Go to MajRoj's Sidebar
- Add a comment
- Go to Man on the radio said we should be nice to countries that try to get nukes.
Benzinha, that would be a Special Effect.
Sorry, the Oscar goes to The People's Republic of China, the runner-up being USA, followed by Russia and Japan.
posted by
majroj
on January 5, 2007 at 2:40 AM
| link to this | reply
maj, can't we all just buy each other's bodies and friendships now?
Small mercenary forces are needed in small areas, but not nukes.
The corporations have no nukes and are taking over the planet and doing a quiet and thorough job of it, methinks. Except for that loud mouth, Hugo Chavez, who refuses to let them into his country anymore. Maybe they could nuke him and his people for effect.
posted by
benzinha
on January 4, 2007 at 7:27 PM
| link to this | reply
Often the bloodless coups are followed by bloody ones.
For example, Corazon Aquino's country has undergone armed surrection, burgeoning Islamist insurgency since her "people power" coup of 1987.
Most bloodless coups are quiet because the gun in the back is hidden, or the individual who has carved out his niche as despot sees the possibility for his personal survival e.g.,the displacement of the Shah Reza Palavi [sp?] in Iran by Shi'ite fundmentalist-led irregulars (aka "students" whose uniform was the green field jacket supplied by the US to their regular Army; the Shah had an avenue offered to get out and took it. The turnover could have been a bloodless coup against a corrupt and despotic regime, but the Shia then turned on their countrymen not following their brand of Islam).
It is the "Stockholm Effect" writ large; when resistance is futile and force overpowering, and perceived as such by the populace, and they are made totally dependent upon their captor, they always tend to side with them on the whole.
posted by
majroj
on December 7, 2006 at 6:40 AM
| link to this | reply
Yes, here I am, an interesting premise
Sometimes of course, there are bloodless coups but it is normally the fear of great violence that keeps them so.
posted by
Azur
on December 6, 2006 at 6:49 PM
| link to this | reply
Ah, someone else coming to comment?
Actually, it can be argued that religion, population pressure and climate have settled more than violence has, but they eventually act through violence as one group is forced onto another's turf.
posted by
majroj
on December 1, 2006 at 9:06 PM
| link to this | reply