5 ms·

Better solution: assassinate Lukashenko and all his henchmen. Put the fear of god in every dictator worldwide.

by silexia 5y ago

smallstepforman 5y ago
Snowden? Assagne?
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
retrac 5y ago
While Lukashenko may not, some of those dictators have the effective power to assassinate Western leaders in retaliation. I'm really not sure we want to open that can of worms. It'll also blow right up in our face in terms of the desired effect. In many cases, I figure doing that would actually boost support for the regime. Many dictators are ruling right now on nationalist sentiment -- "I may be a thug but I am strong and I keep our nation safe from the Americans [or whoever]". Bumping them off will not exactly dispel that myth. If they survive, or if power transfers stably to their second-hand-man or woman, they can now portray themselves and their nation as besieged by hostile foreign powers which will stoop as low as assassination to manipulate the nation's destiny for their ulterior objectives. (The best propaganda, after all, is the truth.)
- Mountain_Skies 5y ago
  I face palm pretty much every time any US administration, Democratic or Republican, makes statements about Venezuela. Seems like every single time it only makes things worse and gives whoever is running the place into the ground at the moment something external to point to as being the source of the people's misery. The desire to "do something" is strong and hard to resist but often is counterproductive.
- baybal2 5y ago
  > While Lukashenko may not Anybody can assassinate just anybody. Even heads of G7 can only afford security barely enough to defend against lone attacker with a battalion sized force constantly following them. It's just they don't want to because they are afraid.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- Zak 5y ago
  When I was a child, I remember my parents suggesting that instead of whatever war was in the news at the time killing thousands, the leaders of the respective countries should have a duel. Assassinations aren't quite that, but perhaps the world would be better if that, rather than warfare was how countries that couldn't resolve their differences escalated. Leaders would have a more personal stake in resolving conflict diplomatically, and fewer people would die when they failed. I should note this is only half-serious before somebody writes up a reply about a scenario where more extreme leaders take their place and there's a worse war as a result, or some such.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
croes 5y ago
Ruling with fear? That's what dictators do.
quickthrowman 5y ago
What happens in the ensuing power vacuum? See: The US in Iraq, Libya post-Ghaddafi, etc It also sends a very strong message to Putin that the US may not want to send
- baybal2 5y ago
  > What happens in the ensuing power vacuum? What a heck is that "power vacuum?" I never managed to comprehend the mechanics of Western thought process arriving to that philosophical concept. > It also sends a very strong message to Putin that the US may not want to send You want to send this message. You want Putin to be intimidated, and scared, and not laughing at you in the face. Very massive intimidation. Gaddafi's intimate encounter with a bayonet type of one. It will be also a message of unity, for the world to see that the West can still Desert Storm any Hitler wannabe like was in time when the West was big, and menacing, and not the other way around.
  - zozbot234 5y ago
    > What a heck is that "power vacuum?" I never managed to comprehend the mechanics of Western thought process arriving to that philosophical concept. It's called a "vacuum" by analogy with physics, because unscrupulous folks will rush in to fill it. This kind of chaos is not something you actually want, since it lets the worst guys around win easily. You want to give Mr. Dictator the best opportunity to establish well-founded transition/succession mechanisms (including respect for fundamental rights, which is even more important than democratic voting norms!) and then step down willingly and orderly, with a golden parachute to sweeten the deal. The West has gotten this stuff horribly wrong as of late, even as recently as the latest wars in the Middle East, but that's no reason to do even worse.
    - baybal2 5y ago
      That's a really fucked up thought process
      - quickthrowman 5y ago
746487482 5y ago
Has anything ever improved after an assassination?
- rasz 5y ago
  France did.
  - anigbrowl 5y ago
    If you refer to the French revolution's eventual execution of the deposed monarch, I'm not sure that qualifies as 'assassination.'
  - wearywanderer 5y ago
    France "improved" after the Revolution if you ignore that minor tangent where, in the chaos and confusion that followed, a man declared himself emperor and thought to conquer all of Europe (starting a series of wars that lasted for more than ten years and killed millions.) But at least Europe got much needed civil reform in the process, I guess?
- 3np 5y ago
  Does Rasputin count?
anigbrowl 5y ago
Even when this sort of thing is organized privately rather than by some rival polity, the ramifications tend to get out of hand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Franz_Ferdinand_of_Austria https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Franz_Ferdinand_of_Au... A more effective solution is to sponsor a resistance movement (whether militant or peaceful) and this has been done so often that it's been systematized in both military and civil terms by various imperial powers, but with (imho) increasingly mediocre outcomes and increasing risk of blowback.

