Tweet
Originally posted by LordShiva
to Vietnam for getting rid of Pol Pot.
to Vietnam for getting rid of Pol Pot.
-
Yeah, while we celebrate this, let us just ignore the fact that they actually supported it from it's birth
With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven Weinberg -
They supported it at its birth, not from its birth.Originally posted by BlackCat
Yeah, while we celebrate this, let us just ignore the fact that they actually supported it from it's birth
THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTFComment
-
Well, if you want the nice story, then the supported them from their birth until they became too much a nuicance.Originally posted by LordShiva
They supported it at its birth, not from its birth.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Which is more than can be said for Thailand, the US, or China.THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTFComment
-
I do hope that you know about the support the US gave to the Khmer Rouge after they committed one of the worst atrocities in the 20th century.Originally posted by BlackCat
Well, if you want the nice story, then the supported them from their birth until they became too much a nuicance.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio RegumComment
-
At least Vietnam has the excuse of ignorance of who they were and what they were capable of while they were supporting them...12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio RegumComment
-
Nope - please post links.Originally posted by KrazyHorse
I do hope that you know about the support the US gave to the Khmer Rouge after they committed one of the worst atrocities in the 20th century.With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
Originally posted by BlackCat
Nope - please post links.The Times editorial of June 24 recognizes a small problem in pursuing Pol Pot, arising from the fact that after he was forced out of Cambodia by Vietnam, "From 1979 to 1991, Washington indirectly backed the Khmer Rouge, then a component of the guerrilla coalition fighting the Vietnamese installed Government [in Phnom Penh]." This does seem awkward: the United States and its allies giving economic, military, and political support to Pol Pot, and voting for over a decade to have his government retain Cambodia’s UN seat, but now urging his trial for war crimes. The Times misstates and understates the case: the United States gave direct as well as indirect aid to Pol Pot—in one estimate, $85 million in direct support—and it "pressured UN agencies to supply the Khmer Rouge," which "rapidly improved" the health and capability of Pol Pot’s forces after 1979 (Ben Kiernan, "Cambodia’s Missed Chance," Indochina Newsletter, Nov.-Dec. 1991). U.S. ally China was a very large arms supplier to Pol Pot, with no penalty from the U.S. and in fact U.S. connivance—Carter’s National Security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski stated that in 1979 "I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot...Pol Pot was an abomination. We could never support him but China could."
In 1988-89 Vietnam withdrew its army from Cambodia, hoping that this would produce a normalization of relationships. Thailand and other nations in the region were interested in a settlement, but none took place for several more years "because of Chinese and U.S. rejection of any...move to exclude the Khmer Rouge. The great powers...continued to offer the Khmer Rouge a veto," which the Khmer Rouge used, with Chinese aid, "to paralyze the peace process and...advance their war aims." The Bush administration threatened to punish Thailand for "its defection from the aggressive U.S.-Chinese position," and George Shultz and then James Baker fought strenously to sabotage any concessions to Vietnam, the most important of which was exclusion of Pol Pot from political negotiations and a place in any interim government of Cambodia. The persistent work of the Reagan-Bush team on behalf of Pol Pot has been very much downplayed, if not entirely suppressed, in the mainstream media.
