Another American Beheading...

[The_Meach]

If we replace democratic society with the true words you meant: "a stable, free society". The sentence would read as: Stable societies do not produce violent movements. That's a tautology. It's like saying "black birds are never white".

Let's assume, for this argument, that a stable society could PRODUCE a violent movement. That doesn't mean the original society wasn't stable. It's not a tautology b/c we're not arguing whether the society is stable. We're trying to decide if the society could PRODUCE "X" (a violent movement). We're talking about whether a black bird could PRODUCE white offspring (to get silly about it).

And one more time now, I do NOT hold that violent movements are NEVER found in stable societies. I hold that mass movements that threaten whole geographic regions are not found in stable societies.

Stable societies have never produced violent movements, because if they had a violent movement, they wouldn't be stable by definition.

Well, I'd consider 90's USA pretty stable. The American Militia 'movement' was in an otherwise stable society. I don't want to be stuck arguing no violent movements have ever been in otherwise stable societies...

Am I making sense here? I feel like I'm not getting through...

[Almaci]

The US has destabilised democraticaly elected governments in central Asia, the middle east, central America, South America etcetera, in doing so they created mass movements that threatened whole geographic regions.

Consider yourself humiliated.

[The_Meach]

I believe the topic for discussion was whether or not stable, free societies spawn mass movements that threaten whole geographic regions. I wasn't aware we were talking about the (temporary/quasi-) 'alliances' the US has made in the past w/ne'er-do-wells like Noriega/Pinochet.

I'm racking my brain trying to come up w/any foreign mass movements that threaten whole geographic regions that we've created. And please don't say "omgwearmedOsamaversustheSoviets!!!!11". The radical Islamist movement was well on its way to threatening the Mid East (see: Iran; also: Anwar Sadat) b/4 the 1980's when we gave some guys in caves some Stingers (hardly what I'd call 'spawning').

(ADDED)
Columbia's pretty effed up these days, mostly b/c of drugs (which we really want them to crack down on). But did we spawn FARC? Is FARC a mass movement? Does it threaten the entire region?

[Almaci]

Urm those too were only made possible becouse of Western meddling.
The so called islamic revolution and rise to power of Khomeini was only possible becouse the US helped the Shah oust a democraticaly elected government and become the local dictator for instance.

[haohmaru]

The US has destabilised democraticaly elected governments in central Asia, the middle east, central America, South America etcetera, in doing so they created mass movements that threatened whole geographic regions.

Consider yourself humiliated.

One could argue that those governments were hardly granite examples of stable governments. If the U.S. could destabalize an entire country that easily, they were probably on the brink of major change without meddling anyway.

Equally, if you think that what now comprises the EU and what was the Soviet Union didn't have a hand in an equal number of similar events than you can consider yourself naive. Britain and France were in Asia *LONG* before the U.S. ever got there and each were guilty of the same meddling that you describe. Same goes for the U.S.S.R in Afghanistan and if you want to go back far enough, how about a little Italy and Germany in North Africa? How about Russian, French and German "interests" in controlling Iraq and it oil reserves? Funny how these never seem to get mentioned in any of your biased U.S. assasinations.

In any event, to pretend that the other members of the "seven" are any less involoved in dozens of foreign countries to protect and serve their own interests is just plain idiotic.

[StriderKyo]

Urm those too were only made possible becouse of Western meddling.
The so called islamic revolution and rise to power of Khomeini was only possible becouse the US helped the Shah oust a democraticaly elected government and become the local dictator for instance.

Come on. I think the Iranians can at least be held responsible for their own revolution. And the "Islamic rise to power" in the middle east began well before Khomeni., and was as much a product of British post-colonial diplomatic neglect as anything else.

tautology

Holy crap. Vocabuilary respect +1.

[Almaci]

One could argue that those governments were hardly granite examples of stable governments. If the U.S. could destabalize an entire country that easily, they were probably on the brink of major change without meddling anyway.

Equally, if you think that what now comprises the EU and what was the Soviet Union didn't have a hand in an equal number of similar events than you can consider yourself naive. Britain and France were in Asia *LONG* before the U.S. ever got there and each were guilty of the same meddling that you describe. Same goes for the U.S.S.R in Afghanistan and if you want to go back far enough, how about a little Italy and Germany in North Africa? How about Russian, French and German "interests" in controlling Iraq and it oil reserves? Funny how these never seem to get mentioned in any of your biased U.S. assasinations.

In any event, to pretend that the other members of the "seven" are any less involoved in dozens of foreign countries to protect and serve their own interests is just plain idiotic.

I never claimed otherwise so stop acting as if i did.
Smear and tear, hit and run, just like those guys who called me a saddam and terorist sympathiser while in reality I was the one protesting his actions as rumsfeld shook his hand, declaring guilty by asociation, asociations the detractors made no less.
How does it feel to be a propaganda tool Haomaru id really like to know.

[The_Meach]

Holy crap. Vocabuilary respect +1.

That's a tautology

TNL has a lot of quality posters that post interesting content. Yays!

[Diff-chan]

LOL. Almaci you really are fucking ridiculous.

[Almaci]

Come on. I think the Iranians can at least be held responsible for their own revolution. And the "Islamic rise to power" in the middle east began well before Khomeni., and was as much a product of British post-colonial diplomatic neglect as anything else.



Holy crap. Vocabuilary respect +1.

Iran isnt even on the peninsula, its west Asia.