Le lundi 11 avril 2005 à 11:59:52 UTC+4, Richmond a écrit :

"Mike Ward" <m@d.w> wrote in message
news:Xns963559...@204.127.36.1...

"The Devil You Know . . ." <msboo[REMOVETOREPLY]@earthlink.net> wrote in news:ftl6e.3925$lP1....@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net:

"hvatum" <hva...@softhome.net> wrote in message
news:3793caff.05041...@posting.google.com...

The empire manages to maintain order throughout the galaxy - this has
to count for something. Think of all the terrible alien races which
would probably rise up in rebellion if it weren't for the empire.

Kind of like how the Nazis claimed they were protecting Germany from
the Jews, the Gypsies, etc.?

Is there any reason to think that the Empire was trying to exterminate a race of people.

Palpatine's prejudice against non-humans was well-known. The Empire sanctioned slavery, and kept Wookiees, a proud and noble race, as slaves. Not to mention they had already exterminated thousands of Jedi.

And maintaining order is hardly a plausible reason for a totalitarian
dictatorship. Hitler maintained order in Germany, Mussolini in Italy,
Stalin in Russia, Saddam in Iraq, etc. So what? What good is it that
the trains run on time if you might get jailed or killed on the whim
of those in power?

Also, the destruction of Hoth was a justified military action. I
don't understand how it's perfectly OK that the rebellion blew up the
"Death Star," thereby killing thousands of Average Joe's who probably
just enlisted with the Empire to get their college paid for, but it's
some horrible tragedy when a bunch of rebels are killed.

Hoth wasn't destroyed. (At least not in the movies, I don't read the
novels.) Alderaan was destoyed in ANH. Why was it justified? Why
must billions of innocents die to make Leia talk?

Something that I think comes out more clearly in the book than in the
movie was that Alderaan was an active particpant in the rebellion which
is why Tarkin goes ahead and destroys it even after Leia has talked.
This of course does not justify the killing of everyone ont he planet,
but Alderaan was a legitimate military traget.

No, no, no NO. That's the kind of logic people try to pass off when they're attempting to justify the blanket bombing of Iraq or Afghanistan; "their leader is violating the law," they say, "and the people follow the leader, so they're viable targets." NO. Bail Organa was an active participant in
the Rebellion, yes, so in your bizarre, pro-Empire worldview he can be held responsible, but John Q. Average Alderaanian is just an innocent victim of genocide.

The "Average Joe" argument was addressed in a different sort of light
in "Clerks,"

_Clerks_ is great movie, but it's hardly authoritative.

*sigh*

but the point is the same - they knew what they were
getting into. Unlike the vast majority of the folks on Alderaan, who
didn't enlist in the army and were just concerned with eeking out a
living [farming/owning a shop/waiting tables/teaching a class of third
graders/ etc., etc., etc.]

And each army in history had "Average Joes" in the rank and file. One
side's not gonna stop attacking the other simply because they look
across the trench and realize it's a bunch of guys with wives and kids
back home. To paraphrase Han Solo, "Better [them] than me!"

But the issue is the hypocracy. Why is collatorial damage okay when it's the rebels causing it but wrong when it's the Empire?

Once again: Alderaan was not "collatorial" (sic) damage, or even collateral damage. It was genocide. The Death Star was a military target, full of military personnel. Alderaan was an unprovoked attack on billions of innocents.
B.

The great fraud that the French were no longer expecing !

The Duclert report is a disinformation operation: shameful, cowardly, repugnant, unworthy of France.

President Macron set up a commission of historians to deny the French complicity in the 1994 Rwandan genocide. After studying the archives related to the French involvement in the Rwandan pogrom, Vincent Duclert comes to this conclusion: France was not
an accomplice in the Rwandan genocide of 1994. While scientists, who have also studied some archives, quickly discover the opposite.

France was an accomplice in the Rwandan genocide. Here is some evidence:

1. active support.

2. informed support. That is, support while the French government was informed about the course of the genocide.

3. support with an effect.

In the middle of a debacle, the evidence of complicity accumulates. The members of the interim government of Rwanda who orchestrated the genocide escaped thanks to the complicity of Paris.

Indeed, the Quai d'Orsay, irritated by the presence of members of the interim government in the Turquoise zone, ordered the soldiers to help them flee to Zaire.

During the genocide, contrary to what had been said, there were a few dozen French soldiers, two teams of mercenaries, that of Paul Barril and that of Bob Denard, as well as an intelligence service, on Rwandan territory.

In english :

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/africa/-archives-show-french-complicity-in-rwandan-genocide-/2116673#

https://globalnews.ca/news/5137073/rwanda-genocide-photos-facts/

In french :

https://survie.org/themes/genocide-des-tutsis-au-rwanda/article/quand-paris-exfiltrait-le-gouvernement-genocidaire-rwandais

https://survie.org/themes/genocide-des-tutsis-au-rwanda/article/nouveau-rapport-rwanda-les-mercenaires-invisibles-les-archives-de-la-dgse

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)