8 ms·

Iranian Officials Asking Venezuela for Asylum in Case of Regime Change

68 points by michaeltimo 4y ago

themitigating 4y ago
It's so weird to me how rare it is that the leaders of countries are executed by the population and to even call for that upsets people regardless of what their reign is like. There's almost no incentive to be a good leader since if it all falls apart you'll just end up living luxuriously in another country. Why is there such a high value placed on human life that ignores the impact that person had upon the world? Feel free to down vote but also reply with something because I think we need to reconsider the inherent value placed on human life.
- greggarious 4y ago
  Someone told me in a bar on K Street the thing Vladimir Putin fears most is being hung from a gas station like Mussolinu, and I suspect that goes for all totalitarians. What scares me is I've met people like that at home in the USA. There is a quote by a KGB defector which I lost the cite for. "There is nowhere to defect to." They can live in luxury, but you cannot buy respect. Folks are allowed to show you, in small ways that you are forever unwelcome in civil society. They should do exactly that to folks who think they can try to get on a helicopter with a laptop bag full of egold like cyberpunk Ceaușescus that at best we will count the days until we can cheer their deaths if we cannot do the needful ourselves due to laws or norms.
  - throwaway290 4y ago
    > They can live in luxury, but you cannot buy respect. Folks are allowed to show you, in small ways that you are forever unwelcome in civil society. Ah, what wouldn't I give to feel forever unwelcome in small ways but have another country's passport/bank account/etc. Heartwarming to know it's easier for those who are running my (on paper) country into mud. Guess I'll keep running around the sanctions I'm under because of them while they live in luxury and know they will be about to keep doing it no matter what goes down. I don't think they and their helicopters should be allowed in and their funny money should not convert as it degrades democracy.
  - kevinmrose 4y ago
    Here's the KGB defector's interview you're talking about, his name was Yuri Bezmenov. https://youtu.be/yErKTVdETpw?t=4624 https://youtu.be/yErKTVdETpw?t=4624
    - greggarious 4y ago
      Thanks I'll bookmark it.
  - EGreg 4y ago
    I think the only Russian leader who ever left and lived abroad was Gorbachev. Even Navalny came back to face the music, and he wasnt even president (yet?) I do not believe they are self serving at the expense of their country and will live in a bunker while their countrymen are bombed. They all thought and think they were doing the right thing for their country. Even Yeltsin, when he did in 1993 what essentially the Peruvian guy is doing now — trying to dissolve parliament in a constitutional crisis, in order to perpetuate the “shock therapy” of privatizing everything to oligarchs while people started to starve. I an sure even Stalin thought he was modernizing the country, just as Mao later did, while people were starving. The problem isn’t that they are self serving kleptocrats. Stalin owned one suit I think, and personally was poor. Just because they love their country and think they’re helping it, doesn’t make it true that they’re helping people though. I am sure George W Bush loved USA and wanted the best for it when he invaded Iraq. As libertarians we question the basic “patriotic common wisdom” of how things are set up in the first place.
    - throwaway290 4y ago
      Hordes of them around the revolution. After there was never a serious change of power.
      - EGreg 4y ago
        Well yes, after the Russian revolution the losers fled for their lives. As did Trotsky when Stalin was seeking to kill him. I think he dressed as a woman to escape lol I am talking about subsequent leaders who actually ruled Russia. Yeltsin helped usher in the Chicago Boys reforms in Russia and he literally fired on Congress. The Peruvian guy does less than that but he is denounced - yet Yeltsin was supported by USA. There is a cover of Time Magazine w him holding an American flag saying “Yanks to the Rescue” where we claimed to have interfered in the Russian elections to have him re-elected despite a 6% (!!) approval rating. We did it so the communist party candidate wouldn’t get into power (Zyuganov). They even made a movie about it https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X1Z7pAcGQSQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X1Z7pAcGQSQ So when it comes to Russia, interfering in their elections is something we are proud of doing and even probably overstate it for propaganda purposes. That is another reason why even on a logic/hypocrisy level, very little said by large states (especially empires) means anything to intelligent people. It’s all sound bites designed to get public support for the latest policy of the latest administration, who themselves make it up as they go. Instead of working hard to hear legitimate concerns of others and prevent wars, they escalate wars. This is true across the board in Russia, China, USA etc. They supposedly “work for us” but they do such a terrible job and then we have to pay with our taxes and our boys (and kill other people by the tens of thousands) for THEIR mistakes while they never even come close to paying the price an average young male member of the public has to pay. In the Russian revolution, 20 million people died, many killing their own relatives. But not Stalin, Lenin, or any of the Bolshevik leaders. Must be nice to be the political class. And people buy this bullshit. Read “war is a racket” by Smeey Butler
  - citilife 4y ago
