Another country starts to fall into Daesh control... Of course, it's the one where USA armed "opposition"

[Ellestar]

I agree that going into Iraq wasn't a good idea.

But we can't say we made things worse/better there yet. Decades from now you can start to make an educated guess. At this point there's ISIS in control of some areas, Kurds in control of some areas, and Iraqis in control of some areas. How it plays out will determine whether it's better/worse than if they all were stuck under a genocidal dictator like Saddam.

LOL. So you destroy everything, take their oil and then say, hey, let's wait 50 years, maybe they'll rebuild themselves?

The wealth wasn't because of Gaddafi, it was because of the oil. It's not like they were drilling it out of his ass. Gaddafi is the one who wasted that wealth in driving his nation into civil war and international pariah status.

Huh? Braaaains?
The wealth wasn't because of Gaddafi, it was because Gaddafi shared wealth from the oil with his people. So yes, it was because of Gaddafi who didn't just took it all for himself and his cronies, like western corporations do in other countries.
How he isn't a good ruler for his people if he does that?

[Ellestar]

Seriously, Aeson, open your damn eyes. If you want to look at absolutely abysmal regime, look at Ukraine. They had THE best starting position of all Soviet republics after the fall of USSR - best agricultural lands in entire Europe, one of the strongest industrial regions of the Soviet Union, natural resources, educated population, good climate, easy sea access to half of Europe. And now they're one of the poorest of all the Soviet republics, poorer than Africa. That's because their "elites" stolen everything possible, and when there was nothing left to steal from USSR legacy, they continued to steal anyway. Even EU stopped giving them money because they know for a fact that everything given to Ukraine will be stolen. But you call them "democracy" and support them, hypocrites.

And Gaddafi was a good leader exactly because he made his country a better place with the money he controlled, instead of just stealing it, like Ukrainian leaders did for all 25 years it existed.

[Aeson]

Why do you oppose Communism and Democracy? Communism is the opposite of Capitalism. And your (and now our) real system of government is Capitalism, not Democracy - in practice people have no real power in neither Capitalism nor Communism (but in Communism in theory they should).

You equated the extremists of each. I simply pointed out that Democracy is different than Communism or Sharia in that you can support Democracy without supporting oppression, whereas there are forms of oppression that are fundamental tenants built into Sharia and Communism.

Communism (though not all communist systems) is a social, religious, economic, and political system. Capitalism is largely an economic system. Democracy is largely a political system. Neither is comprehensive the way Communism is.

The people can have had a large amount of power in any system when they band together in enough numbers. Democracy has a built in function for allowing that without toppling the system. In the US the Labor movement, Womens' Rights movement, Civil Rights movement were all successful at changing the country from within using the system that was in place.

I mean, the same as in fanatically believing that their ideas are the only right ideas, and they should be brought to everyone, by force. In that sense, "democracy" fanatics are exactly the same - they start coups and wars to bring "democracy", and it's widely supported by fanatics. Real reason to start these wars and do these coups is to make more profit for Capitalists, of course, but fanatics don't see it - they're fanatics, after all.

People who try to oppress others are always wrong to do so whatever ideology they claim to follow. I agree. Some ideologies just require it, while others can function without that oppression.

Not really, "liberal democracies" (in fact, capitalist-controlled states) live well only by exploitation of people in the colonies (direct colonies or economic ones). You can't bring everyone to the same level of quality of life - if anything, world just doesn't have enough oil an metal to do so, just check consumption rates per capita in different countries.

It's not true that it requires exploitation of people. That exploitation is actually a way of undercutting the foundation of the economy for a quick local gain at the expense of the system in general.

We could achieve a very high standard of living for everyone in the world with modern technology if we wanted to do so as humans. (Sadly we don't tend to care much about others even within our own borders, and outside our own borders significantly less still.)

Recently capitalists started to exploit cheaper workforce in other countries, yeah, but keyword is "cheaper", they don't want to make workers richer, they want to make them poorer by paying less, so they don't exactly improve quality of life of the worker class, quite the opposite.

Not the opposite. The opposite would be trying to decrease the quality of life. The reality is they generally don't care much if it increases or decreases.

But yah, globalization has been handled badly. I've spoken at length on that issue many times myself.

