Beach, if you consider me to be callously insensitive to the atrocities of Idi Amin who was indeed a butcher and a monster. What do you make of the western political leadership at the time which actively supported and protected Amin, and ensured him a safe haven in Saudi Arabia where he was able to live out the rest of his life in luxury and comfort. People like Thatcher and Callaghan in Britain and Carter and Reagan in America.
Closer to home and more recent, how do you feel about Abbott actively supporting an outlawed terrorist organisation in the form of The Kurdistan Workers Party, and others in iraq. Is it a case of "my enemies, enemy is my friend"?

http://www.nationalsecurity.gov.au/Listedterroristorganisations/Pages/KurdistanWorkersPartyPKK.aspx

As I said some do conveniently take the moral high ground, when it suits.

Paul 1405

Again that is an irrelevancy. You are shameless.

Beach, you failed to answer the question. Is it shameless of the Abbott Government to provide military support, by its own admission, to an outlawed terrorist organisation in the form of the PKK and others. Likewise, do you think we should now switch our support to the Assard regime in Syria. I think we should condemn the lot and not militarily support any side. time and time again the west has made the mistake of supporting one side, only to find later that support was ill founded. We even supported Saddam Hussein at one time when it suited us.
When is a terrorist a freedom fighter, when he's on your side.

Paul,

If the support for those opposed to IS/ISIS/whoever saves innocent lives then is it not justified?

Foxy’s account of the war might well have been written in Langley, Virginia, with all its references to “tacit agreements”. I recall only what I read in the Press at the time, and clearly remember German Chancellor Helmut Kohl raising the hope to regain Lebensraum east of the Oder-Niesse German-Polish border with reunification and the Western Allies telling him not to even think about it. I recall the Axis scum, expelled from Poland’s western territories where they had ruled as brutal overlords during the Nazi occupation, whining incessantly in Germany demanding compensation, until the Polish Parliament responded that before any claim of compensation could be considered the quantum of reparations for the German war damage to Poland would have to be calculated and paid. That shut the Nazis up. For now.

I also recall from news reports that agreement was at least tacit, and maybe more formal than that, that reunification would not be accompanied by any eastward expansion of NATO. Now the Russians can see NATO metastasing like cancer towards their borders. On geostrategic grounds, I can sympathise with their concern and their warning of massive retaliation if NATO’s push comes to shove. But the grounds in the eastern Ukraine and Crimea are more than geostrategic. They rest on the firm global consensus agreements at http://www.ohchr.org/en/profesosionalinterest/pages/ccpr.aspx . Way beyond tacit.

Five highly relevant questions in my first paragraph, each related to the human rights of populations, not overlords, and each so far weaseled out of by Foxy’s PNAC handouts. Is her silence complicit and will it continue?

Dear Emperor Julian,

Perhaps the following link may assist to clarify
a few things for you:
It gives current events in historical perspective.

http://origins.osu.edu/article/Ukrainian-crisis-russias-long-shadow

BTW: The information that I have provided
on the Ukraine did not come from the US -
but from an article (as I stated previously) written
by Dr Al Kabaila, "Should We care about Ukraine?"
in the Lithuanian newspaper in Sydney, "Musu Pastoge,"
Nr. 12. 2014.

If it offends you in some way - you are under no
obligation to read or respond to it. And using
words like "weasel" is not polite.