    > Someone told me in a bar on K Street the thing Vladimir Putin fears most is being hung from a gas station like Mussolinu, and I suspect that goes for all totalitarians. Putin has openly said he despises what the west did to Gaddafi and believes thats what they want for him. He not only fears it, but but said he fears for his civilization (Russia). The west makes it pretty easy to be feareful - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/clinton-on-qaddafi-we-came-we-saw-he-died/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/clinton-on-qaddafi-we-came-we-s... Putin asked what right the west had to assassinate Gaddafi without a trial and destroy all the countries infrastructure https://www.the-sun.com/news/2268833/vladimir-putin-killed-gaddafi-navalny-russia/ https://www.the-sun.com/news/2268833/vladimir-putin-killed-g... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-putin-libya-idUSTRE73P4L920110426 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-putin-libya-idUSTR... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/26/libya-us-british-putin-gaddafi https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/26/libya-us-briti...
    - rasz 4y ago
      This is projecting. Everything you said russia has been doing for years. Less than a week ago russians published those photos https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/zcak1k/photos_are_circulating_from_the_luhansk_region/ https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/zcak...
    - greggarious 4y ago
      >Putin asked what right the west had to assassinate Gaddafi without a trial and destroy all the countries infrastructure The purposeful destruction of infrastructure is an inexcusable war crime. But "the west" did not stick a sword up Gaddafi's butt -- that was his own people, enraged by the actions of a totalitarian. "The West" did not wander into Libya and and lynch a so called world leader who only wants norms followed when said lynch mob has formed. To kill in this manner is a crime, but it happens when so many laws and norms have been broken it's more akin to manslaughter, more akin to a concentration camp victim losing their temper, seizing a firearm, and executing their former captors. (As they say in America: "Fuck around, find out.")
      - citilife 4y ago
  - themitigating 4y ago
    "They can live in luxury, but you cannot buy respect." If they were ok with being hated by the world and some large percentage of their population why would they care about being respected? I think this is huge divide between sociopaths and normal people. You think everyone cares about honor, respect, and the like but many people just want money and or power.
    - greggarious 4y ago
      >I think this is huge divide between sociopaths and normal people. You think everyone cares about honor, respect, and the like but many people just want money and or power. I know. I worked in DC :-)
  - another2another 4y ago
    I also heard somewhere (also don't have link), that he apparently watched in horror the killing of Gaddafi multiple times, possibly imagining himself in the same situation. I wonder if there's a deepfake of that video with Putin's face instead of Gaddafi's - that would certainly freak him out :)
  - JadeNB 4y ago
    > Someone told me in a bar on K Street the thing Vladimir Putin fears most is being hung from a gas station like Mussolinu, and I suspect that goes for all totalitarians. > What scares me is I've met people like that at home in the USA. I'm trying to give this a charitable reading, but I'm puzzled by it. First, I'm pretty sure that Mussolini was shot, not hanged, but obviously that doesn't change the main sentiment. Second, I don't think I'm particularly likely to be hanged, and not much more likely than the average USian to be shot, but both those outcomes do frighten me if I think about them. So, when you say "What scares me is I've met people like that at home in the USA", do you mean people who are scared of being shot or hanged, or people who think that their likely end is being shot or hanged? Or something else? Since you're getting a lot of reasoned replies I assume your meaning is clear to others, but I'm really having trouble figuring it out.
- gizmo686 4y ago
  You want leaders to be able to give up. If staying in power is the only thing seperating a leader from the angry mob, they will fight the hopeless fight until the bitter end. If they have the option if fleeing to another country, then at some point they could decide its in their best interest to just give up.
  - themitigating 4y ago
    Hopeless fight how? Personally? Because I don't think the army won't stand with them forever.
- saint_fiasco 4y ago
  The idea is that if the leader can live luxuriously in another country, they have an incentive to stop being a bad leader and retire in luxury already. If bad leaders got executed, then the incentive for bad leaders would be to stay in power no matter the cost. The reason dictatorships turn murderous when they lose popularity is that the dictator knows they will be killed if the opposition wins, so they have no choice but to go all out and do unto the opposition before they do it to him.
  - luckylion 4y ago
    > The idea is that if the leader can live luxuriously in another country, they have an incentive to stop being a bad leader and retire in luxury already. That sounds plausible, but does it actually happen? I mean, tyrants have certainly fled the country to live somewhere else and retire their ambitions, but have they ever done so peacefully?
    - schubart 4y ago
      Former East German leader Erich Honecker [1] lived in Chile until he died of cancer. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Honecker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Honecker
      - luckylion 4y ago
        I don't think he was threatened, Germans are far too nice to take revenge on their dictators (and he probably also doesn't quite fit the 'dictator' model this is aimed at, as I'm not aware of him having funneled large sums of money out of the country; he was a dictator because of ideology, not because he was a power-hungry cleptocrat, and he resigned before the government folded). He could've lived in Germany, his trial was abandoned, but chose Chile to join his family who had emigrated when he asked for asylum.
    - MonkeyMalarky 4y ago
      Was more of a thing historically wasn't it? Napoleon was exiled to a far away island before his death. Not by choice though.
- tokai 4y ago
  >to even call for that upsets people regardless of what their reign is like. Its was so weird when Gaddafi was killed. He was a murderous villain and the west had directly made sure that his regime would fall or even outright tried to kill him with bombings. But when some of his so-called subjects got their hands on him and finished the job it was much maligned in the press. For some reason the more power you have the less people feel like you should experience consequences.
