Lukashenko Urges the UN to Stand Up to Washington

Bloomberg

UNITED NATIONS -- Dozens of leaders have stepped up to the green marble podium of the United Nations General Assembly hall to call for peace, goodwill and an end to terrorism. Belarussian President Alexander Lukashenko used his turn for a Cold War-style rhetorical assault on the United States.

Lukashenko expressed regret over the loss of Soviet influence in the world and the rise of a "unipolar" system dominated by the United States.

He blamed troubles from Afghanistan to Iraq to the Balkans on U.S. policies, and chided the world's governments for not standing up to the world's sole superpower. The UN has become a "tool" of the United States, he said.

"A bloody slaughter in Iraq is continuing to this day," Lukashenko said in his address Thursday. "Long-suffering Afghanistan became a hotbed of conflicts and drug trafficking. Iran and North Korea are looked at through gun sights.'' <snip>

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/stories/2005/09/19/019.html

Lukashenko, then, if they still think they want to do it, hit themselves over the head with a very, very big mace.

And it's Belarusian, for political correctness' sake.

I'm not sure if Lukaskenka (the 'a' just to piss him off, in the abstract) is the last dictator in Europe. Haven't thought about it much. But dictator, he is.

Putting people in jail and closing newspapers because they don't use the orthography mandated by Stalin ...

.. any sympathy.

But, as far as I can see, nothing whatsoever prevents a person with "strong arm" tendencies from observing accurately ambient political attitudes and dynamics. Perhaps it is not unthinkable that the remarks quoted in the article are directed at some portion of the audience to which they were delivered and that those remarks may even reflect the attitude of a certain number of the listeners.

It may also be worthwhile to reflect carefully on the attitude which you expound -- that people who engage in dictatorial behavior should not be quoted -- because this view (with which I in fact normally and naturally sympathize) could in fact prevent us from quoting our own leaders, who have stolen elections, tortured people around the world, arrested people for intimidation purposes and detained people without trial, and who now have recently the military to limit press coverage in a major American city, where armed mercenaries now roam the streets while a sizable portion of the country lies under a "state of emergency" the exact meaning of which remains unclear, while the President begs a Congress he completely controls to augment his power.

And, of course, nothing could say "tin-pot dictator" better than our own President's ascent to power -- the son of a former CIA chief and President, "winning" in the province governed by his brother after a Supreme Court packed with his father's allies stopped the recounting of ballots in a decision which they announced had no value as precedent.

However, support for one part of his platform easily lends itself to being perceived as supporting another part of his platform.

You like the idea of currency reform, and the next thing you're supporting a pogrom.

You like the idea of a strong Russian presence in a non-Russian country, and the next thing you know you're excusing beating Poles because they're Poles.

You like the idea of a strong black leader condemning 40k black people being abused as racism, and you find it rather less problematic to have 200k black people abused under the name "Taking out the Trash".

.. reform or pogroms. I made no statements whatsoever on "Russian presence," "beating Poles," "black people," or "taking out the trash."

Your repeated assertions "You like the idea of ... You like the idea of ... You like the idea of ..." reflect, as far as I can tell, absolutely no remarks whatsoever of mine but are rather your effort to put words in my mouth.

Now all a bloody dictator needs to do is saying Vitamin C prevents scurvy! Everybody will have to agre with him, and, sooner than they know, they'll believe gulags are the best thing since sliced bread! MWA HA HA HA HA HAAAAAAA!

Lukashenko is an authoritarian dictator and basically a Stalinist. He comes from the same breed of those hardliners who tried to stop Gorbachav.

No one should take the guy seriously or support him, regardless of if he's trashing Bush.

For some reason, many Americans are unable to see the entirely parallel irony of American criticism of Lukashenko.

If you wish, entirely appropriately, to object to Lukashenko as a tinpot dictator, it is worth noting that his power is limited and his sphere of influence confined. He does not project his abuses around the world. But to credibly criticize him (an enterprise the reasonableness of which I do not abstractly question), we should much prefer to be in a position in which our own behavior did not so completely reflect -- or even exceed -- the behaviors to which we object. And since we Americans citizens obviously must have more influence over our own government than his, perhaps the real test of our sincerity in professing a belief in human rights is whether we will effectively hold our own government to a standard higher than he hold his.

And an excellent point worth considering....

Why should anyone care what he says?

Good people cannot comprehend callous exploitation or violent imposition of will upon others.

Get it?

I am not saying to believe him... I listen to what bush says, I dont believe it, but I need to be informed. So the real question is did he say all that.