Better solution: assassinate Lukashenko and all his henchmen. Put the fear of god in every dictator worldwide.

smallstepforman 5y ago

Snowden? Assagne?

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

retrac 5y ago

While Lukashenko may not, some of those dictators have the effective power to assassinate Western leaders in retaliation. I'm really not sure we want to open that can of worms. It'll also blow right up in our face in terms of the desired effect. In many cases, I figure doing that would actually boost support for the regime. Many dictators are ruling right now on nationalist sentiment -- "I may be a thug but I am strong and I keep our nation safe from the Americans [or whoever]". Bumping them off will not exactly dispel that myth. If they survive, or if power transfers stably to their second-hand-man or woman, they can now portray themselves and their nation as besieged by hostile foreign powers which will stoop as low as assassination to manipulate the nation's destiny for their ulterior objectives. (The best propaganda, after all, is the truth.)

Mountain_Skies 5y ago
I face palm pretty much every time any US administration, Democratic or Republican, makes statements about Venezuela. Seems like every single time it only makes things worse and gives whoever is running the place into the ground at the moment something external to point to as being the source of the people's misery. The desire to "do something" is strong and hard to resist but often is counterproductive.
baybal2 5y ago
> While Lukashenko may not Anybody can assassinate just anybody. Even heads of G7 can only afford security barely enough to defend against lone attacker with a battalion sized force constantly following them. It's just they don't want to because they are afraid.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
Zak 5y ago
When I was a child, I remember my parents suggesting that instead of whatever war was in the news at the time killing thousands, the leaders of the respective countries should have a duel. Assassinations aren't quite that, but perhaps the world would be better if that, rather than warfare was how countries that couldn't resolve their differences escalated. Leaders would have a more personal stake in resolving conflict diplomatically, and fewer people would die when they failed. I should note this is only half-serious before somebody writes up a reply about a scenario where more extreme leaders take their place and there's a worse war as a result, or some such.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

croes 5y ago

Ruling with fear? That's what dictators do.

quickthrowman 5y ago

What happens in the ensuing power vacuum? See: The US in Iraq, Libya post-Ghaddafi, etc It also sends a very strong message to Putin that the US may not want to send

baybal2 5y ago
> What happens in the ensuing power vacuum? What a heck is that "power vacuum?" I never managed to comprehend the mechanics of Western thought process arriving to that philosophical concept. > It also sends a very strong message to Putin that the US may not want to send You want to send this message. You want Putin to be intimidated, and scared, and not laughing at you in the face. Very massive intimidation. Gaddafi's intimate encounter with a bayonet type of one. It will be also a message of unity, for the world to see that the West can still Desert Storm any Hitler wannabe like was in time when the West was big, and menacing, and not the other way around.
- zozbot234 5y ago
  > What a heck is that "power vacuum?" I never managed to comprehend the mechanics of Western thought process arriving to that philosophical concept. It's called a "vacuum" by analogy with physics, because unscrupulous folks will rush in to fill it. This kind of chaos is not something you actually want, since it lets the worst guys around win easily. You want to give Mr. Dictator the best opportunity to establish well-founded transition/succession mechanisms (including respect for fundamental rights, which is even more important than democratic voting norms!) and then step down willingly and orderly, with a golden parachute to sweeten the deal. The West has gotten this stuff horribly wrong as of late, even as recently as the latest wars in the Middle East, but that's no reason to do even worse.
  - baybal2 5y ago
    That's a really fucked up thought process
    - quickthrowman 5y ago

746487482 5y ago

Has anything ever improved after an assassination?

rasz 5y ago
France did.
- anigbrowl 5y ago
  If you refer to the French revolution's eventual execution of the deposed monarch, I'm not sure that qualifies as 'assassination.'
- wearywanderer 5y ago
  France "improved" after the Revolution if you ignore that minor tangent where, in the chaos and confusion that followed, a man declared himself emperor and thought to conquer all of Europe (starting a series of wars that lasted for more than ten years and killed millions.) But at least Europe got much needed civil reform in the process, I guess?
3np 5y ago
Does Rasputin count?

anigbrowl 5y ago

Even when this sort of thing is organized privately rather than by some rival polity, the ramifications tend to get out of hand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Franz_Ferdinand_of_Austria https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_Franz_Ferdinand_of_Au... A more effective solution is to sponsor a resistance movement (whether militant or peaceful) and this has been done so often that it's been systematized in both military and civil terms by various imperial powers, but with (imho) increasingly mediocre outcomes and increasing risk of blowback.