  - themitigating 4y ago
    This is what I'm saying. If you call for Putin's death people go nuts but he's responsible for a war that's killed 10s of thousands.
    - peanuty1 4y ago
      The War in Iraq killed a lot more civilians than that.
      - mindslight 4y ago
        And if you call for justice for those responsible, people get even nuttier.
      - themitigating 4y ago
        Ok, I wasn't excluding anyone. Edit: I believe the first Gulf War was justified. The second however is a war crime. IMO
      - Lendal 4y ago
        Yep, and if it wasn't for the Iraq war, there are plenty of other wrongs throughout human history we could point to in order to justify the continuation of any particular evil & injustice.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
  - esperent 4y ago
- JadeNB 4y ago
  > Feel free to down vote but also reply with something because I think we need to reconsider the inherent value placed on human life. This is a sentence that I would hope never to have associated with me. We need to re-consider the value of people's lives … on what basis? Because of the harm they have done to others, I guess. And why is that harm so bad? Because people's lives have value, surely. But should we interrogate whether all the people hurt by an official's actions were good or bad people before deciding how much to weight that official's harm to them? If the principle of life having value doesn't extend to everyone, then it doesn't really cover anyone. To put it differently, if there is a principle according to which a life can be said to have no value, then that principle, howsoever aimed at the powerful it might initially be, will be used against the powerless.
  - sitkack 4y ago
    A civilization should be judged on how it treats the abhorrent and powerless.
    - JadeNB 4y ago
      > A civilization should be judged on how it treats the abhorrent and powerless. I'm not sure if this is support or disagreement. If it is disagreement, then I should clarify that, as far as I can tell, I meant to say the same thing, though I certainly said it less pithily.
      - sitkack 4y ago
        I was attempting to distill the sentiment to a single sentence. And I completely agree with you.
- steveBK123 4y ago
  Looking at US vs China, and situations like this.. more and more I think the function of democracy is not so much to install good leaders, but to uninstall bad leaders more rapidly. No democracy could have maintained Xi's zero-covid policy for nearly 3 years.
- staticman2 4y ago
  "Why is there such a high value placed on human life that ignores the impact that person had upon the world?" This is the wrong question. There isn't a high value on human life, the leaders are permitted to execute and kill people. There is an incentive for people in power to not want to create a precedent for the killing of people in power, for obvious reasons of self interest. There's also a precedent for people to live vicariously through leaders, be they a political leader or someone like Elon Musk, which can presumably lead to violence if you make them a martyr.
- s1artibartfast 4y ago
  I had an innate negative reaction to your post and had to spend some time thinking about why that is the case. I think the biggest thing that caused it is the implicit assumption that increased fear for leaders would lead to better government outcomes. I'm not very confident that this is the case. I think the other part that triggered me is that an implies some singular authority that is determining the value of human life and doling out justice, but choosing not to, when in fact there are practical considerations. Who would hold these leaders accountable, and how? If leaders flee to venezuela, should Iran declare war on venezuela? Should the US step in and attack venezuela? Overall, I think civilization benefits more from a population that cares about the impact leaders have on them when in office and are satisfied when they are out of power. I don't think an increased amount of bloodlust and revenge in society is ultimately prosocial. Bloodlust and focus on revenge is a genie that's hard to put back in the bottle once it's out. Endorsing it at a state level can trickle down to how individuals behave. I wouldn't want disenfranchised voters or employees murdering anyone that they felt wronged by in the present or past
  - themitigating 4y ago
    Threat of punishment is the basis of all law. You can call it "fear" to garner sympathy for your argument but I think you're not being consistent with your application of justice
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      That kind of gets to my entire point. Of course it's not consistent application of Justice if it dictator can commit genocide and escape to another country. Everyone will agree that in a perfect world they would undergo trial and be sentenced. We don't live in a perfect world and have practical constraints. Like I said above, what are you going to do if a dictator flees to another country? Invade it and go to War with it? Is Justice against one individual worth sacrificing tens or hundreds of thousands of lives? Would that be Justice?
      - themitigating 4y ago
- AnimalMuppet 4y ago
  If you want a bad leader out of power, and his options are to remain in power or be executed, then he's going to fight to the death. But before his death, that will cause the death of a lot of other people. You don't think we should place any value on the dictator's life? Fine. Place some value on the lives of the people who would die to kick him out.
greggarious 4y ago
Huh? Is... Venezuela... particularly Islamic? Maybe Kosovo would be a better cultural fit.
- the_only_law 4y ago
  If I was an Iranian trying to flee a regime change, I’d probably pick the western-hostile Venezuela over the NATO friendly Kosovo.
  - greggarious 4y ago
    I'll have to read up, the few folks I met from there weren't rude to me. (I'm a big fan of personal diplomacy, in the sense I used to loudly joke I might one day become a test case for the Logan Act :-))
    - zoklet-enjoyer 4y ago
