I think the problem (which exists for perfectly good and logical reasons) is that we have no actual rules about who we'll deal with and who we'll support. There's actually no rule against America supporting a dictatorship if that's what gets the job done. As in the case of Stalin or Hitler, it's often just a choice between two or more pretty bad options anyway. Stalin would be ranked somewhere on the list of the Top Five Murderous Dictators of the 20th Century, but Hitler is number one with a bullet. It's not like anybody thinks we should have backed Hitler to stop Stalin (not anybody that people take very seriously anyway), so I think that we can sort of look back and go, "Well, that makes sense. Kind of."

But it only makes sense to back a mass-murdering dictator even temporarily if it accomplishes some further goal, and that goal should always be (in this order) the betterment (defined as the further guaranteeing of all rights in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence) of the American people, and then the rest of the world. The logic is, dictatorships rarely support democracies, so we need to make our first priority keeping ourselves free. Therefore, we should never support a dictatorship in America (or for Americans), but it may be strategically necessary to support one somewhere else, briefly.

The problem is when it gets to the mass-murder stage. All dictatorships are not equal -- hypothetically, a benevolent dictatorship is possible -- but a mass-murdering dictatorship is by definition not benevolent. I really think we're supposed to be against that, as a country. The whole mass-murder thing. We've learned our lesson since our own genocidal campaign against the Indians. At least, I think we have. I know I don't want a repeat of that, 'cause personally, I think we'd be a lot better off as a country right now with a little more Native American influence, just as one example of how mass-murder sucks.

So I think that there should be some kind of basic guideline, at least, for which kind of government we'll deal with and under what circumstances. Obviously it can't be a hard rule 'cause international politics are always giving rise to situations that nobody anticipated and unpleasant alliances can't be taken off the table. But since we're actually the most powerful nation on Earth, I think we can probably afford to be picky about who we get into power -- or more precisely, about who we get killed.

so what you're saying is that once the dictator crosses the line he becomes an evil dictator. LOL

Germany would have lost World War 2 regardless. They couldn't even manufacture a single aircraft carrier and weren't even fully mechanized. They still relied on hundreds of thousands of horses.

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

So need to recognise the millions of Red Army men who lost their lives, germany would have failed anyways.

absolutely true and Stalin makes Suharto a genocidal miget. you will notice that England was even higher thatn Suharto on the cento -kilokiller list. hindsight moralizing about an existential moment is an exercise in furtility. Even the poor jews had to "collaborate" with the nazis. it's a big deal the the ashleys, but when an existential threat exist hard choices will be made.

Red Army men? You mean slaves who bowed to their masters and butchered other people under their authority.

Regardless, no country is capable of conquering and occupying the world.

__________________
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." - Schopenhauer

So in your eyes Suharto is really a good person just a bit misunderstood??

I don't think so.


Is the above supposed to mean something????

If Suharto had been a communist you'd be wearing his image on a T-SHIRT.

__________________
McCain 2008
"We make war that we may live in peace"
"...peace is the highest aspiration of the American People. We will negotiate for it, sacrifice for it, we will never surrender for it, now or ever."
"War critics can no longer credibly argue that we are losing in Iraq, so now they argue the war costs too much."
"Oderint dum metuant"
http://members.cox.net/neddy/bobhope_kerfuffles.wmv
http://youtube.com/watch?v=RnfflRNpwKA
http://youtube.com/watch?v=j-QYIP7o2-A

If Stalin was a right wing authoritarian neocon you'd have a moustache.

Come on DuH2 what sort of retort is that? That's an insult to a joke.

It is amazing how a murderous dictator is not evil when he is on our team, but once he is no longer on our team he becomes evil. Go Figure.

E.Pluribus Unum

__________________
people of power have NO good will and people of good will have NO power.