Moscow Metro Bombed

[grumbler]

Even the North Korean government has done some good.

How does that have anything to do with whether a government is evil or not?

I don't know.  I don't think governments can be evil.  I suppose you could simply define your way around the problem, but what would that solve?

[BuddhaRhubarb]

You can call anything you like evil.  Generally, I will laugh at you for it.  "Evil" is too simplistic a concept to fit any but the simplest actions at all snugly.

Unfortunately for you, things MUST be labeled, and 'evil' is a perfectly adequate label for those whose actions and motivations oppose our own.

:facepalm:

[Neil]

You can call anything you like evil.  Generally, I will laugh at you for it.  "Evil" is too simplistic a concept to fit any but the simplest actions at all snugly.

Unfortunately for you, things MUST be labeled, and 'evil' is a perfectly adequate label for those whose actions and motivations oppose our own.

:facepalm:

You shouldn't facepalm when I speak, because I traffic in the truth.

[garbon]

I don't know.  I don't think governments can be evil.  I suppose you could simply define your way around the problem, but what would that solve?

I think an entity can be evil and still take some good actions.

[Neil]

I don't know.  I don't think governments can be evil.  I suppose you could simply define your way around the problem, but what would that solve?

I think an entity can be evil and still take some good actions.

Hitler and highways and whatnot.

[citizen k]

I think an entity can be evil and still take some good actions.

Hitler and highways and whatnot.

Mussolini and railroads, China and cheap shit.

[garbon]

France and art.

[Alcibiades]

But to call a regime/system of government evil?  I could go along with that.  North Korea's government would seem to fit that title.

You can call anything you like evil.  Generally, I will laugh at you for it.  "Evil" is too simplistic a concept to fit any but the simplest actions at all snugly.

Even the North Korean government has done some good.  People in it have committed many evil actions, for sure.  But believe in "evil" governments (and even in the North Korean government as "evil") if that makes you feel better.  I will only object if you try to argue that your "evil government" idea is at all an intellectual concept.

You may object all you like if it pleases you.

I will remind you that I have one of the 50 best presidents in US history agreeing with me that North Korea has an evil regime.

Not hard to be one of the 50 best presidents in US history when there's only been 44.

[Jaron]

Which of our presidents was you referring to, boy?

[Razgovory]

Even the North Korean government has done some good.

How does that have anything to do with whether a government is evil or not?

I don't know.  I don't think governments can be evil.  I suppose you could simply define your way around the problem, but what would that solve?

I dunno, you do this all the time.  What does it do for you?

[Martinus]

I think one of the problems in the US perception of Russia is that while both the US and Russia are superpowers that tend to be perceived by various Rest of the World countries as evil, Russia actually *is* evil but some Americans tend to have a sort of unwarranted sympathy (or at least, a grudging respect) for it.

Not sure what you're referring to in terms of sympathy.  A lot of Americans still view the Russians in the same light as they viewed the Soviets.  A lot of other don't give two shits about the Russians, either way.

Personally, I've been of the opinion that it falls within our national interests to have a somewhat-strong Russia (though preferably a less anti-American Russia from what we've seen).  A weak Russia would mean a power vacuum in certain regions that could have all sorts of nasty, unpredictable consequences.  It was for that reason that I supported Russia in the Chechnya conflict.

Having said that, I think we need to be a little more cautious and a little less gracious when dealing with Putinvedev & Russia than we have been in the past decade.  I don't think the Bush administration was as naive as they appeared, but I think Russia mistook its gentle approach for naivite & weakness.

The Obama administration has no policy with Russia, so hopefully they have a supply of mis-translated reset buttons for the times things go wrong.

I think even on the American right (not all of it but some) there is this sort of feeling of connection with Russia, sort of "tough guys vs. the Euro pussies". A good example of it was the famous quote by Bush about looking into Putin's eyes.

[Martinus]

Also in the news: grumbler boggles down a thread in another retarded discussion about semantics. Film at 11.

[Martinus]

Looks like Putin needs a pretext to seize more power.

So you are the American version of those Euros, Russians, and Arabs who claimed that 9/11 was a plot for Bush to seize power.

It's a far less inconceivable scenario for the Russian secret police.  After all, it's an agency that killed millions of its fellow citizens directly, and that's staffed with trained sociopaths even today. 

This act doesn't sound like a false flag operation, but apartment building bombings that happened at a very convenient time in 1999 are suspicious.  This particular incident is mainly what fuels the conspiracy theories:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings#Ryazan_incident .

I'm not big into conspiracy theories.  While Russia (and the Soviet union have done many unscrupulous things they tend to be very ham handed about it.

That may be true. But in terms of pure motivations, I like to think that if faced with a possibility of killing 3,000 Americans and getting away with it, just to score some political points, Bush and Cheney would at least think twice, whereas if Putin had the same opportunity, only with 3,000 Russians he would do it right away.

[Martinus]

France and art.

[Queequeg]

I think even on the American right (not all of it but some) there is this sort of feeling of connection with Russia, sort of "tough guys vs. the Euro pussies". A good example of it was the famous quote by Bush about looking into Putin's eyes.

There's a certain amount of truth to it.  Also that I think Americans (until pretty recently at least) tended to think of Russians as more or less our equals on the other side of the spectrum, with the Europeans being silly and depending on either Soviet or American assistance for everything. 

That said, Bill Kristol, the American Far Right's Cappo de Retardi, recently came out with an interview defending Chechen suicide bombers , here.  Apparently Palestinian suicide bombers are war criminals bent upon the annihilation of everything right and true in the Universe, while their Chechen counterparts valiantly defend their nation's honor by blowing themselves up on Moscow subways, killing a bunch of babushkas, tourists and kids in the process. 

That may be true. But in terms of pure motivations, I like to think that if faced with a possibility of killing 3,000 Americans and getting away with it, just to score some political points, Bush and Cheney would at least think twice, whereas if Putin had the same opportunity, only with 3,000 Russians he would do it right away.

I don't think there is a lot I'd put past post-9/11 Cheney, but besides their relative innocence compared to Putin, I really don't think for a second that they would be competent enough to kill 3,000 people with a massive, coordinated faux-terrorist attack and only have a few retard dropouts find out the truth.  I think Putin and the FSB are probably more than smart enough to pull off a few strategically timed bombings, though.

I don't necessarily believe that the FSB is responsible, but I just find it far, far more plausible than anything the "Truthers" are spewing.