      I don't believe a thing you've said
      - greggarious 4y ago
        >I don't believe a thing you've said Have we met in real life? I have witnesses. Don't question my integrity. I'm not asking you for a letter of recommendation, your opinions are irrelevant.
- mc32 4y ago
  Venezuela gives more cover. Larger, gives less shits. There are African options too.
  - greggarious 4y ago
    >African options Libya? Egypt? Be specific. Let's plan where they will go and prepare for their arrival.
somid3 4y ago
I can't tell if this is for real. If so, this is the first sign that the regime in Iran is falling. As a Iranian born in Chile and raised in Ecuador because of the monkeys in power... this is amazing news.
m00dy 4y ago
Turkey is clearing 80k mines in east turkey on the Iranian border [0]. That's another vital sign. Because the last time, something similar happened on the Syrian border, and the civil war in Syria started. [0]: Joint project with EU, UNDP to clear 80,000 mines in eastern Turkey https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/eu-affairs/joint-project-with-eu-undp-to-clear-80000-mines-in-eastern-turkey https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/eu-affairs/joint-project...
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- firstSpeaker 4y ago
  Could you elaborate more on how is this related?
  - m00dy 4y ago
    Turkey is clearing mines on its border for no reason and right after these operations, something big is happening. This is the relation. I hope it is clear.
    - Fatnino 4y ago
      How does the existence of a minefield near but not in Iran contribute to stability in Iran? How does the removal of those mines destabilized Iran? These are obviously unrelated.
      - m00dy 4y ago
        Because, it is all planned way before. Why would you remove those mines ? Turkey has no reason to do that. Maybe they know something...Maybe the regime won't survive and a lot of people will need to run away from their homeland. They might need some secure migration pathways.
        ls15 4y ago
Alir3z4 4y ago
> Western diplomatic sources told Iran International > In early-November, an unnamed source at Tehran's Imam Khomeini Airport told Kayhan-London > Citing an unnamed Iranian source, > There are also unconfirmed reports that officials are transferring their assets to friendly countries Basically, "source? trust me bro!"
- adamsmith143 4y ago
  Yeah lets name them bro, then we can have articles like: "Iranian whistleblower found dead with signs of torture." Much better!
  - Alir3z4 4y ago
    I find it hard to believe that in an era of smartphones and all these gadgets, there's no picture, video or any other type of evidence except "unnamed sources".
    - mcv 4y ago
      As adamsmith143 pointed out, if that evidence exists, it's probably better to keep it out of sight of Iranian authorities. If that means you don't believe it, then that's what it is. Exposing sources is a bad idea.
    - adamsmith143 4y ago
      Of course the evidence exists lol but you don't burn your sources if you ever want another hot tip and certainly not when it likely means a horrible death for them if you do.
      - Alir3z4 4y ago
        I like how you're confident the evidence exists by seeing 0 evidence. Sure. Apparently I should also believe Iran has WMD and NATO should attack it. It's coming from a unnamed sources.
boringg 4y ago
Who would be the follow-on power if such an event did happen?
- Alir3z4 4y ago
  The same freedom lovers and democratic fighters that filled the gap in Libya, Syria, Iraq and bunch of other countries.
winReInstall 4y ago
If the upper echelons are fleeing, then the whole stampede sets in, all the lower levels who cant flee, swinging around searching for a new "leader" in the chaos.
myth_drannon 4y ago
I see exactly the same news going around Ukrainian telegram channels about Putin. First they thought China and now they are buying real estate in Venezuaela and Argentina. Some say it's fake and some not. I tend to believe it's fake news to show the regime is weak and is loosing.
firstSpeaker 4y ago
Sudden vacuum of a central authority in Iran can result in seriously messed up situation. I very much hope that there is a peaceful transition of government rather than a sudden vacuum.
ethotool 4y ago
Source? The Venezuelans and Iranians have strong relations, I doubt this is real. A lot of propaganda against Iran lately while the Israelis continue to slaughter Palestinians on a daily basis (while calling for “freedom” in Iran).
rsj_hn 4y ago
This is not a real story, it's published by a regime change media outlet. There is an enormous anti-Iran Persian language media industry, staffed primarily by Persians in Los Angeles and to a lesser degree by Persians in London and Paris. Tens of thousands of people are employed full time in this industry, dwarfing the number of people employed in Persian language media in Iran itself. It's truly massive in scale, primarily funded by US/UK and EU governments as well as by Saudi Arabia, which is engaged in a cold war against Iran. It cranks out weaponized propaganda at a constant rate, with the goal of creating a revolution in Iran in which a pro-Western government is installed. This particular influence operation is headquartered in London and is owned by Volant Media, and receives donations from Saudi Arabia[1]. Volant has offices in Washington DC, and owns this and a sister publication called "Afghanistan International", which was launched immediately after the Taliban capture of Kabul, and is now focused on waging information warfare against Afghanistan. "Iran International TV emerged abruptly on the London media scene last year; many of the 100-strong staff network were offered generous salaries, often double what rivals paid, but was elusive about its source of funding." "The source claimed Saud al-Qahtani, the crown prince’s information tsar, who was among two senior officials removed in connection with the Khashoggi affair, was involved in the funding behind Iran International TV." [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/31/concern-over-uk-based-iranian-tv-channels-links-to-saudi-arabia https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/31/concern-over-u...

