Why Don’t We Just Kill All Dictators

So it’s pretty controversial that we’re intervening in Libya. Qdaffy is a crazed dictator killing his own people, but does that mean we should intervene in any country with a dictator?

I say yes.

As the defenders of freedom, I don’t know why we haven’t long ago made it official American policy that if you’re a dictator, we will murder you. I used my iPad to make an illustration of this policy idea.

Hi-tech!

If you govern without the consent of the govern, then America is actively plotting your death. Maybe we won’t kill you today, maybe we won’t kill you tomorrow, but we’ll probably kill you Thursday. In the least, if you’re a dictator, know that in the Pentagon we’re working on plans to make you dead. They can even declassify plans as they don’t use them.

“Here’s our plans to make Kim Jong Il swallow a bomb and explode him from the inside, including a CGI simulation of what we think that would look like. We really think it would discredit his rule if he were exploded. And here is a drawing of him being eaten by a t-rex. Unfortunately, that one never got past the cool drawing stage.”

What would be the objections to this? That big powerful America is picking on smaller countries? You can’t pick on dictators; that’s like saying our police forces are picking on thugs and murderers. Dictators are freebies; we can kill all we want, and it’s morally okay. We’re a big powerful country — way more powerful than the dictators out there — so why shouldn’t we do what’s right and awesome? What’s really wrong is for dictators to be out there murdering and generally pushing people around and for them to have it in their head that no one is plotting to kill them. That’s why America needs to announce loud and clear, “If you’re a dictator, we’re after you. And look at this new sniper bullet we made. It enters your head then explodes. That’s right, our snipers are going to explode your head. So either have fair and free elections, or stay away from windows if you don’t want to explode your head over everything.”

Okay; so I’m a neocon. That’s way better than being someone who doesn’t want dictators’ heads exploded.

Send to Kindle
1 Star (Hated it)2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (Awesome) (25 votes, average: 4.96 out of 5)

22 Comments

  1. *People must kill their own dictators otherwise a few years later the international media Marxists Goebbels will have turned him into a martyr. They’ll still try but they wont succeed nearly as well.

    *The French could have fought the revolutionary war for us and beat those British forces with a lot fewer deaths then our bunch of American farmers did. However, civilization and independence are two things that shouldn’t be handed to a people. Much like in the animal kingdom a people must either rise and adapt or they will not have the ability, will, mindset, to say nothing of their own George Washington type heroes to maintain either independence or civilization.

    0
    0
  2. Today is a great day. For, today the art of Frank J lives again. I am basking in the glow of your newest contribution to the art community. And, there will most certainly be numerous galleries fighting to display this new piece.

    As I began to review this newest Frank J. offering I was struck by the artist’s choices depicting civilization declined from one frame to the next. The writings in the first frame are civil, neatly printed, as each character calmly addresses their differences – yet evolve into psychotic scribbling when the two resort to extreme violence. In contrast, the hat personifying a modern-day cowboy seems awkward and disheveled in the context of civility, and only comes into focus when in its element of unbridled violence. The burst that thrusts from the barrel of the gun is simplistic in its representation, yet effective and somewhat terrifying – and the viewer is forced to endure the confusion and agony with the “dictator” as his right knee goes weak, the discharged bullet passing clear through his very soul and exiting the vessel that served as his life’s body, preceding the pending fall we dare not be shown.

    0
    0
  3. Thats not the neocon position at all. That seems like a paleo-con but with proactive foreign policy idealism. The neo-con position is that we should actively pursue our national interests in the foreign sphere – and sometimes, that means aiding dictators, when they are doing what’s in our best interests. Like for instance, those in Latin America that kept communists from gaining a greater foothold in our hemisphere. It’s not as simplistic and easy as “oh theres a dictator, lets go kill him” – sometimes, what is leftover is much worse. This is what happened in Iran, where many saw the Shah as a dictator. While there were some abuses under the Shah, he was stable, and predictable mostly, and pro-Western. I’m not necessarily saying is absolutely correct. I just think you’re misrepresenting the different positions.

    0
    0
  4. Jeesh if I didn’t know better, I would say that Son of Bob sounded like one of them thar liberals.

    To translate what he said: Yeehaw! Thet thar dictators brains shore got sum air!

    0
    0
  5. Castro.

    I mean, it’s been decades and decades, and his revolution still hasn’t succeeded. Incompetent. I’d say that if you haven’t won the revolution in four or five years, give it up or the US will send you a poison rat hidden in a fruit basket.

    0
    0
  6. UMM…Do people who still live in the 6th century really count? I mean c’mon! Like they are going to be all George Washington and stuff? I don’t think so! They still think hitting something with a shoe is a giant “take that”!!! Yea, ok…we will install Democracy in Lybia…it’s worked so well in Iraq and Afganistan!

    0
    0
  7. Pingback: Out and About on a Wednesday Morning | Blogs For Victory

  8. Pingback: Steynerism 441rd « Free Canuckistan!

Leave a Reply