Robert Mugabe must die

[Provolution]

Good you are disgusted, makes you feel as better human being. I believe in some laws and some human rights, but Mugabe has made sure he lost his rights. This is why he has to go. You may defend him for principle, as your notion of human suffering is based on a principle, not consequences. So you can choose, your principles and the life of Mugabe, or the many innocents that suffer in Zimbabwe on a routinely basis thanks to "understanding humanitarian intellectuals" who are more worried about rhetoric and principles than about survival and freedom. I am to set up a poll on this.

You disgust me even more, as you want these people to suffer in order to make you look good and "humane", and to keep Mugabe alive to show the power of a principle. And if Mugabe died, who would really know what happened? It could look like a stroke if well conducted.

If I revelled in human suffering, I would advocated genocide. I didn't. I only asked for an assassination of a very bad leader. So do not call me a nazi for no reason. That technique is called "Brown splatting", making people look like nazis even if they aren't - and a socialist rhetoric method used for politically correct censorship.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

Good you are disgusted, makes you feel as better human being. I believe in some laws and some human rights, but Mugabe has made sure he lost his rights. This is why he has to go. You may defend him for principle, as your notion of human suffering is based on a principle, not consequences. So you can choose, your principles and the life of Mugabe, or the many innocents that suffer in Zimbabwe on a routinely basis thanks to "understanding humanitarian intellectuals" who are more worried about rhetoric and principles than about survival and freedom. I am to set up a poll on this.

This highlights your partisan hackery. Why are you not advocating the deaths of the Bush administration? They have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands, and caused millions more to become refugees in their own countries. Where's your outrage at that prick? Why aren't you spouting BS about he needs to suffer so that others may not?

You disgust me even more, as you want these people to suffer in order to make you look good and "humane", and to keep Mugabe alive to show the power of a principle. And if Mugabe died, who would really know what happened? It could look like a stroke if well conducted.

Principals are what others have fought and died for. Sometimes doing the right thing isn't nice, and making the decision to do the right thing isn't easy. If anything, you're displaying weakness in willing to do something disgusting. If you actually had a shred of character, you'd be willing to do the right thing if it meant added suffering.

The ends don't justify the means. Democracy is supposed to be the epitome of that truth.

And lastly, practically speaking your ideas are stupid. Kill Mugabe? Sure, and watch as tens of thousands die in the subsequent struggle to replace him, as a dozen people in Zimbabwean military and political forces launch a civil war that would probably devolve into genocide.

So yes, here, you are advocating genocide.

If I revelled in human suffering, I would advocated genocide. I didn't. I only asked for an assassination of a very bad leader. So do not call me a nazi for no reason. That technique is called "Brown splatting", making people look like nazis even if they aren't - and a socialist rhetoric method used for politically correct censorship.

But you are a Nazi. You want to kill people because you think it would make the world a happier place, much like the Nazis. You advocate murdering people you disagree with. You're clearly not a human being.

 

[Provolution]

This highlights your partisan hackery. Why are you not advocating the deaths of the Bush administration? They have caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands, and caused millions more to become refugees in their own countries. Where's your outrage at that prick? Why aren't you spouting BS about he needs to suffer so that others may not?

I am not supporting the Bush administration, and I look forward to a new Clinton Administration. Bush is inconsistent, as he is ok with collateral damage, but not with assassinations. You are the one more like Bush, disregarding assassination like a tool.

Principals are what others have fought and died for. Sometimes doing the right thing isn't nice, and making the decision to do the right thing isn't easy. If anything, you're displaying weakness in willing to do something disgusting. If you actually had a shred of character, you'd be willing to do the right thing if it meant added suffering.

You haven't fought and died for these principles, have you? All I can see is some sporadic and principle driven threadjacking from an old Dominion.
The ones dying in WW2 were real men, which understood and believed in these principles, and saw assassinations as part of a bigger picture.
I guess several of WW2 soldiers would have supported killing Mugabe, given their outlook and values. Only dreadful socialists and liberals have hijacked the WW2 legacy and applied that to protect some of the worst leaders on this planet. Well, you can be willing to do the "right" thing (or left thing for you) even if it means added suffering. I believe assassinating Mugabe is the way to go, and I see several agree with me.

The ends don't justify the means. Democracy is supposed to be the epitome of that truth.

That is your individual view of democracy, and the ends certainly justify some means. For you, democracy is a means to make yourself look good at the expense of others.

And lastly, practically speaking your ideas are stupid. Kill Mugabe? Sure, and watch as tens of thousands die in the subsequent struggle to replace him, as a dozen people in Zimbabwean military and political forces launch a civil war that would probably devolve into genocide.

Stupid? There would probably not be a civil war killing tens of thousands. How can you forecast that? With some red, socialist crystal ball with some evil red eye of Mordor you predict the future with? You rather see the same tens of thousands die under the leadership of Mugabe, than risk having the same amount of people die in a fight for freedom. Most people knows that removing a command structure creates a power vacuum mostly filled with more sane people. In most cases, failed states do not appear afterwards.

Most likely, Zimbabwe would work out more like South Africa, with some courts and so on.

So yes, here, you are advocating genocide.