68 points by michaeltimo 4y ago

It's so weird to me how rare it is that the leaders of countries are executed by the population and to even call for that upsets people regardless of what their reign is like. There's almost no incentive to be a good leader since if it all falls apart you'll just end up living luxuriously in another country. Why is there such a high value placed on human life that ignores the impact that person had upon the world? Feel free to down vote but also reply with something because I think we need to reconsider the inherent value placed on human life.

greggarious 4y ago
Someone told me in a bar on K Street the thing Vladimir Putin fears most is being hung from a gas station like Mussolinu, and I suspect that goes for all totalitarians. What scares me is I've met people like that at home in the USA. There is a quote by a KGB defector which I lost the cite for. "There is nowhere to defect to." They can live in luxury, but you cannot buy respect. Folks are allowed to show you, in small ways that you are forever unwelcome in civil society. They should do exactly that to folks who think they can try to get on a helicopter with a laptop bag full of egold like cyberpunk Ceaușescus that at best we will count the days until we can cheer their deaths if we cannot do the needful ourselves due to laws or norms.
- throwaway290 4y ago
  > They can live in luxury, but you cannot buy respect. Folks are allowed to show you, in small ways that you are forever unwelcome in civil society. Ah, what wouldn't I give to feel forever unwelcome in small ways but have another country's passport/bank account/etc. Heartwarming to know it's easier for those who are running my (on paper) country into mud. Guess I'll keep running around the sanctions I'm under because of them while they live in luxury and know they will be about to keep doing it no matter what goes down. I don't think they and their helicopters should be allowed in and their funny money should not convert as it degrades democracy.
- kevinmrose 4y ago
  Here's the KGB defector's interview you're talking about, his name was Yuri Bezmenov. https://youtu.be/yErKTVdETpw?t=4624 https://youtu.be/yErKTVdETpw?t=4624
  - greggarious 4y ago
    Thanks I'll bookmark it.
- EGreg 4y ago
  I think the only Russian leader who ever left and lived abroad was Gorbachev. Even Navalny came back to face the music, and he wasnt even president (yet?) I do not believe they are self serving at the expense of their country and will live in a bunker while their countrymen are bombed. They all thought and think they were doing the right thing for their country. Even Yeltsin, when he did in 1993 what essentially the Peruvian guy is doing now — trying to dissolve parliament in a constitutional crisis, in order to perpetuate the “shock therapy” of privatizing everything to oligarchs while people started to starve. I an sure even Stalin thought he was modernizing the country, just as Mao later did, while people were starving. The problem isn’t that they are self serving kleptocrats. Stalin owned one suit I think, and personally was poor. Just because they love their country and think they’re helping it, doesn’t make it true that they’re helping people though. I am sure George W Bush loved USA and wanted the best for it when he invaded Iraq. As libertarians we question the basic “patriotic common wisdom” of how things are set up in the first place.
  - throwaway290 4y ago
    Hordes of them around the revolution. After there was never a serious change of power.
    - EGreg 4y ago
      Well yes, after the Russian revolution the losers fled for their lives. As did Trotsky when Stalin was seeking to kill him. I think he dressed as a woman to escape lol I am talking about subsequent leaders who actually ruled Russia. Yeltsin helped usher in the Chicago Boys reforms in Russia and he literally fired on Congress. The Peruvian guy does less than that but he is denounced - yet Yeltsin was supported by USA. There is a cover of Time Magazine w him holding an American flag saying “Yanks to the Rescue” where we claimed to have interfered in the Russian elections to have him re-elected despite a 6% (!!) approval rating. We did it so the communist party candidate wouldn’t get into power (Zyuganov). They even made a movie about it https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X1Z7pAcGQSQ https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X1Z7pAcGQSQ So when it comes to Russia, interfering in their elections is something we are proud of doing and even probably overstate it for propaganda purposes. That is another reason why even on a logic/hypocrisy level, very little said by large states (especially empires) means anything to intelligent people. It’s all sound bites designed to get public support for the latest policy of the latest administration, who themselves make it up as they go. Instead of working hard to hear legitimate concerns of others and prevent wars, they escalate wars. This is true across the board in Russia, China, USA etc. They supposedly “work for us” but they do such a terrible job and then we have to pay with our taxes and our boys (and kill other people by the tens of thousands) for THEIR mistakes while they never even come close to paying the price an average young male member of the public has to pay. In the Russian revolution, 20 million people died, many killing their own relatives. But not Stalin, Lenin, or any of the Bolshevik leaders. Must be nice to be the political class. And people buy this bullshit. Read “war is a racket” by Smeey Butler
- citilife 4y ago
