Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (8236)	10/30/2001 3:04:00 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

When times get tough, I'm sorry, but we've just gotta set our normal civilized ethical standards to one side and TAKE what we want and kill anyone in the way. Very provocative, but also in line with my opinion about the "civilized" nature of nations. We're civilized because we VOLUNTARILY restrain ourselves by what we call a rule of law. But when we find that others could care less about how "restrained" we been, or they take that restraint for granted, we see nations, and people quickly come to the point of "screw 'em... if they want to play hardball, we'll play hardball", and take what we need. It probably comparable to living in a small with only a one grocery store or gas station, telling you your credit is no good because they don't like "your kind in these here parts...".. What choice would you have if you need diapers and formula for the kid, or gas for your car and couldn't get 'em because they just didn't like you?? Yep... I'd beat the hell out of them too, and leave them the cash... Hawk

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (8236)	10/30/2001 3:25:53 PM
From: FaultLine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

It's like those bloody n***** picken' cotton.* As in the past, you cleverly weave an epithet into the discussion, nicely camouflaged for shock impact. Well, I don't think that technique is necessary to make your point and in any event, I would certainly be dismayed to find everyone doing it. You may rejoin us in a few days Maurice Winn. --FaultLine

To: Maurice Winn who wrote (8236)	10/31/2001 4:21:48 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The problem with your approach is you are comparing a "life boat" thought problems with "everyday" ethics. If you are stranded on a desert isle with three people, with no food, and no hope of rescue anytime soon, do you eat one of your fellow castaways? Ethics is full of useless thought problems like these, better known as life boat ethics. They are useless because normal standards, normal questions of ETHICS, are suspended. You are comparing a life boat scenario against normal ethical situations. If you accept in the above example that it would be justifiable to eat your fellow, that DOES NOT mean that suddenly normal human taboos against cannibalism go out the door. Withholding a vital natural resource which can not be immediately replaceable elsewhere with the sole intent of destroying or severely harming a nation IS a life boat situation. And so the source of your dilemma. Do I propose throwing property rights and questions of human decency out the window? Not at all. But such questions are only so FRAGILE because they are VOLUNTARY CONVENTIONS which can and have been so easily breached. Calculations of power preserve those conventions. Derek