You twisted the argument to make yourself look good at my expense, so that is hollow Soviet rhetoric to me. I am really glad you guys lost the cold war, and are reduced to some rabble anti-globalization movement.

But you are a Nazi. You want to kill people because you think it would make the world a happier place, much like the Nazis. You advocate murdering people you disagree with. You're clearly not a human being.

I think it is against the forum rules to call people nazis, but that is probably a digression. I may advocate murdering one person I disagree with. But the intent of brutal death, is not locked to an ideology. There are many people in jail, even many like you, who have killed people for disagreeing with them.
Being a socialist does not mean you are nice person, but that you claim you are the nicer person. There are many socialists in jail, which is good, and nazis and islamists for that matter.

Anarchists killed a lot of people prior to WW1, and is the main source of political assassinations.

 

[Pasi Nurminen]

I am not supporting the Bush administration, and I look forward to a new Clinton Administration. Bush is inconsistent, as he is ok with collateral damage, but not with assassinations. You are the one more like Bush, disregarding assassination like a tool.

You didn't answer my question, so I'm going to pose it again: why aren't you whining about the need to assassinate George Bush? He's responsible for far more human suffering than Robert Mugabe.

You haven't fought and died for these principles, have you? All I can see is some sporadic and principle driven threadjacking from an old Dominion.

This doesn't make sense. What Dominion? Where? Why wasn't I sent the memo?

The ones dying in WW2 were real men, which understood and believed in these principles, and saw assassinations as part of a bigger picture.

Uh, in World War Two we were engaged in warfare with nations that had attacked us. In such instances, all bets are off. What you are doing is proposing the murder of someone who has done you no wrong during peacetime. Big . .. .. .. . difference.

I guess several of WW2 soldiers would have supported killing Mugabe, given their outlook and values. Only dreadful socialists and liberals have hijacked the WW2 legacy and applied that to protect some of the worst leaders on this planet. Well, you can be willing to do the "right" thing (or left thing for you) even if it means added suffering. I believe assassinating Mugabe is the way to go, and I see several agree with me.

The only people that agree with you are republican party hacks. I see people saying things like "I wouldn't be sad to see him go, but we can't assassinate him."

In your desperate attempt to sound adult, you throw every label in the book at me. The World War Two legacy... what? You mean the legacy of fighting against those who have attacked us/declared war on us? I don't see how that has anything to do with murdering someone who has done you nothing wrong. Most World War Two veterans I've ever met, including several members of my family in both the Canadian Army and the Red Army would not advocate doing that.

Let me put it in terms so simple that even you could understand it: if my friend speeds down the highway at 160 km/h in a 50 km/h zone, that doesn't give me the right to speed down the same route at 80 km/h with the justification that my misdeed was less bad than his.

That is your individual view of democracy, and the ends certainly justify some means. For you, democracy is a means to make yourself look good at the expense of others.

I haven't used the word . .. .. .. .nuckle to describe someone in years, but you're forcing my hand here. My view of democracy is that it's something to make myself look good at others' expense? Silly me, I always thought I believed that democracy involved giving everyone a voice, and providing people in my own country the means to have a good life.

I'm so lucky to have random jerkoffs on the internet who have never met me tell me what I believe.

Stupid? There would probably not be a civil war killing tens of thousands. How can you forecast that? With some red, socialist crystal ball with some evil red eye of Mordor you predict the future with? You rather see the same tens of thousands die under the leadership of Mugabe, than risk having the same amount of people die in a fight for freedom. Most people knows that removing a command structure creates a power vacuum mostly filled with more sane people. In most cases, failed states do not appear afterwards.

Most likely, Zimbabwe would work out more like South Africa, with some courts and so on.

You know nothing about Zimbabwe. The nation's political landscape is highly factionalized, and the only thing preventing civil war is Mugabe's constant shakeups in his cabinet.

As for your absurd historical views: Iraq! How could you forget . .. .. .. .ing Iraq? The power structure there was removed, and way more people have died since than during Saddam's entire rule.

You twisted the argument to make yourself look good at my expense, so that is hollow Soviet rhetoric to me. I am really glad you guys lost the cold war, and are reduced to some rabble anti-globalization movement.

...and? I haven't twisted your arguments one bit. You advocate murder. You advocate a course of action that would kill thousands. You advocate genocide by proxy. Your words.

I think it is against the forum rules to call people nazis, but that is probably a digression. I may advocate murdering one person I disagree with. But the intent of brutal death, is not locked to an ideology. There are many people in jail, even many like you, who have killed people for disagreeing with them.
Being a socialist does not mean you are nice person, but that you claim you are the nicer person. There are many socialists in jail, which is good, and nazis and islamists for that matter.

Anarchists killed a lot of people prior to WW1, and is the main source of political assassinations.

Great, except I'm not an anarchist.

Many people like me... what? Do you know me? Have we ever met? I've never killed anyone, most certainly not for disagreeing with me.

And I've yet to claim that I'm a nice person, dickweed. I'm fully aware that I can be a prick at times, and we share that in common. The difference is, I'm a sane prick. You, on the other hand, are clearly not sane. You're not even human.

 

[IglooDame]

Moderator Action: Provolution and Pasi, cease the personal attacks. Thread closed pending review.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889