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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (60933)	10/3/2002 2:34:04 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

That's why we have juries and trials. We don't allow the police to kill suspected bank robbers (they aren't bank robbers in fact until convicted) just because the police have the power to do so. They are entitled to arrest them, and recommend that charges be brought against them. But there is a separate judge and jury who look at the evidence and decide whether, indeed, the suspicions are accurate and they really are bank robbers. With Iraq, the US is acting as accuser, judge, and jury rolled up into one. We don't allow that without our society. We shouldn't allow it on the national stage, either. The UN is acting in some way in the role of judge and jury. They are looking at the accusations and charges made by the US, and determining whether there is sufficient basis for the accused to in fact be imprisoned or executed. The analogy isn't, of course, perfect, but it's reasonable. But in our societal mores, learnt at our mother's knees, we reject the concept that a single authority should act as accuser, judge, and jury without right of appeal. Why you (presumably) accept this very basic and vital principal for internal society, and indeed rely on it to protect you from wrong acts by armed policemen, but reject it for external, you haven't yet explained.