Can't help but notice that you choose not to discuss the fact that your own stance (gunboat diplomacy) coincides with that of Russia and China)
Jim Carroll ...
.,.,
That is not my stance, Jim; I haven't one, in particular, except concern & grief at another of those situations. It is my gloss on how I perceive yours.

No-one expects you to 'pass by on the other side'. I recognise that you are a man of strong moral principles which you are intent on expressing and upholding. I much respect this in you, even when my opinions do not coincide with yours. But I find much of the terms in which you choose to express these absolutely counterproductive. One feels that, if you can't argue with someone without calling him a slimeball or enjoining him to piss off, the force of your arguments is concomitantly diminished. Incontinent unmannerly foulmouthed denunciation is not a sign of strong involvement, but of weak arguments IMO. A point I think you should consider.

~M~