------------------
"Diplomacy is the art of Internationalising an issue to your advantage"

Field Marshal Military Project
http://fieldmarshal.virtualave.net

There's a reason we call it the Social Equality Party. EQUALITY is a key theme. Depriving the people of the right to vote is a critical flaw in Stalnism, and denies equality. All must be able to vote, and moreover, have an EQUAL vote. Trotsky, in 1925, wanted to give the vote to the people (keep in mind, Russians had never had a vote, due to the Tsarists). His basic theory was that the revolution was safe. There was no longer a need for the dictatorship of the proletariat. Democracy, and thus equality, had to come into being in Soviet Russia. Stalin, fearful of what this could mean to his beuracracy and his own power, denied Trotsky's request.

Democracy itself is not inheritently perfect, either. The Nazis were elected to power. Slavery would not have been voted out in the south. One of the lessons I learnt from Julius Caesar, and incorporate into my mindset when portraying Marc Antony, is that skilled oration can mislead the people. Let us briefly consider Josef Goebbels.

Dr. Joseph Paul Goebbells was the Reich Minister of Education and Enlightenment, or, propaganda. He was responsible for "enlightening" the people, into whatever Hitler wanted them to believe. He practiced the Big Lie Theory

1) Tell a lie often
2) Tell a lie strongly
3) Keep it protected from scrutiny

If those three critera were met, Goebbels believed, then the lie would work. History has proven him right. Hearstian techniques are used even now. How many people knew before April that there was a conflict in Serbia? How many know that the KLA is executing an equally brutally war against Serbs, Romas and Gypsies even as we speak? Americans were told that genocide was being carried out in Kosovo. Americans believed it. Americans didn't know that, all told, less than 3,000 Kosovan Albanians died. If they did, if CBS or CNN came out with daily coverage of the war from the Serbian soldier POV, or if the New York Times carried editorials opposed to the war, or if ABC had reported EXTENSIVELY on the terrorist background of the KLA and on the true nature of the Kosovan conflict, would Americans been as gung-ho to carry out the war?
Likewise, if Americans knew the plight of the Kurdish people, that they're the victims of a policy by Turkey that would make Slobodan Milosevic look like Mickey Mouse, would there be an outcry to stop sending the Turks arms? But you don't see that on NBC, and Meet the Press never focuses on the PKK.

What does all this mean? Essentially, I advocate republicanism (representative democracy) as it is the best form of government. Yet, it is incompatible in the shadow of business, and it is worthless without STRONG education and freedom of speech. Only when people are exposed to many different views can they come to a decision. As I'm fond of saying, I respect a man more if he comes to a wrong decision after reasoning on it than if he comes to that same decision because he is told to.

(hmm, any ideas what Nirvana song I Should tap for my siggy?)

He was Hitler's propaganda man.

------------------
"There are some upon this earth of yours, who lay claim to know us, and who do their deeds of passion, pride, ill-will, hatred, envy, bigotry, and selfishness in our name, who are as strange to us and all out kith and kin, as if they had never lived. Remember that, and charge their doings on themselves, not us."
-- The Ghost of Christmas Present (A Christmas Carol -- Charles Dickens)
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm

From a friend.

#1. The semantics of "equality." We all know that equality in most cases is an illusion, even in "equality under the law." Ask anybody whose ever tried to exercise free speech in school. people are not physically, mentally, or socially equal.

#2. The idea that 3000 dead people isn't genocide... it sure smells like it to me.
"How many does it take before it becomes wrong, Admiral?"
Of course, this leads in to all sorts of quibbles about Iraq and such, too... so it's not necessarily a justifiable quibble.

------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson

This is not just restricted to the USA, everyone does it. Or tries anyway.

------------------
"Diplomacy is the art of Internationalising an issue to your advantage"

Field Marshal Military Project
http://fieldmarshal.virtualave.net

It also serves to demonstrate the hypocrisy. Are 3,000 Albanians worth more than 100,000 Kurds or 20,000 Columbians or 5,000 Tamils or 50,000 Chechens?

Moreover, numbers do matter. If we had an accurate count of how many Vietnamese "we" killed, would it surpass that? There is a point where casulaties of war turn into genocide. This isn't a numbers game, this is a judgement call. A small percentage of a population being shot, by paramilitary organizations, is not genocide. Not by the dictionary or connatative definition. Genocide is rounding up of mass groups of people to be interned and shot or burned. Genocide is sealing the border's of a country after hauling out all the food. Genocide is when 90% of a population is exterminated. (I know what you're going to counter with is the arguement that "well, we had to stop Milosevic before that point" to which I will counter with "The small military incursion into Kosovo is a farther cry from genocide than was rounding up the Japanese to put into internment camps, which could've turned into genocide with but the stroke of a pen" so let's not go there) Finally, genocide is the destruction of an entire indigenous population through disease, guns, and destroying their source of food. (if you're wondering, I named Nazi Germany, Stalinist Ukraine, Occupied Poland, and the Native Americans)

If you wish to stop "other Kosovos" from occuring, look to Turkey and the Kurds, look to Australia and the Aborigines, look to Sri Lanka and the Tamils, look to Columbia and the FARC supporters, look to Mexico and the Mayan Indians, look to Russia and the Chechens.

Slobo Milosevic is an awful, awful man. But he's no worse than Tudjman in Croatia, who the US actively supports. If you doubt me, just ask the Krajina Serbs. Well, you can't. And soon, you won't be able to ask the Kosovo Serbs. Thus the ancient riddle, if a Serb screams while he dies, does he make a sound? (apparently the Nazis the Serbs killed DID make sounds)

Let me leave you all with one last thought. Is it not slightly hypocritical that the man who commands KFOR, and would've commanded a ground invasion to, supposedly, stop an ethnic cleansing against the Kosovo Albanians brought about by their legally recognized rulers who claim to be stopping a terrorist organization, was the same man who was second in command of British troops in Derry on Bloody Sunday?

Something to think about.

As an aside, I hear through the grapevine that Milosevich has cut off all heat oil shipments and power to locations in Serbia whose populations called for his ouster.

Can anybody confirm or deny this?

------------------
Calvin: "No efficiency, no accountability... I tell you, Hobbes, it's a lousy way to run a Universe." -- Bill Watterson

Do not be surprised if he is ousted soon. The US actively supports that, which probably hurts more than helps. What people fail to consider is that his own supporters were turning against him, as they opposed the war against Kosovo. Bombing simply brought them to support Slobo. Historically, we can see this is often the case. The Germans, for instance, who were not enamored with Adolf Hitler, were not enamored with the Americans who brought death from above. There were people in Dresden. And that is one of the many reasons I oppose bombing campaigns of the ilk. More often than not it is the civilians who bear the brunt, and with little strategic result.

The Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor so the U.S. would be unable to interfere in the pacific, and because the U.S. had decided not to sell oil to a country that was expanding its borders by conquering other nations. Germany declared war on the U.S. because it was allied with Japan. No-one expected America to fight. Should we be sorry they were wrong?

The problem with war is, once it begins, people die and continue to do so until well after the shooting stops.

--Baloo

------------------
"If knowledge is power, then willful misinformation is the work of the Devil."
-- Barbara "the man who sought Liberty's talents" Mikkelson
http://members.tripod.com/~Bob_Baloo/index.htm

Incidentally, why is it that condemning one side automatically leads people to believe you're supporting the other?