For example, what exactly did you built in Iraq, other than restoring the oil pumping (that is now owned by Western coprorations, so that's just capitalists making profit). What exactly did you do to improve the quality of life in Iraq, to give people jobs or education, after you conquered it?

I didn't claim we rebuilt Iraq.

Oh come on. How a society where official religion is money can be stable in the long run?

There is no official religion in the US.

[NICE MOBIUS]

Wow, I've seen it all, but Aeson uniting Ellestar with the rest of us against him - surely a feat that not even the great Ben Kenobi ever achieved!!!

[Aeson]

Seriously, Aeson, open your damn eyes. If you want to look at absolutely abysmal regime, look at Ukraine. They had THE best starting position of all Soviet republics after the fall of USSR - best agricultural lands in entire Europe, one of the strongest industrial regions of the Soviet Union, natural resources, educated population, good climate, easy sea access to half of Europe. And now they're one of the poorest of all the Soviet republics, poorer than Africa. That's because their "elites" stolen everything possible, and when there was nothing left to steal from USSR legacy, they continued to steal anyway. Even EU stopped giving them money because they know for a fact that everything given to Ukraine will be stolen. But you call them "democracy" and support them, hypocrites.

I'm not that familiar with the situation there and wouldn't offer any serious analysis of it. I certainly have never shown support for any of the factions involved there currently. (Not even for whatever the West's involvement is there.)

[Aeson]

Wow, I've seen it all, but Aeson uniting Ellestar with the rest of us against him - surely a feat that not even the great Ben Kenobi ever achieved!!!

It's because I am a moderate who can see both sides of the issue. Thus I can piss off both sides. Though in this case we're missing any of the "USA USA #1!" camp ... so you're just all sucking dictator ****.

[C0ckney]

[Aeson]

And Gaddafi was a good leader exactly because he made his country a better place with the money he controlled, instead of just stealing it, like Ukrainian leaders did for all 25 years it existed.

The actual result of his oppressive regime is that Libya is in ruins. He destroyed a lot of the good that was accomplished along the way. He did so by supporting terrorism, creating/exporting terrorists, blackmailing trading partners, oppressing his own population, ruining relations between Libya and most other countries (sometimes again after being given a second chance). He could have easily lead Libya to a bright future just by not being a world class ass to the international community and being willing to share the wealth and power rather than keep all the power and share most of the wealth with his loyalists. That's not a great leader. It's one that ran their country into the ground.

The West deserves it's share of blame, but so does Gaddafi. (As do various other factions)

[NICE MOBIUS]

Utter deluded hogwash!

[Kidlicious]

Wow, I've seen it all, but Aeson uniting Ellestar with the rest of us against him - surely a feat that not even the great Ben Kenobi ever achieved!!!

You think it's hard to unite authoritarians?

[kentonio]

Utter deluded hogwash!

Are you seriously trying to claim Gaddafi was a good leader? Would you like to nip up to Lockerbie and tell them all about it too?

[C0ckney]

but that's not the point though is it. the point is that libya was a place where most of its people could lead decent lives as long as they didn't involve themselves with politics and now, following a western bombing campaign the led to gaddafi's ouster, it's a ruin. the same pattern came be seen with other western interventions, where the countries have been left far worse off than before.

[kentonio]

but that's not the point though is it. the point is that libya was a place where most of its people could lead decent lives as long as they didn't involve themselves with politics and now, following a western bombing campaign the led to gaddafi's ouster, it's a ruin. the same pattern came be seen with other western interventions, where the countries have been left far worse off than before.

Yes its exactly the point. A place where people could lead decent lives unless they wanted any kind of self determination or say over their own lives. In other word a ****ing dictatorship. The kind we're happy to ignore as long as they don't interfere with our own interests. I suppose you were ok with the Iraqi one too right? Where as long as you didn't interfere with politics, or have the wrong ethnic group or be born an attractive girl, you'd be just fine..

**** is wrong with you guys, seriously?

[C0ckney]

sometimes people are better off living in a dictatorship than in the situation after the dictator's removal. libya and iraq are very clear examples of that. as we have seen, when we do intervene, we usually make things worse; therefore, we shouldn't intervene.

[kentonio]

That's lovely of you to decide for them, especially considering our complicity in the dictatorships arising in the first place, and the countless rewards that situation has given us since.