|
Iraqi girl (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| emc^2 |
The dumbest thing that world could have EVER done is displace Saddam Hussein (and subsequently kill him).
There. I said it.
Moan and b~tch if you like - don't matter. He was able to keep all these monsters in check. Here comes the brave Uncle Sam to liberate the oppressed people of Iraq... so that they can slaughter each other! Team America - F*CK YEAH!!!!!!!
:rolleyes:
Personally, Iraq deserved Saddam. He had the ballz and nerve to do what US (and most of civilized world) would never be able to do - keep these animals in check. The only way to do that is to gas, torture, mass murder THOUSANDS. ONly then you could keep it from self-imploding.
Way to go George W! You got rid of bad Saddam. Let's see what you can make of it by "winning their hearts and minds" :rolleyes: Oh wait. It ain't working. Hm... Let's send more troops, more money, more resources! That will stop em. Oh. Wait. No it won't. :(
Oh well. If you fail, try and try and try over and over again. Unless you're skydiving. Or invading a country. Or minesweeping.
Anywho, rant over. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by emc^2
Personally, Iraq deserved Saddam. He had the ballz and nerve to do what US (and most of civilized world) would never be able to do - keep these animals in check. The only way to do that is to gas, torture, mass murder THOUSANDS. ONly then you could keep it from self-imploding.
|
just wow. |
|
|
| idoru |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
It was meant as a comment and not a course of action. The fact of the matter is that human rights are (unfortunately) not universal and never have been. Cultural values differ so greatly from locale to locale that it's nearly impossible to create a list of mutually agreeable human rights principles for the world to agree upon. For instance, it's been stated in this thread that it's wrong to take someone's life, but it's also been stated that those who stoned this woman should die horrible deaths. Those two assertions stand in direct opposition to one another. Which is right? The fact of the matter is that there is no answer. It's easy for us in, say, the United States to be indignant that the woman was killed, and yet we commute death sentences to dozens of individuals every year. It's also easy for us to demand just recompense for those who did the deed, but what does that accomplish? If we truly believe that no crime warrants death, how can we advocate such a sentence here? How is right to life in the face of a cultural crime a universal human right when we ourselves don't respect it?
My point here isn't to call us all hypocrites, but rather to point out that life is relative. We express outrage at the taking of her life while calling for the deaths of dozens more. Who are we to make either judgment?
As long as we're pointing out moral deficiencies... why, in the name of everything that makes sense in the world, would anyone want to watch the video? We're appalled by those who took the pictures, but clamor to see them. If you're so sickened by this story, then do something productive and join Amnesty or Oxfam. Engage with the issues and work toward a solution. It is extraordinarily disheartening to see people passively sit back and say "that's horrible, they should all die horrible deaths." Perhaps if we work towards greater cultural reconciliation, the actions of the girl will no longer be viewed as a crime, much less one punishable by death. Instead, we only manage to incite and perpetuate hate, mistrust, and ignorance through value-loaded cultural opinions. |
I love you, in the most heterosexual way possible.  |
|
|
| Perfect_Cheezit |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
It was meant as a comment and not a course of action. The fact of the matter is that human rights are (unfortunately) not universal and never have been. Cultural values differ so greatly from locale to locale that it's nearly impossible to create a list of mutually agreeable human rights principles for the world to agree upon. For instance, it's been stated in this thread that it's wrong to take someone's life, but it's also been stated that those who stoned this woman should die horrible deaths. Those two assertions stand in direct opposition to one another. Which is right? The fact of the matter is that there is no answer. It's easy for us in, say, the United States to be indignant that the woman was killed, and yet we commute death sentences to dozens of individuals every year. It's also easy for us to demand just recompense for those who did the deed, but what does that accomplish? If we truly believe that no crime warrants death, how can we advocate such a sentence here? How is right to life in the face of a cultural crime a universal human right when we ourselves don't respect it?
My point here isn't to call us all hypocrites, but rather to point out that life is relative. We express outrage at the taking of her life while calling for the deaths of dozens more. Who are we to make either judgment?
As long as we're pointing out moral deficiencies... why, in the name of everything that makes sense in the world, would anyone want to watch the video? We're appalled by those who took the pictures, but clamor to see them. If you're so sickened by this story, then do something productive and join Amnesty or Oxfam. Engage with the issues and work toward a solution. It is extraordinarily disheartening to see people passively sit back and say "that's horrible, they should all die horrible deaths." Perhaps if we work towards greater cultural reconciliation, the actions of the girl will no longer be viewed as a crime, much less one punishable by death. Instead, we only manage to incite and perpetuate hate, mistrust, and ignorance through value-loaded cultural opinions. |
The problem isn't with human rights being relative. There is no culture in the entire planet that doesn't value human life innately and there is no culture that doesn't value personal freedom. The problem with human rights also isn't that we have no right to sit back and state something is wrong - killing a child for example. We have a right as people to be upset about situations like this, just like we have the right to be angry that the Iraq War took place and is causing events like this to take place. The problem with human rights is that it is enforced by states, and states will not enforce them. Individuals and communities, not governments, need to be taking stances against like this and not writing off the event like it's some inherent characteristic of people living in the Middle East that can never be changed. |
|
|
| emc^2 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
just wow. |
NOt sure what the direction of this comment is, though I assume you don't agree with my point of view.