THEY!!111 OMG WTF LOL LET DA NOMADS AND TEH S3D3NTARY PEOPLA BOTH MAEK BITER AXP3REINCES
AND TEH GRAAT SINS OF THERE [DOCTRINAL] INOVATIONS BQU3ATH3D SMAL
AND!!1!11!!! LOL JUST IN CAES A DISPUTANT CALS U 2 DISPUT3 ABOUT THEYRE CLAMES
DO NOT THAN DISPUT3 ON THEM 3XCAPT BY WAY OF AN 3XTARNAL DISPUTA!!!!11!! WTFComment
-
Thailand wasn't going to start a fight with a Vietnamese Client state since that would likely have not netted them much and cost a whole lot while China and the US weren't close enough to really do much.Originally posted by LordShiva
Which is more than can be said for Thailand, the US, or China.Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
I'm not quite sure what to say about that (thank you anyway). It seems to be after knocking down the pol pot regime, so is it what KH refers to ?Originally posted by LordShiva
The Times editorial of June 24 recognizes a small problem in pursuing Pol Pot, arising from the fact that after he was forced out of Cambodia by Vietnam, "From 1979 to 1991, Washington indirectly backed the Khmer Rouge, then a component of the guerrilla coalition fighting the Vietnamese installed Government [in Phnom Penh]." This does seem awkward: the United States and its allies giving economic, military, and political support to Pol Pot, and voting for over a decade to have his government retain Cambodia’s UN seat, but now urging his trial for war crimes. The Times misstates and understates the case: the United States gave direct as well as indirect aid to Pol Pot—in one estimate, $85 million in direct support—and it "pressured UN agencies to supply the Khmer Rouge," which "rapidly improved" the health and capability of Pol Pot’s forces after 1979 (Ben Kiernan, "Cambodia’s Missed Chance," Indochina Newsletter, Nov.-Dec. 1991). U.S. ally China was a very large arms supplier to Pol Pot, with no penalty from the U.S. and in fact U.S. connivance—Carter’s National Security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski stated that in 1979 "I encouraged the Chinese to support Pol Pot...Pol Pot was an abomination. We could never support him but China could."
In 1988-89 Vietnam withdrew its army from Cambodia, hoping that this would produce a normalization of relationships. Thailand and other nations in the region were interested in a settlement, but none took place for several more years "because of Chinese and U.S. rejection of any...move to exclude the Khmer Rouge. The great powers...continued to offer the Khmer Rouge a veto," which the Khmer Rouge used, with Chinese aid, "to paralyze the peace process and...advance their war aims." The Bush administration threatened to punish Thailand for "its defection from the aggressive U.S.-Chinese position," and George Shultz and then James Baker fought strenously to sabotage any concessions to Vietnam, the most important of which was exclusion of Pol Pot from political negotiations and a place in any interim government of Cambodia. The persistent work of the Reagan-Bush team on behalf of Pol Pot has been very much downplayed, if not entirely suppressed, in the mainstream media.
http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/hermansept97.htmWith or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.
Steven WeinbergComment
-
ecthy
1. the sino-soviet split was brewing since 1957, well before 1969
2. Chinese support to NVN was not contradicted by the split. It was a way to gain prestige in the movement vs USSR, and to compete for support of NVN. think of Iran and KSA today and their relationship to Hamas.
3. As long as the US was present in Indochina, the US was perceived as a threat in Beijing, and this limited the Sino-soviet split from becoming complete.
The Chinese in 1972 still wanted the US out of VN, and were not sure the USSR would gain the loyalty of VN."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
The US, fearful of continued Soviet expansion in the 1980s, supported a COALITION of insurgents. One of them was the Khmer Rouge, but the US never directly supported the KR, and was embarrassed by their presence in the coalition. The US was not in position to dictate to China about the make up of the coalition, and could not hope to succeed without Chinese support.
one of the benefits of the end of the cold war, was the diminished need for the US to be associated, even indirectly, with such unsavory elements."A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin BuberComment
-
Yes. After Khmer Rouge got knocked out, the US supported them and sister organisations against the new Cambodian government. One of the more despicable examples of US realpolitik in recent history.Originally posted by BlackCat
I'm not quite sure what to say about that (thank you anyway). It seems to be after knocking down the pol pot regime, so is it what KH refers to ?
12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio RegumComment
-
Much worse than supporting mujahadeen, for example. Or even Saddam.
KR is one of better examples of pure evil since the death of the NSDAP12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio RegumComment
-
Explanation. Not an excuse. The support for the KR cannot be adequately justified by fear of sov expansion in what had become a backwater of the CW.Originally posted by lord of the mark
The US, fearful of continued Soviet expansion in the 1980s
The support was immoral, stupid and inexcusable.12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
Stadtluft Macht Frei
Killing it is the new killing it
Ultima Ratio RegumComment
Comment