Mr. S?
Are you referring to Iraq somehow?
Actually I wasn't. A good case in point would be the 1983 invasion of Grenada...
Quote:"Soviet-Cuban colony being readied as a major military bastion to export terror and undermine democracy"
InfraBlue wrote:McG wrote:There is a huge difference between a county's military actions during a war and the actions of illegal enemy combatants. Do not try to compare them.
How so?
Well, the easy answer is that one force is ILLEGAL!
We ought not to concern ourselves so much with terrorism's silent partner at the United Nations...as we should with terrorism's not so silent partner here in the United States...specifically the moron currently in the Oval Office.
The rashness of George Bush and the incompetent adminsitration which he has unleashed on the world are a much more effective partner of the terrorists than the United Nations could ever be even if it passed resolutions in support for the next 10 years.
Wake up!
So, the attack on The Cole was not terorism?
Stumble It!
Tweet This
Bookmark on Delicious
Share on Facebook
Share on MySpace