Ok, so I've read the detailed reply but I'd still like to know how far the dictator would have to go, until you'd be
for humanitarian intervention.
My objection to NATO involvement in Libya (or anywhere else) is not because such intervention is external in and of its self, its not an objection because it is foreign. It is because it is imperialism, not assistance. I reject the entire concept of humanitarian intervention
Time machine mode > Germany 1942:
Imagine if in Germany 1942, Hitler hadn't yet embarked on any of his excursions into foreign territories but, nevertheless been systematically driving millions to their deaths in concentration camps.
Where, in this imaginative scenario, today's communication technologies are also available and there's a 1942 version of wiki leaks, with young German whistle-blowers exposing the atrocities by uploadeding the anally compiled documentation.
Reading through the documents that had been linked to the 1942 version of Urban75, would you have argued against humanitarian intervention on the "Hitler Exposed" thread of the politics forum?
Time machine FFWD > Germany 1951 and the economic miracle - the "Wirtschaftswunder"
Feeling a little uncomfortable for not supporting the imperialists going in and crushing the tyrant responsible, who then go on to steer an industrial colony that would develop into a very successful economy with a high average standard of living?
dylans said:
There is no free lunch so why invite the wolf to dinner
dylans said:
nevertheless I do see a difference between seeking assistance from the enemy of a foreign occupying power (such as Arabs or Irish seeking German assistance) and seeking the assistance of imperialist powers in a purely internal national democratic struggle.
This is where I don't get your stringent rules. They seem to overlap. I'm not buying this justification of alignment. Choosing the worst of two evils just on the basis that one has colonialised
my land so I'll join up with a dictator that's invaded someone else's land.
The Irish wouldn't be too popular with the Poles, Czechs, Dutch, French, Russians and so on...
dylans said:
In the case of Arab or Irish nationalists, they were attempting to tempt the enemy of a foreign occupying power to support their struggle in order to pit one against another and weaken the hold of the nation occupying them.
So jumping back in the time machine, to the imaginary geopolitical playground and it's 1943, where the RA have managed to weaken the hold of the British so much that Hitler has swept through the Benelux states and strolled into the UK taking absolute control.
The British go underground to start a resistance against the Nazis.
The Irish meanwhile are nervously pondering the next part of the master plan.
What do the Irish do when they find out they don't really like the fucking Nazis?
Sure, it's possible that the NTC will find themselves the same position, it's also possible that the critical mass of the Libya people embrace the capitalist lifestyle that they're most likely to receive, now that Ghadiffi's been run out of town.
We'll have to wait and see.