A Hypothetical Question - Page 2

Blade · #11 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 11:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bla-bla

Thank you for bringing that point up. A frontal assault against military targets
is exactly where American power is most effective.

It's a protracted policing of a civil war that is more destructive to humanitarian
goals, and the preservation of American assets and life.

But had that policing not taken place, the probable outcome is the accession of another "Saddam Hussein" - this time an islamofascist one in place of a arab transnationalist fascist. Net gain in that case? Zip. Such actions are, as you say, much more difficult than rolling over half-baked armies. Is that all the argument necessary against them - that they are more difficult? I heard the dimwit lib media loudly proclaim that this war has lasted longer than WWII - they're comparing apples and oranges.

How about this analogy - I say I take showers every day, but never wash the car. When you ask why, I say triumphantly that it's more difficult to wash the car.

Daybreaker · #12 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade

On the one hand, if they leave the dictator alone, and he and his successors kill people by the hundred thousand endlessly into the future ...

And on the other hand?

You didn't finish your question. On the one hand, if they leave the dictator alone, he and his successors kill lots of people ... and on the other hand ...?

You're on the edge of an epiphany, Blade.

raytri · #13 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 11:49 AM

If there's a documented slaughter going on -- hundreds of thousands, as you say -- then you intervene to stop it.

If the toll is smaller -- a few thousand a year -- then the humanitarian argument becomes more difficult to make, given the expense and risks of intervention and the difficulty of justifying an invasion. There are probably better places to invade, where the toll is higher and the legitimacy of the cause clearer.

raytri · #14 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 11:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade

But had that policing not taken place, the probable outcome is the accession of another "Saddam Hussein"

hey, I thought this was a hypothetical example....

BuckNaked · #15 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 12:18 PM

Do they have oil or some other natural resource (like slave labor) that can be exploited to benefit the profits of the corporations of our own country? Also is there some type of strategically geographical significance, that we could use to our advantage sometime down the line at a later date?

Hypothetically that is?

Of course the right thing to do is not what is considered normal behavior, if it was Cuba would have been liberated when Russia fell if not sooner!

JavaBlack · #16 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade

There is a country - The Republic of Slobovia. It is a horrifying evil dictatorship. It is clear that nobody can overthrow the dictator - several attempts have been made, and all crushed. Many hundreds of thousands of the people of Slobovia have been killed by the dictator. The democratic nations contemplate this country: It is rather weak compared to first world countries. Should they liberate the country, they wonder. They think they can do that in relatively low cost of life, but they are concerned that a conflict between ethnic groups will break out in the aftermath, with fairly large loss of life. On the one hand, if they leave the dictator alone, and he and his successors kill people by the hundred thousand endlessly into the future.

What should the democratic countries do, and why?

Well, first thing they'd ask is:
If we expect the dictator to keep killing into the future for all time...
Why do we expect the ethnic conflicts that break out to have a limited timespan?

Seems like we better have a plan to curb those ethnic conflicts before we replace one bad situation with another.

Tedminator · #17 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JavaBlack

Well, first thing they'd ask is:...

I'm thinking they'd first want to know where the hell is this place?

Herkdriver · #18 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blade

If you have a problem grasping the idea of hypothetical questions, please go elsewhere.

There is a country - The Republic of Slobovia. It is a horrifying evil dictatorship. It is clear that nobody can overthrow the dictator - several attempts have been made, and all crushed. Many hundreds of thousands of the people of Slobovia have been killed by the dictator. The democratic nations contemplate this country: It is rather weak compared to first world countries. Should they liberate the country, they wonder. They think they can do that in relatively low cost of life, but they are concerned that a conflict between ethnic groups will break out in the aftermath, with fairly large loss of life. On the one hand, if they leave the dictator alone, and he and his successors kill people by the hundred thousand endlessly into the future.

What should the democratic countries do, and why?

Hypothetically?

Learn the lessons from Iraq.

Diplomacy, Diplomacy, Diplomacy

There is only so much democratic nations can do without instituting a "Spartanesque" war-like Society where every man, woman and child is indoctrinated into Military life.

Personally? I like the fact we have a diverse population. I appreciate those who are willing to don a uniform and learn Soldiering skills, but I also appreciate those who learn to play guitar or plant a garden.

Hypothetically of course.

Have a good evening Sir.

Tedminator · #19 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herkdriver

Diplomacy, Diplomacy, Diplomacy

yeh yeh yeh talk talk talk. Enough talk, time to die.

Where is this place so we can atleast start planning a military option, so I'll need know who to kill and where they are at.

Herkdriver · #20 (**permalink**) 03-20-2008, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tedminator

yeh yeh yeh talk talk talk. Enough talk, time to die.

Where is this place so we can atleast start planning a military option.

Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and not clothed.
Dwight D. Eisenhower

There are alternatives, they should be exhausted....

Going to war is a serious endeavor...there is no replay button, there is no turning back...

Of course sometimes it is all there is left to do to stop an injustice, but it should not in so doing become an injustice itself.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Hypothetical 'what if'	exigent	Political Opinions & Beliefs	5	02-12-2007 11:35 AM
Another hypothetical question for anti-war persons.	Jake	Political Opinions & Beliefs	45	01-21-2007 10:29 PM
Hypothetical Proposition	poletree	Off-Topic Chat	12	05-04-2006 03:27 PM
Here's a hypothetical for you	SenaxFlatulus	Political Opinions & Beliefs	33	06-23-2004 12:00 AM
extremely hypothetical scenario	EiregoSod	Elections & Campaigns	6	04-28-2004 04:47 PM