A Boring Dystopia

9723 readers

779 users here now

Pictures, Videos, Articles showing just how boring it is to live in a dystopic society, or with signs of a dystopic society.

Rules (Subject to Change)

--Be a Decent Human Being

--Posting news articles: include the source name and exact title from article in your post title

--Posts must have something to do with the topic

--Zero tolerance for Racism/Sexism/Ableism/etc.

--No NSFW content

--Abide by the rules of lemmy.world

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

882

Headlines (lemmy.world)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

177 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago (1 children)

The first example was Zaire, so if you don't even know what you are linking I'm not going to go through it line by line.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2015/08/18/jimmy-carters-blood-drenched-legacy/

William Blum writes in Killing Hope: U.S. Military and CIA Interventions Since World War II that Carter, who had been in office for only two months, was reluctant to involve his administration in a far-reaching intervention whose scope and length could not be easily anticipated.

However, Carter did provide “non-lethal” aid, while he did not protest as European countries offered military aid, and Morocco sent several thousand of its US-trained military forces to aid Mobutu.

“President Carter asserted on more than one occasion that the Zaire crisis was an African problem, best solved by Africans, yet he apparently saw no contradiction to this thesis in his own policy, nor did he offer any criticism of France or Belgium, or of China, which sent Mobutu a substantial amount of military equipment,” writes Blum. [1]

He didn't criticize, what an absolute bloodthirsty monster!

[–] [email protected] -2 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I apologise for getting a minor detail wrong about the order of items in the list, I underestimated how critically important the order of items in that list was to you.

For instance it seems like you saw a chronological list and when the very first item - which is actually quite damning and from which you omitted the inciting incident of a CIA-backed assassination - wasn't a full-on war crime, you decided it was all frivolous. I can see why it's so easy to get someone like you to ignore war crimes when you're that unwilling to even read about them. I called out East Timor by name and you still ignored it. I can't hold your hand through the entire article. History is for people who are willing to do some reading.

Anyway, if you go just a few items down the list, you read this:

The genocidal slaughter reached its peak in 1977, On March 1, 95 members of the Australian Parliament sent a letter to Carter claiming the Indonesian troops were carrying out “atrocities” and asking the American President “to comment publicly on the situation in East Timor.” [3]

The response was crickets. Carter ramped up aid with funding and weapons to the murderous Indonesian regime, brazenly flaunting the human rights requirements imposed on American aid.

So that's a war crime, even by the extremely lax rules imposed by the US on themselves and to which they will never hold themselves accountable.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Oh look, you edited your first post with a snide remark!

What are you talking about? Please be specific. All I’m getting are vague “nuh-uh” answers. If you want to actually convince anyone that you have a point, you need to make it.

The ~~first charge~~ (edit: it was the third charge, I do apologise for expecting anyone to read more than a few paragraphs),

Then you offer an 'apology' for getting a detail wrong...

I apologise for getting a minor detail wrong about the order of items in the list, I underestimated how critically important the order of items in that list was to you.

I do not accept your apology.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 4 months ago

My comment made some actual points, but you chose to be petty and make this comment instead of actually engaging with those points.

Don't worry, the apology was insincere as you guessed, because the mistake was in fact not a very important one. But your obstinate, petulant avoidance of the war crimes that I know you've now read about directly says everything anyone needs to know about where you stand on the issue.

It's quite clear that you don't accept my apology, and that that was what you chose to focus on. This seems like a pretty clear admission that you have nothing of worth to say on the matter. Well, not anything so gracious as that, but you wouldn't make a comment like this if you did have anything worthwhile to say, so I'll take it.

[–] [email protected] -3 points 4 months ago

pee pee poo poo