Tags

Is it only mad dictators of the non-western world whom use ‘human shields’?


Alright.  Those amongst us whom aren’t self-absorbed ignoramuses know that some dictators, knowing that they are going to be under attack by western imperialists, surround their place of refuge with civilians in the hope that the attack would be thwarted by the alleged ‘humanity’ of the western elite.

So the western-led media keeps banging on about how this or that dictator, from Saddam to Gaddafi, use ‘human shields’ to absolve themselves from the explosive consequence of their actions.  So this ‘human shield’ thing is usually used by the savages outside of the western world right?

Bollocks.

The west use ‘human shields’ all the time.  In fact, they use them every day, 24/7.  More so than any non-western dictator of this medieval age. 

It’s a simple formula actually. 

S/he who goes about pissing off others for their own interests knows full well that if or when those they pissed off retaliate, its probably going to hit their civilians since places of government, or administration, is always located at places where there are high civilian populations.  It doesn’t matter whether it is intentional or not.  All that matters is that they know that civilians being hit is inevitable given that the government is relatively untouchable, or cannot be touched without civilians being grazed significantly. 

the determination of when ‘human shields’ are being used is dependent on the degree to which any state goes about pissing off others for their own interests, whilst taking care to NOT situate their places of government far away from civilians whom can hence be used as a 'human shield' or motive to finish off what they started in foreign climes.And if or when the civilians are hit, it is a win-win situation for these governments as they can cry foul of those who have no respect for ‘innocent civilian’ life and stoke desires for vengeance amongst their own populations to give them the thumbs-up to go into the ‘terror camps’ and states that have WMDs or host ‘terrorists’ to finally finish the job of ridding the world of opponents of the western elite’s claim to global dominance. 

And given the fact that, for instance, the so-called ‘greatest nation on earth’, i.e. the u.s. of a, do their utmost to install governments and states in favour of their global hegemony, and do so despite the lives of the peoples of those climes, and do so far more than any non-western dictator, one can go on to say that these actions immediately cast the civilian population as ‘human shields’. 

In a clamshell, one can hence say that the determination of when ‘human shields’ are being used is dependent on the degree to which any state goes about pissing off others for their own interests, whilst taking care to NOT situate their places of government, or administration, far away from civilians whom can hence be used as a 'human shield' or motive to finish off what they started in foreign climes. Governments do not have to do this intentionally. They just have to be aware of the consequences for it to be intentional.



ed



2 comments:

  1. That Islamist fellow hates the West (the Roaming Bear blog). You do too. You mean Indian supremacists do that too? How come?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Stupidity finds refuge, and is reinforced by, behind anonymity, most times anyway.

    ReplyDelete

The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.

Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.

Blogger Template by Clairvo