Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Elroy who wrote (222778)	3/8/2005 4:39:43 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) of 1572604

So the conclusion is regardless of what is going on in some country, other countries should never use force to stop it unless they themselves are threatened. And the implication of that is that if the rulers of some country are routinely raping the adolescent female population of some minority group in their country, you would not go save those minority girls. You can't have it both ways - sometimes you've either got to fight, or let the bad guys be bad. Whose wanting it both ways? I say no period. To answer your question..........I don't like it at all when the 20% oppress the 80%. I didn't ask if you like it. I asked if you would go in and forcibly stop those 20% from their oppressive acts or not. Would you ever stop them IN ANY SITUATION where you aren't directly threatened? No.........for the second or third time. Your relatively immoral conclusion seems to be that using force is OK if YOU are threatened (you actually haven't even said this), but using force is NOT ok if OTHERS are threatened. Exactly right. I believe in a nation's sovereignty and international law. And I also believe that each nation has its own manifest destiny. Because I firmly believe there are good reasons for international law and it should be respected. I also believe there are good reasons for respecting the sovereignty of every nation. Why do you think that respecting "international law" (whatever that is) and respecting "sovereignity of nations" are more important than fighting for the rights of oppressed people to be free from persecution at the hands of people more powerful than them that happen to be citizens of the same country, which is not your country? Because I think people should fight for their own rights. Why is national sovereignity more important than stopping those armed government militia in Darfur from raping village girls? Because I don't believe an invading army would make it right. I don't believe any one country on this planet is imbued with the necessary talents to make it work out properly. In truth, this invasion of Iraq is a disaster. Some people are excited because there was an election but in reality, the place is a mess. And it comes down to our own shortcomings. Its because we are not that great at invading another country and setting things right. No one is. I know you don't agree with that notion.........but its how it looks to me. I see only a slight improvement in the lives of the Iraqis........and that's tenuous at best. ted

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next