  > Someone told me in a bar on K Street the thing Vladimir Putin fears most is being hung from a gas station like Mussolinu, and I suspect that goes for all totalitarians. Putin has openly said he despises what the west did to Gaddafi and believes thats what they want for him. He not only fears it, but but said he fears for his civilization (Russia). The west makes it pretty easy to be feareful - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/clinton-on-qaddafi-we-came-we-saw-he-died/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/clinton-on-qaddafi-we-came-we-s... Putin asked what right the west had to assassinate Gaddafi without a trial and destroy all the countries infrastructure https://www.the-sun.com/news/2268833/vladimir-putin-killed-gaddafi-navalny-russia/ https://www.the-sun.com/news/2268833/vladimir-putin-killed-g... https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-putin-libya-idUSTRE73P4L920110426 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-putin-libya-idUSTR... https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/26/libya-us-british-putin-gaddafi https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/apr/26/libya-us-briti...
  - rasz 4y ago
    This is projecting. Everything you said russia has been doing for years. Less than a week ago russians published those photos https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/zcak1k/photos_are_circulating_from_the_luhansk_region/ https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineWarVideoReport/comments/zcak...
  - greggarious 4y ago
    >Putin asked what right the west had to assassinate Gaddafi without a trial and destroy all the countries infrastructure The purposeful destruction of infrastructure is an inexcusable war crime. But "the west" did not stick a sword up Gaddafi's butt -- that was his own people, enraged by the actions of a totalitarian. "The West" did not wander into Libya and and lynch a so called world leader who only wants norms followed when said lynch mob has formed. To kill in this manner is a crime, but it happens when so many laws and norms have been broken it's more akin to manslaughter, more akin to a concentration camp victim losing their temper, seizing a firearm, and executing their former captors. (As they say in America: "Fuck around, find out.")
    - citilife 4y ago
- themitigating 4y ago
  "They can live in luxury, but you cannot buy respect." If they were ok with being hated by the world and some large percentage of their population why would they care about being respected? I think this is huge divide between sociopaths and normal people. You think everyone cares about honor, respect, and the like but many people just want money and or power.
  - greggarious 4y ago
    >I think this is huge divide between sociopaths and normal people. You think everyone cares about honor, respect, and the like but many people just want money and or power. I know. I worked in DC :-)
- another2another 4y ago
  I also heard somewhere (also don't have link), that he apparently watched in horror the killing of Gaddafi multiple times, possibly imagining himself in the same situation. I wonder if there's a deepfake of that video with Putin's face instead of Gaddafi's - that would certainly freak him out :)
- JadeNB 4y ago
  > Someone told me in a bar on K Street the thing Vladimir Putin fears most is being hung from a gas station like Mussolinu, and I suspect that goes for all totalitarians. > What scares me is I've met people like that at home in the USA. I'm trying to give this a charitable reading, but I'm puzzled by it. First, I'm pretty sure that Mussolini was shot, not hanged, but obviously that doesn't change the main sentiment. Second, I don't think I'm particularly likely to be hanged, and not much more likely than the average USian to be shot, but both those outcomes do frighten me if I think about them. So, when you say "What scares me is I've met people like that at home in the USA", do you mean people who are scared of being shot or hanged, or people who think that their likely end is being shot or hanged? Or something else? Since you're getting a lot of reasoned replies I assume your meaning is clear to others, but I'm really having trouble figuring it out.
gizmo686 4y ago
You want leaders to be able to give up. If staying in power is the only thing seperating a leader from the angry mob, they will fight the hopeless fight until the bitter end. If they have the option if fleeing to another country, then at some point they could decide its in their best interest to just give up.
- themitigating 4y ago
  Hopeless fight how? Personally? Because I don't think the army won't stand with them forever.
saint_fiasco 4y ago
The idea is that if the leader can live luxuriously in another country, they have an incentive to stop being a bad leader and retire in luxury already. If bad leaders got executed, then the incentive for bad leaders would be to stay in power no matter the cost. The reason dictatorships turn murderous when they lose popularity is that the dictator knows they will be killed if the opposition wins, so they have no choice but to go all out and do unto the opposition before they do it to him.
- luckylion 4y ago
  > The idea is that if the leader can live luxuriously in another country, they have an incentive to stop being a bad leader and retire in luxury already. That sounds plausible, but does it actually happen? I mean, tyrants have certainly fled the country to live somewhere else and retire their ambitions, but have they ever done so peacefully?
  - schubart 4y ago
    Former East German leader Erich Honecker [1] lived in Chile until he died of cancer. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Honecker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Erich_Honecker
    - luckylion 4y ago
      I don't think he was threatened, Germans are far too nice to take revenge on their dictators (and he probably also doesn't quite fit the 'dictator' model this is aimed at, as I'm not aware of him having funneled large sums of money out of the country; he was a dictator because of ideology, not because he was a power-hungry cleptocrat, and he resigned before the government folded). He could've lived in Germany, his trial was abandoned, but chose Chile to join his family who had emigrated when he asked for asylum.
  - MonkeyMalarky 4y ago
    Was more of a thing historically wasn't it? Napoleon was exiled to a far away island before his death. Not by choice though.
