• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    71 year ago

    What if they don’t have the power to topple their oppressors without foreign intervention?

    It seems that’s the case for Iran.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      61 year ago

      I agree. A revolution would be a violent and bloody one. I worry it would still be ineffective. Conservatism is like cancer. The treatment is deadly for both the disease and its victim.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      3
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Foreign infervention is almost always the worst possible option.

      It only makes sense in the case of active mass genocides (think WWII, Cambodia or Serbia). Toppling an oppresive but stable regime through foreign power always ends in destabilisation and even more suffering to the people.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        Foreign infervention is almost always the worst possible option.

        Agreed.

        Anyone who suggests otherwise needs to look at the very long history of foreign attempts at “intervention” in Afghanistan.

        The country was left worse than it was after each of those many failed attempts.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Serbia? Serbia (SR Yugoslavia) did a lot of nasty shit, but 99’ intervention was not a product of a genocide, let alone a massive one.

        UN ruling in question, BBC article.

        Crimes against humanity and war crimes did take place, it said, but “the exactions committed by Milosevic’s regime cannot be qualified as criminal acts of genocide, since their purpose was not the destruction of the Albanian ethnic group… but its forceful departure from Kosovo”.

        Srebreica was a genocide, but was not perpotrated by actual Serbia, if it makes any difference…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      …wasn’t foreign intervention the primary reason why Iran is in this mess in the first place?

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        01 year ago

        That means it’s impossible to intervene with positive results.

        Is that what you’re implying? Just say it, lol. But you won’t because you know how stupid it sounds.