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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: shades who wrote (48996)	3/30/2006 5:53:23 PM
From: regli	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 116555

"so what do you think about that woman in Iraq who praised Bush for liberating her - is she to be totally disregarded? Have you lost all objectivity in your rage against an evil dictator as Nietzche warned?" First and foremost, there is the issue of sovereignty. A country has the right to establish its own customs and laws which does include its own political system. en.wikipedia.org "In constitutional and international law, the concept of sovereignty also pertains to a government possessing full control over its own affairs within a territorial or geographical area or limit, and in certain context to various organs (such as courts of law) possessing legal jurisdiction in their own chief, rather than by mandate or under supervision. Determining whether a specific entity is sovereign is not an exact science, but often a matter of diplomatic dispute." Liberation is a slippery slope. What is to one person liberation is to another interference. The important point here is that moral values often do not transcend cultural boundaries. It is also important to note that laws are local and that under the Universal Human Rights Declaration everyone has the “right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law”. un.org Therefore as regrettable as that woman’s experience is, it is very difficult to prove that here father was not accorded a local tribunal under the laws in effect in Iraq at the time, however arbitrary. I am quite certain that the Bush administration did not investigate the legal issues before parading her around. It is not ANY country’s or culture’s prerogative to decide what the laws should be in another sovereign nation. Based on what we know today, Iraq was invaded under the wrong pretext in violation of international law. Many people have suffered including many Iraqi soldiers that were killed during the attacks. These soldiers often aren’t mentioned but in fact, in an illegal war, these soldiers have to be counted as innocent victims. How many of these people and their wives, children and parents were paraded at the Bush state of the union? The problem is that the U.S.' and Britain’s Iraq adventure has resulted in a huge number of lives lost and caused a lot more suffering than was happening under Saddam Hussein. However, legally this is not the point. Self determination is the key here and Iraq has the right to self determination however painful that may turn out to be. Likely it can’t be any worse than what is happening today as it has never been as bad in Iraq as it is today. Just another point, that woman likely will need to be "liberated" again soon as under the new constitution women have lost many rights they were afforded under Saddam Hussein. now.org ”… "Iraqi women will have far fewer rights under this constitution than they have enjoyed for decades, and for this reason all Iraqi women should pause to consider whether they will vote for it," Gandy urged in August. "Adoption of this constitution will likely result in the loss of rights gained over past decades. Conservative Sharia law as the basis for the country's family law system threatens to send Iraqi women back to the Middle Ages.”…