tokai 4y ago
>to even call for that upsets people regardless of what their reign is like. Its was so weird when Gaddafi was killed. He was a murderous villain and the west had directly made sure that his regime would fall or even outright tried to kill him with bombings. But when some of his so-called subjects got their hands on him and finished the job it was much maligned in the press. For some reason the more power you have the less people feel like you should experience consequences.
- themitigating 4y ago
  This is what I'm saying. If you call for Putin's death people go nuts but he's responsible for a war that's killed 10s of thousands.
  - peanuty1 4y ago
    The War in Iraq killed a lot more civilians than that.
    - mindslight 4y ago
      And if you call for justice for those responsible, people get even nuttier.
    - themitigating 4y ago
      Ok, I wasn't excluding anyone. Edit: I believe the first Gulf War was justified. The second however is a war crime. IMO
    - Lendal 4y ago
      Yep, and if it wasn't for the Iraq war, there are plenty of other wrongs throughout human history we could point to in order to justify the continuation of any particular evil & injustice.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
- esperent 4y ago
JadeNB 4y ago
> Feel free to down vote but also reply with something because I think we need to reconsider the inherent value placed on human life. This is a sentence that I would hope never to have associated with me. We need to re-consider the value of people's lives … on what basis? Because of the harm they have done to others, I guess. And why is that harm so bad? Because people's lives have value, surely. But should we interrogate whether all the people hurt by an official's actions were good or bad people before deciding how much to weight that official's harm to them? If the principle of life having value doesn't extend to everyone, then it doesn't really cover anyone. To put it differently, if there is a principle according to which a life can be said to have no value, then that principle, howsoever aimed at the powerful it might initially be, will be used against the powerless.
- sitkack 4y ago
  A civilization should be judged on how it treats the abhorrent and powerless.
  - JadeNB 4y ago
    > A civilization should be judged on how it treats the abhorrent and powerless. I'm not sure if this is support or disagreement. If it is disagreement, then I should clarify that, as far as I can tell, I meant to say the same thing, though I certainly said it less pithily.
    - sitkack 4y ago
      I was attempting to distill the sentiment to a single sentence. And I completely agree with you.
steveBK123 4y ago
Looking at US vs China, and situations like this.. more and more I think the function of democracy is not so much to install good leaders, but to uninstall bad leaders more rapidly. No democracy could have maintained Xi's zero-covid policy for nearly 3 years.
staticman2 4y ago
"Why is there such a high value placed on human life that ignores the impact that person had upon the world?" This is the wrong question. There isn't a high value on human life, the leaders are permitted to execute and kill people. There is an incentive for people in power to not want to create a precedent for the killing of people in power, for obvious reasons of self interest. There's also a precedent for people to live vicariously through leaders, be they a political leader or someone like Elon Musk, which can presumably lead to violence if you make them a martyr.
s1artibartfast 4y ago
I had an innate negative reaction to your post and had to spend some time thinking about why that is the case. I think the biggest thing that caused it is the implicit assumption that increased fear for leaders would lead to better government outcomes. I'm not very confident that this is the case. I think the other part that triggered me is that an implies some singular authority that is determining the value of human life and doling out justice, but choosing not to, when in fact there are practical considerations. Who would hold these leaders accountable, and how? If leaders flee to venezuela, should Iran declare war on venezuela? Should the US step in and attack venezuela? Overall, I think civilization benefits more from a population that cares about the impact leaders have on them when in office and are satisfied when they are out of power. I don't think an increased amount of bloodlust and revenge in society is ultimately prosocial. Bloodlust and focus on revenge is a genie that's hard to put back in the bottle once it's out. Endorsing it at a state level can trickle down to how individuals behave. I wouldn't want disenfranchised voters or employees murdering anyone that they felt wronged by in the present or past
- themitigating 4y ago
  Threat of punishment is the basis of all law. You can call it "fear" to garner sympathy for your argument but I think you're not being consistent with your application of justice
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    That kind of gets to my entire point. Of course it's not consistent application of Justice if it dictator can commit genocide and escape to another country. Everyone will agree that in a perfect world they would undergo trial and be sentenced. We don't live in a perfect world and have practical constraints. Like I said above, what are you going to do if a dictator flees to another country? Invade it and go to War with it? Is Justice against one individual worth sacrificing tens or hundreds of thousands of lives? Would that be Justice?
    - themitigating 4y ago
AnimalMuppet 4y ago
If you want a bad leader out of power, and his options are to remain in power or be executed, then he's going to fight to the death. But before his death, that will cause the death of a lot of other people. You don't think we should place any value on the dictator's life? Fine. Place some value on the lives of the people who would die to kick him out.

