Iran elections - TTLG Forums

Taffer36 on 21/6/2009 at 06:30

I guess what you can end up deciding upon is that ideologically we SHOULD intervene at some point, but that realistically we shouldn't, since it's been quite some time since we've intervened with actual proper intentions.

But ideologically I couldn't give a rat's ass about sovereignty. This protest is definitely much more than just the election fraud. It's a catalyst for something MUCH more important. It's the protestors' way of reaching out to the rest of the world; they're tired of putting up with the shit they have for as long as they have. If we could truly enter and deal justice properly, of course we should. They're an independent nation BUT THEY'RE REBELLING FOR A REASON, BECAUSE THINGS ARE BROKEN.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ixitixl
IMO, the USA (or whoever) could liberate half of Africa without too much sweat.

That'd be nice and I realize that you're just making a point, but still, I'm would assume that nothing close to that is true. In regions as unstable as parts of Africa, it's not just about "beating the bad guys", it's about setting in place an infrastructure that can fend for itself, maintain itself, support the people, etc.

Your point being that America isn't intervening in Africa because it's selfish, which is true to an extent, but I also would assume that it's not very practical. Although it is a fair point that we could just transfer the HUGE amounts of money and lives we've spent in Iraq over to Africa.

Tocky on 21/6/2009 at 07:13

Quote Posted by Ixitixl

I find it difficult to name one which had a positive result for the people being 'liberated' (even the US involvements in WWI&II are dubious).

South Korea. So far.

On bad days I am that cynical Ixitixl. On those days I too see us as anthills too close to one another. But as long as we have a true vote then there is at least the possibility of getting someone in who isn't so very compromised that they at least try to do the best for the most. I think you have shown how difficult that is though. So many differing ideas on what that is exactly. And the cost. How do you gauge that without a crystal ball?

Koki on 21/6/2009 at 07:40

Quote Posted by Tocky

South Korea. So far.

Oh right, and that's why all koreans hate america now.

Denenberg on 21/6/2009 at 07:41

This is what is happening (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sjHW8TX68WE)

icemann on 21/6/2009 at 07:42

Considering how much they worship games by a certain Americain company, thats just so believeable Koki.

nickie on 21/6/2009 at 09:35

(http://iran.whyweprotest.net/news-current-events/1200-why.html) This is undoubtedly not related to that youtube video - but . . . it could be. The first and last posts are the relevant ones.

The main site: (http://iran.whyweprotest.net/)

gunsmoke on 21/6/2009 at 10:53

Neda :(

Fragony on 21/6/2009 at 11:03

look at the bright side, that video is going to make a difference, not so easily forgotten, how she looks 'you' in the eye before starting to give up blood. If you want to show ugliness this is perfection.

Koki on 21/6/2009 at 11:04

Did I comment on how the case is mostly backed by angry rebel teens and thieves? I do not think I did

Ixitixl on 21/6/2009 at 13:51

Quote Posted by Taffer36

Yes! The grand problem in Africa is lack of education, primitivism, superstition... these things ensure that they keep standing at the bottom, without much of a chance for real change.

I know a bit about this, as I did my final thesis (is that what it's called in English?) at high school on the subject of African development.

Take Congo, for example. 3rd largest country in Africa, with a large and ethnically wildly diverse population. Had a history of extremely brutal Belgian colonialism until 1960, when they gained independence. Belgian retreat from the country was rather fast and sudden, without much time for transition preparations. A country with a very complex ethnic structure and very low educational levels, suddenly gaining independence (IIRC, the country had ~40 million people... out of which 16 (sixteen people in total!!!) had a PhD!). Is there any surprise that civil war immediately started, and never really stopped - raging on even today?

Also, all those famines... there's that old proverb: "Give a man a fish and feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, and feed him for a lifetime." We give a bit of aid, send some sacks of rice and a bit of medical supplies, occasionally give a financial boost which is immediately eaten by corruption. The people whom aid actually reaches often end up depending on it, without means/knowledge how to fend for themselves. This is not a way to help.

An arid climate, for instance, is no excuse for poverty and famine. Just look at Israel - with a bit of planning and irrigation they managed to turn desert areas into lush agricultural ones which give a greater amount of products than plantations in many developed temperate-climate countries!

[diversion]

Btw. back to US interventions and such - if they 'freed' Iraq, why don't they free, for instance, Zimbabwe? Here's some justification: Robert Mugabe, Zim's president since 1980, lost the democratic elections last year. Yet, he refuses to genuinely concede power to the opposition which defeated him. As for his ruling, he seems worse than Saddam to me.

Actually, things seemed pretty good at first. Prior to 1980, Zimbabwe was dominated by white colonialists, who ruled the country apartheid-style. Yes, they were on friendly terms with South Africa. The black majority was impoverished and robbed of rights. After Mugabe & co brought down the apartheid and gained power, living standard was on the rise, education was very good for African standards and things seemed to be going nice for a while (though not for the whites, whom Mugabe persecuted with a vengeance). But after 1991, shit hit the fan... and among other things, the land reform which was aimed at transferring land from whites to blacks so they could have a bit of the prosperity didn't exactly give good results... at all.

Mugabe was showing his ugly side more and more, and not only to the whites. Besides torture, political imprisonment, murders, intimidation and all the nice things dictators do, he has one great accomplishment, his life work if you will:
When Mugabe was elected in 1980, Zimbabwe was one of the main food producing countries in Africa. They had more than enough for themselves, and plenty left for export (even if it was dominated by whites). Today, Zimbabwe's population is starving! He managed to turn one of the comparatively well-off countries in Africa into an impoverished butthole. All hail the great ruler!

[/diversion] :)

Saying that the US, for instance, can conquer half of Africa might be a bit too much... but Africa can be helped - a lot. All that's needed is a bit of will, planning and some funds. Rich countries can allocate those - but guess who has the power to do it? Politicians! And they almost unanimously don't give a shit.

Even without political backing, we as individuals can help... only that we generally don't care either. Oh sure, when the local journalist has cancer or the local kid needs some expensive medicine, we answer the call for aid. We donate a little money for the cause, and feel good about it. We satisfied our altruism for a while by saving a person.

Meanwhile, 35000 people, 30000 of which are children under the age of 5, die from starvation each day. When a real, nearby person is ill or dies, we feel bad... but 30000 kids dying only today - naw, that's just statistics. Nameless, faceless people we've never seen and who will never be missed. We don't care... and if we just diverted all the money we spend on dog and cat food (only that money is enough!) into buying rice and such, all people on Earth could theoretically have enough to eat! And there's certainly enough food being produced - developed countries make huge surpluses which often end up being thrown away.

Things can be helped, but we just don't care enough.