You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Evildave's Third Terrorism Solution
Grammatron
Philosopher
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2003
- Messages
- 5,444
evildave said:
I fail to see.... what?
I "fail to see" how increasing the poverty of countries by destroying their infrastructures, only to have to rebuild them at great cost to ourselves over a number of years under constant threat of attack by insurgents and opportunists who take advantage of the anarchy "helps".
The terrorists/insurgents are "bad guys". Does making the U.S.A. seem as bad as, or even worse than the terrorists "help"? I "fail to see" how that helps, either. It helps make slogans like, "The Student Is Gone; the Master Has Arrived" in reference to the U.S. occupation of Iraq seem credible and easy to repeat by the people we're 'liberating'.
You fail to see gray in the black and white world of yours.
evildave
Unregistered
E
Grey? You mean like the "grey" of defining beatings and other abuses of prisoners "not torture", or the "grey" of attempting to deny people due process and hearings for their imprisonment by redefining their status with different labels?
I seem to perceive lots of moral relativism in the current administration in regards to treatment of their "little trophies".
What precisely would be a clear delineation between "too far" and "OK" when it comes to human rights abuses?
I seem to perceive lots of moral relativism in the current administration in regards to treatment of their "little trophies".
What precisely would be a clear delineation between "too far" and "OK" when it comes to human rights abuses?
Poor guy can't even improvise to wipe his own butt.Jocko said:Hey, I'm out of toilet paper in here. ED, pass me another one of your brilliant ideas, willya?
The prisoners should be getting soft treatment to make them soft. They should have access to as much as they can eat and drink and watch and listen to:evildave said:Grey? You mean like the "grey" of defining beatings and other abuses of prisoners "not torture", or the "grey" of attempting to deny people due process and hearings for their imprisonment by redefining their status with different labels?
I seem to perceive lots of moral relativism in the current administration in regards to treatment of their "little trophies".
What precisely would be a clear delineation between "too far" and "OK" when it comes to human rights abuses?
(1) Their choice of various kinds of drinks such as distilled water, mineral water, fruit juices, soda pop, alcoholic beverages, etc.
(2) Their choice of sweets such as cake, cookies, ice cream, etc.
(3) Their choice of salty snacks such as pretzels, corn chips, potato chips, etc.
(4) Their choice of fresh fruits and vegetables.
(5) Their choice of movies: action, comedy, romance, porn, whatever they want to see provided that it's not pro-terrorism propaganda.
(6) Their choice of music provided that it doesn't have pro-terrorism lyrics.
They could start simply and just provide an unlimited supply of chocolates and cakes and water to end every meal. Let them pig out.
evildave
Unregistered
E
Well, seeing as most of them haven't actually been charged with any crimes....
But fortunately Dave's not in power, so we're okay. What would be really scary would be if people who commanded armies and stuff took that attitude.Grammatron said:
[...] nor do you understand there is more than one solution to this very complicated problem.
Wait...
Oh sh!t...