greggarious 4y ago

Huh? Is... Venezuela... particularly Islamic? Maybe Kosovo would be a better cultural fit.

the_only_law 4y ago
If I was an Iranian trying to flee a regime change, I’d probably pick the western-hostile Venezuela over the NATO friendly Kosovo.
- greggarious 4y ago
  I'll have to read up, the few folks I met from there weren't rude to me. (I'm a big fan of personal diplomacy, in the sense I used to loudly joke I might one day become a test case for the Logan Act :-))
  - zoklet-enjoyer 4y ago
    I don't believe a thing you've said
    - greggarious 4y ago
      >I don't believe a thing you've said Have we met in real life? I have witnesses. Don't question my integrity. I'm not asking you for a letter of recommendation, your opinions are irrelevant.
mc32 4y ago
Venezuela gives more cover. Larger, gives less shits. There are African options too.
- greggarious 4y ago
  >African options Libya? Egypt? Be specific. Let's plan where they will go and prepare for their arrival.

somid3 4y ago

I can't tell if this is for real. If so, this is the first sign that the regime in Iran is falling. As a Iranian born in Chile and raised in Ecuador because of the monkeys in power... this is amazing news.

m00dy 4y ago

Turkey is clearing 80k mines in east turkey on the Iranian border [0]. That's another vital sign. Because the last time, something similar happened on the Syrian border, and the civil war in Syria started. [0]: Joint project with EU, UNDP to clear 80,000 mines in eastern Turkey https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/eu-affairs/joint-project-with-eu-undp-to-clear-80000-mines-in-eastern-turkey https://www.dailysabah.com/politics/eu-affairs/joint-project...

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
firstSpeaker 4y ago
Could you elaborate more on how is this related?
- m00dy 4y ago
  Turkey is clearing mines on its border for no reason and right after these operations, something big is happening. This is the relation. I hope it is clear.
  - Fatnino 4y ago
    How does the existence of a minefield near but not in Iran contribute to stability in Iran? How does the removal of those mines destabilized Iran? These are obviously unrelated.
    - m00dy 4y ago
      Because, it is all planned way before. Why would you remove those mines ? Turkey has no reason to do that. Maybe they know something...Maybe the regime won't survive and a lot of people will need to run away from their homeland. They might need some secure migration pathways.
      - ls15 4y ago

Alir3z4 4y ago

> Western diplomatic sources told Iran International > In early-November, an unnamed source at Tehran's Imam Khomeini Airport told Kayhan-London > Citing an unnamed Iranian source, > There are also unconfirmed reports that officials are transferring their assets to friendly countries Basically, "source? trust me bro!"

adamsmith143 4y ago
Yeah lets name them bro, then we can have articles like: "Iranian whistleblower found dead with signs of torture." Much better!
- Alir3z4 4y ago
  I find it hard to believe that in an era of smartphones and all these gadgets, there's no picture, video or any other type of evidence except "unnamed sources".
  - mcv 4y ago
    As adamsmith143 pointed out, if that evidence exists, it's probably better to keep it out of sight of Iranian authorities. If that means you don't believe it, then that's what it is. Exposing sources is a bad idea.
  - adamsmith143 4y ago
    Of course the evidence exists lol but you don't burn your sources if you ever want another hot tip and certainly not when it likely means a horrible death for them if you do.
    - Alir3z4 4y ago
      I like how you're confident the evidence exists by seeing 0 evidence. Sure. Apparently I should also believe Iran has WMD and NATO should attack it. It's coming from a unnamed sources.

boringg 4y ago

Who would be the follow-on power if such an event did happen?

Alir3z4 4y ago
The same freedom lovers and democratic fighters that filled the gap in Libya, Syria, Iraq and bunch of other countries.

winReInstall 4y ago

If the upper echelons are fleeing, then the whole stampede sets in, all the lower levels who cant flee, swinging around searching for a new "leader" in the chaos.

myth_drannon 4y ago

I see exactly the same news going around Ukrainian telegram channels about Putin. First they thought China and now they are buying real estate in Venezuaela and Argentina. Some say it's fake and some not. I tend to believe it's fake news to show the regime is weak and is loosing.

firstSpeaker 4y ago

Sudden vacuum of a central authority in Iran can result in seriously messed up situation. I very much hope that there is a peaceful transition of government rather than a sudden vacuum.

ethotool 4y ago

Source? The Venezuelans and Iranians have strong relations, I doubt this is real. A lot of propaganda against Iran lately while the Israelis continue to slaughter Palestinians on a daily basis (while calling for “freedom” in Iran).

rsj_hn 4y ago

This is not a real story, it's published by a regime change media outlet. There is an enormous anti-Iran Persian language media industry, staffed primarily by Persians in Los Angeles and to a lesser degree by Persians in London and Paris. Tens of thousands of people are employed full time in this industry, dwarfing the number of people employed in Persian language media in Iran itself. It's truly massive in scale, primarily funded by US/UK and EU governments as well as by Saudi Arabia, which is engaged in a cold war against Iran. It cranks out weaponized propaganda at a constant rate, with the goal of creating a revolution in Iran in which a pro-Western government is installed. This particular influence operation is headquartered in London and is owned by Volant Media, and receives donations from Saudi Arabia[1]. Volant has offices in Washington DC, and owns this and a sister publication called "Afghanistan International", which was launched immediately after the Taliban capture of Kabul, and is now focused on waging information warfare against Afghanistan. "Iran International TV emerged abruptly on the London media scene last year; many of the 100-strong staff network were offered generous salaries, often double what rivals paid, but was elusive about its source of funding." "The source claimed Saud al-Qahtani, the crown prince’s information tsar, who was among two senior officials removed in connection with the Khashoggi affair, was involved in the funding behind Iran International TV." [1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/31/concern-over-uk-based-iranian-tv-channels-links-to-saudi-arabia https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/oct/31/concern-over-u...