Main > Everything Else
U.N. takes SOME steps, at least (formerly - where's the equivalent outrage)
DrewKaree:
While it's just a handful of people, at least they've started to do SOMETHING about it.
http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/news/nation/11163446.htm
mr.Curmudgeon:
Damn it...I was just planning on rioting in the streets. Looks like I'll have to reshedule.
mrC
JCL:
I don't get the question or at least think the implication makes no sense.
The US's bad actions can't be excused just because the UN is a lousy corrupt organisation.
I care much more about my own nation than I care about the UN. I care a lot that the US is torturing people and sending people to other countries to be tortured. I care a lot that the US is essentially kidnapping people and is depriving people of US citizenship illegally. I care a lot that the US invades other countries on false premises.
The fact that there are other bad things in the world is irrelevent. If you really love this country, you should be horrified at how far she is moving away from her principles.
APFelon:
--- Quote from: JCL on March 20, 2005, 12:27:11 am ---I don't get the question or at least think the implication makes no sense.
The US's bad actions can't be excused just because the UN is a lousy corrupt organisation.
--- End quote ---
I don't think that is the point. I think the point is that the other "bad actions" aren't getting the press that the US's "bad actions" get.
--- Quote ---I care much more about my own nation than I care about the UN. I care a lot that the US is torturing people and sending people to other countries to be tortured. I care a lot that the US is essentially kidnapping people and is depriving people of US citizenship illegally. I care a lot that the US invades other countries on false premises.
--- End quote ---
The US had a casus beli against Iraq since 1991. As for that other stuff, it's a cruel, cruel world out there. Sainted nations don't remain nations for long. Asking the US to behave like angels is essentially like asking the US to play geopolitical games with one hand tied behind its back.
The world is not a hornet's nest, where if you leave it alone it'll leave you alone. So, as a nation, we need to decide whether to act or be acted upon. Should we do nothing if US assets are seized and nationalized by various countries? Maybe, maybe not. Should we trade with nationstates regardless of their human rights records or their belligerent attitudes towards other nations? Perhaps, perhaps not. Should we withdraw all of our military back to our own country and let the chips fall where they may? Who knows? But rest assured, the prosperity of the United States is hinged on our willingness to use force when the situation requires it. The prosperity of other nations depend on it as well. So ask yourself: do I value my comfortable lifestyle, do I enjoy the luxuries that sit in my garage and in my home, and would I be willing to sacrifice them if my country decides to become altruistic?
As a hypothetical, let's say that the US decides to demilitarize the Pacific Rim and promises not to send any military forces to the area regardless of what happens. China instantly annexes Taiwan and executes every pro-independence politician, professor, and intellectual. North Korea sends waves of troops over the DMZ and occupies and annexes South Korea. The Philipines breaks into a full-fledged religious civil war. How would that affect you?
The entire region would be a mess. American businesses would take a hit, and the cost of tech, rubber, textiles would skyrocket. An unstable region is bad for business, and this would affect the price of nearly everything else on the world market.
So, take that as you may. It's a worldwide market, and markets love stability. The US military maintains that stability, and I would argue that the world now is more harmonious now than it has ever been due to the US's threat of force.
Is that worth it so that folks can sit in an oil heated home, typing on an Internet forum happily as they dream about their MAME cabinets, car nestled in their garage so they can drive to their job that pays an obscene amount of money (compared to the world's average salaries), chatter away on the latest Cellular phone with cameras built in about some guy who was caught shelling a hospital is now in a military prison, forced to wear panties on his head?
Yes, the world is indeed cruel. And the safety, security, prosperity and general wellness of the US and other western nations shelter the population to that fact. We have the luxury to wring our hands about that mean ol' Scott Peterson who dumped his dead wife in the ocean just a few short years after African rivers were choked with war causalities and execution victims. We can lament the fact that Iraqi prisoners had to make a naked human pyramid while entire ethnic populations are executed en masse. We can weep about immigrants being deported from our shores while the farmers in Zimbabwe are being marched out of their homes by gunpoint. The luxury to cry of lesser evils, what a luxury it is! Oh, the US, so cruel. So cruel in a cruel, cruel world. Must we live up to some bizarre international standard that has been set only for the United States? Maybe we should.
If we want to maintain our masturbatory lifestyles, we must remain cruel. I think we can become less cruel as soon as cruelty is driven from humanity. I don't know about you, but I won't hold my breath.
--- Quote ---The fact that there are other bad things in the world is irrelevant. If you really love this country, you should be horrified at how far she is moving away from her principles.
--- End quote ---
And what, precisely, are these principles, and when, precisely, did we live up to them? A week in May, 1977? Even a cursory look at US history reveals constant warfare, exploitation, inequality, racial hatred, slavery, etc, etc, etc... travesties of history committed even by statesmen who wrote that they hated slavery and that the US should not become engaged in foreign entanglements. I thought dreaming of a fictional past was reserved for flag-waving conservatives. However, it's consistant with the belief that the US should have a castrated foreign policy and handle world affairs like Jesus would.
Anyway, welcome to the forum. We offer other topics like arcade controls, monitors, and various arcade-related issues. Enjoy your stay.
APf
JCL:
--- Quote from: APFelon on March 20, 2005, 01:53:15 am ---
I don't think that is the point. I think the point is that the other "bad actions" aren't getting the press that the US's "bad actions" get.
--- End quote ---
This stuff is in the news. As are a million other things. But we (the US) don't control and aren't responsible for the UN. Bringing up the UN in this context is just saying "We're not so bad, look at what they did!"
It's a ---That which is odiferous and causeth plants to grow--- argument that doesn't work for six year olds and certainly shouldn't work for nations.
--- Quote ---As for that other stuff, it's a cruel, cruel world out there. Sainted nations don't remain nations for long. Asking the US to behave like angels is essentially like asking the US to play geopolitical games with one hand tied behind its back.
The world is not a hornet's nest, where if you leave it alone it'll leave you alone.
--- End quote ---
Really. How was Iraq going to attack the US? With the fictitious Weapons of Mass Destruction?
You want to know how to cure Islamic Terrorism? Stop supporting the horrible corrupt nations in the Middle East!
Stop giving them billions for oil. Stop proping up dictatorships, police states, and theocracies. Without the oil money the corrupt nations are powerless. Without the support of the US, Saddam would probably not been dictator of Iraq. If he was a threat, it was because the US helped him. We helped him get into power and we made damn sure he stayed in power.
Of course the real terrorist threat is from which nations? Where did the hijackers of 9/11 come from? Fifteen of the nineteen were from our ally Saudi Arabia. Thank goodness we are so friendly with that theocratic hellhole. Lets not forget the fact that the Taliban would likely never have been in power in Afghanstan providing a safe haven for Al Queada had it not been for the US supporting them too.
Of course, the leader of Al Qeada is still out there because Iraq was so much more important than finishing the job in Afghanistan.
I wonder how many nuclear plants one could build for the hundreds of billions of dollars spent on invading Iraq? I wonder how much research could have been done on energy self-sufficiency could have been done with that money? The Apollo program could have been funded several times over with that kind of money. The Manhattan Project cost a tiny fraction of the Iraq Adventure.
But I'm sure we are much safer today. Except for the fifteen hundred dead US soldiers and the many thousands of crippled ones. And I'm sure we are much better off with the National Guard under such severe strain.
And I'm sure its better that the