▲ 317 ▼ ‘Disturbing Surge’ in Afghan Female Suicides, Attempted Suicides (www.voanews.com) submitted 2 years ago by alphacyberranger@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world 57 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 70 points 2 years ago* (2 children) Their only dignified escape from the conservative nightmare is by their own hand. Nothing good in history has ever come from conservatism. Nothing. Conservatism is a plague of oppression and death. And the plague is spreading. permalink fedilink source hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] bobman@unilem.org 7 points 2 years ago (3 children) What if they don't have the power to topple their oppressors without foreign intervention? It seems that's the case for Iran. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] TimeNaan@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JackOfAllTraits@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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... permalink fedilink source parent [–] bobman@unilem.org -3 points 2 years ago Right. Let me know when these problems get solved doing something I don't suggest. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Peddlephile@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) ...wasn't foreign intervention the primary reason why Iran is in this mess in the first place? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bobman@unilem.org 0 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent [+] PilferJynx@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I wish conservatives would conserve any of those things. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bobman@unilem.org 7 points 2 years ago (3 children) What if they don't have the power to topple their oppressors without foreign intervention? It seems that's the case for Iran. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] TimeNaan@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JackOfAllTraits@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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... permalink fedilink source parent [–] bobman@unilem.org -3 points 2 years ago Right. Let me know when these problems get solved doing something I don't suggest. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Peddlephile@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) ...wasn't foreign intervention the primary reason why Iran is in this mess in the first place? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bobman@unilem.org 0 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] TimeNaan@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (3 children) 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] JackOfAllTraits@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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... permalink fedilink source parent [–] bobman@unilem.org -3 points 2 years ago Right. Let me know when these problems get solved doing something I don't suggest. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] JackOfAllTraits@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years 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... permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bobman@unilem.org -3 points 2 years ago Right. Let me know when these problems get solved doing something I don't suggest. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Peddlephile@lemm.ee 1 point 2 years ago (1 child) ...wasn't foreign intervention the primary reason why Iran is in this mess in the first place? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] bobman@unilem.org 0 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] bobman@unilem.org 0 points 2 years 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] PilferJynx@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 child) [removed by mod] permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I wish conservatives would conserve any of those things. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world 1 point 2 years ago I wish conservatives would conserve any of those things. permalink fedilink source parent