3 ms·

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 t

by 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.

by retrac 5y ago

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.