Another hypothetical question for anti-war persons. - Page 3

Nathan · #21 (**permalink**) 01-08-2007, 09:48 AM

Quote:

Sorry, argumentum ad verecundiam is not acceptable - I need proof.

See signature.

LoSconosciuto · #22 (**permalink**) 01-08-2007, 05:51 PM

the American Foreign Legion. Not the American Legion, the American Foreign Legion. It's motto: Everybody else's business is our business. The logo would be a giant nose buried between two buttocks.

This would be the group we'd send in to mop up any "objectionable" foreign powers. Gender would not matter. Age wouldn't matter. Physical condition wouldn't matter. Mental stability wouldn't matter. Any tough talking old woman, with bad knees and an artificial hip, would still be welcome to strap on an M16 and have at it... whether she hears voices in her head or not.

Jokes (sorta) aside, I understand the original poster's point. I see things on TV or read about something that makes me think how great it would be if we could send in the 82nd Airborne and kick the stuffings out of some murderous dictator. But just like in Iraq, when you do that, you have to be prepared to stick around and rebuild. And how often is it that the main bad guy is the only bad guy. Just like in Iraq, maybe you end up with multiple bad guys filling the vacuum you've created.

If nothing else, one thing I hope we've learned (this time) is that if you want to go in with guns blazing, you need a plan that extends past the V-Day celebration.

But one of my main questions: at what point does our government decide that it should take from the people it represents, to give to those it does not represent? It may seem like a cold question, but it is one which (IMO) MUST be answered before another feel good, multi-billion dollar crusade is begun. Forced redistribution of wealth is forced redistribution of wealth, no matter how you try to spin it. I generally do not agree with this scheme. And that's another reason I oppose fiscally liberal, nation building neoconservatism, as this relates it to its Trotskyite roots.

Jake · #23 (**permalink**) 01-08-2007, 09:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chesby05";p=&quot

Apotropoxy, you are my new best friend.

Jake, be careful when you start asking people for proof to support their arguments. They might just turn around and ask YOU for some to support yours.

Lesseee - he's a masochist, so that must make you a sadist! What a lovely couple!

Johnderondon · #24 (**permalink**) 01-09-2007, 03:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake";p=&quot

The US dealt with unsavory dictators...

Yes it did, didn`t it?

And continues to.....so save the Cold War excuses

mejganh · #25 (**permalink**) 01-09-2007, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by nawbut";p=&quot

If all of the freedom-loving freedom-lovers who love freedom live by their word they will not have traded with Scumeria, so its government will not be able to import the arms with which to continue the subjugation of their people. It will be crushed by popular revolution if not suppored by external powers - read the history.

Oh, like the soviet union, nazi germany, and north korea have been crushed by popular revolution? Garsh, it sure seems people are always ready to trade with dictators - certainly europeans. Hell, even as we speak, euros are catching some rays on Castro's beaches.

Slow down now, don't blame the Europeans for the wrongs caused by the USA itself! Fidel Castros' beaches is the results of the USAs' overconsumption of everything and primarily drugs -and of course- the US peoples' favorite; guns!!! Europeans worship knowledge, not wars! But the USA is the very foundation of wars all around the world! Get some knowledge before you go out accusing others!!

mejganh · #26 (**permalink**) 01-09-2007, 05:48 AM

[quote="apotropoxy";p="327089"]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake";p=&quot

There is a country called Scumeria. Scumeria has never invaded its neighboring countries. It doesn't support terrorists aboad. Scumeria is sitting on an ocean of oil reserves. It is a horrible dictatorship. It meticulously follows international law regarding it's relations with other countries. However, inside its borders, it kills political enemies of the state by the hundred thousand. It enforces it's rule by torture chambers, rape rooms, midnight raids by the police - all the things dictatorships do. Of course the people have zero rights in Scumeria.

Now the question is, what if anything should other countries do about Scumeria?[/quote]

If any country tries to reverse the domestic politics of Scumeria it will find itself at war with the United States of America.
You see, you have described Saudi Arabia [except that it does support terrorists abroad but its internal opposition has been forced to be quiescent due to decades of absolute oppression.] It has a very special and protected relationship with the USA, particularly the Bush family. Our country will go to nearly any extreme to see that the House of Saud remains in power.

Now a question for you:

What should the world do about a lone superpower which:
1. Continues to pollute the planet at a rate that may well cause massive climate change
2. Invades countries which pose no threat to it.
3. Uses international monetary institutions to force poor countries to privatize their natural resources
4. Has military installations in virtually every country in the world.
5. Sponsors and supports dictatorships around the world while squelching democratic impulses in these places.
6. Has the highest domestic incarceration rate of any country in the world.
7. Imprisons minority populations in its country at far higher rates than that of the majority population.
8. Has the highest average prison sentences of any of the world's countries.

Doesn't this country seem to be a bit paranoid?

Good point!!!!!!!!!! I wish more Americans could see this point and do something about it! A country that has internal problems can't change by external pressure, the people inside the country, those who really need the changes has to deal with it themselfs, by political engagement and engagment in general, anything helps! If the people passively accept the treatment they get, well, then the government may not know their limits!

mejganh · #27 (**permalink**) 01-09-2007, 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jake";p=&quot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chesby05";p=&quot

you are my new best friend.

Jake, be careful when you start asking people for proof to support their arguments. They might just turn around and ask YOU for some to support yours.

Lesseee - he's a masochist, so that must make you a sadist! What a lovely couple!

JAKE you are incredibly childish!! How old are you? 5?! I don't understand why people even bother to answer you seriously!

mejganh · #28 (**permalink**) 01-09-2007, 06:06 AM

Apotropoxy, your my bestfriend too!

mejganh · #29 (**permalink**) 01-09-2007, 06:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LoSconosciuto";p=&quot

the American Foreign Legion. Not the American Legion, the American Foreign Legion. It's motto: Everybody else's business is our business. The logo would be a giant nose buried between two buttocks.

This would be the group we'd send in to mop up any "objectionable" foreign powers. Gender would not matter. Age wouldn't matter. Physical condition wouldn't matter. Mental stability wouldn't matter. Any tough talking old woman, with bad knees and an artificial hip, would still be welcome to strap on an M16 and have at it... whether she hears voices in her head or not.

Jokes (sorta) aside, I understand the original poster's point. I see things on TV or read about something that makes me think how great it would be if we could send in the 82nd Airborne and kick the stuffings out of some murderous dictator. But just like in Iraq, when you do that, you have to be prepared to stick around and rebuild. And how often is it that the main bad guy is the only bad guy. Just like in Iraq, maybe you end up with multiple bad guys filling the vacuum you've created.

If nothing else, one thing I hope we've learned (this time) is that if you want to go in with guns blazing, you need a plan that extends past the V-Day celebration.

But one of my main questions: at what point does our government decide that it should take from the people it represents, to give to those it does not represent? It may seem like a cold question, but it is one which (IMO) MUST be answered before another feel good, multi-billion dollar crusade is begun. Forced redistribution of wealth is forced redistribution of wealth, no matter how you try to spin it. I generally do not agree with this scheme. And that's another reason I oppose fiscally liberal, nation building neoconservatism, as this relates it to its Trotskyite roots.

I didn't get your "propose"...? What was your point?