I want to ask you a question. Before the whole tree-hugging, peace loving, "why can't we be friends" emo generation took root - what was the concept of original warfare?
That's right - DESTROY, DEMOLISH, OBLITERATE your enemy. Saving civilians, smart bombs, PR actions, "spinning the image" of "military action" (not war) was all NON-EXISTENT in tactics.
The way you stopped your enemy was to either kill or cause enough incentive to STOP THEIR FURTHER ACTIONS. I know that I sound harsh and very UN-PC, but I don't care. I tell you one thing - one tactical nuke dropped on hotbed of terrorist activities and you'd see a totally different sort of reaction. Look at Japan - 2 nukes is all it took for them to start making Nissans, Toyotas, Naruto, and Pokemon.
I don't condone war, murdering of innocents, and insanity that only humans can create. But anything worth doing is worth doing right. And the only right thing to do in war is - end it as quickly as possible. Casualties of war serve as additional deterrent for further escalation. Sorry, such has been the so-called "art of war" for thousands of years and in most cases it has been pretty darn effective.
/end of senseless rant. |
|
|
| idoru |
| quote: | Originally posted by Perfect_Cheezit
The problem isn't with human rights being relative. There is no culture in the entire planet that doesn't value human life innately and there is no culture that doesn't value personal freedom. |
You mean that some of the cultures in the Middle East that oppress women also value personal freedom?
| quote: | | The problem with human rights is that it is enforced by states, and states will not enforce them. |
True. That's because each governing country governs in methods geared more towards their own culture rather than methods of cultures on the other side of the world that differ vastly from themselves.
| quote: | | Individuals and communities, not governments, need to be taking stances against like this and not writing off the event like it's some inherent characteristic of people living in the Middle East that can never be changed. |
I'm kind of split on where I stand on this particular piece. Part of me agrees, but the other part, I dunno. We can't just go over and force our own beliefs on other cultures, that's just not right. |
|
|
| Halcyon+On+On |
| quote: | Originally posted by emc^2
|
There is NO justification for dropping an atomic bomb on a village of civilians. Absolutely none.
You can talk about warfare, cultural genocide, and assimilation all you want - you can talk about the history of mass murder and the supposed "art of war" forever - but there is absolutely no excuse to meet innocent civilians with military warfare and there never has been, however much history books and CNN try to justify such things as 'war' or as a 'glorious victory'.
edit: I know that wasn't necessarily your message, but my post was just a response to what you said, nothing more. |
|
|
| chach |
| whats wrong with being stoned ? |
|
|
| emc^2 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Halcyon+On+On
There is NO justification for dropping an atomic bomb on a village of civilians. Absolutely none.
You can talk about warfare, cultural genocide, and assimilation all you want - you can talk about the history of mass murder and the supposed "art of war" forever - but there is absolutely no excuse to meet innocent civilians with military warfare and there never has been, however much history books and CNN try to justify such things as 'war' or as a 'glorious victory'.
edit: I know that wasn't necessarily your message, but my post was just a response to what you said, nothing more. |
There's no justification for stoning a person for loving someone of different faith. There's no justification for beheading people of different culture. There's no justification for blowing up innocent civilians by flying planes into buildings. There's no justification for dropping nukes. There's no justification for innocent children being shot, blown up, killed in most senseless ways possible.
yet it all happened and continues to happen. not something you read from books - something you could actually witness with your own two eyes.
humans are self-destructive. all our thought process becomes null and void once you enter primitive mindset like some of the people over in Middle East and other places. You can't use western mentality and basic respect for human life with stone-age cavemen. it just won't work. (and no, I'm not afraid of being sued by Geico Cavemen). |
|
|
| igottaknow |
| what would have happened to her if she was dating a jewish guy? :conf: |
|
|
| Ripped Bag |
These guys would love the Old Testament
SMITE A THROW ROCKS |
|
|
| DjWhooCares |
ANY man abusing on a female should be taken down...no matter what the circumstance....
well unless shes coming at u with a knife or something...to hurt u..thats diff...but u all should know what i mean!:whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip:
bahh what a horrible video...and hundereds around just tryint to take a peek with their phones!!...bunch of savages!! |
|
|
|
|
