Saddam's a bad guy, so we should....

It would be nice for the Middle East to have at least one democracy besides Israel. Democracies tend to be our friends, because we tend to have a mutual interest in freedom and human rights.

Well, our interst in human rights and freedom seems to wax and wane these days. The US doesn't have the greatedt record in the world on human rights, and Rumsfeld wants to severely curtail civil rights for a great many people.Anyway, I stated in a now-closed thread that Palestinians living in Israel weren't allowed to vote, but I was wrong.I retract that claim.

[QUOTE] by zipzip ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
It would be nice for the Middle East to have at least one democracy besides Israel. Democracies tend to be our friends, because we tend to have a mutual interest in freedom and human rights.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++I agree that it would be nice to have more democracies in the MidEast, though I'd be willing to settle for a constitutional Monarchy (like England, the Netherlands, Denmark, etc etc).Unfortunately democracy does not necessarily mean a country is interested in freedom or human rights (other than paying lipservice to them). Isreal and the US are two good examples. While I think we are both interested in freedom (within limits), we both have terrible human rights records (and no I am not talking about Guantanamo).Unfortunately there is a sad fact about democracies which no one in the white house seems to get.While all of us may wish the governments of the MidEast were more democratic, the best way to prevent them from accepting democracy is by invading and imposing one upon them.holmes[This message has been edited by holmes, 02-04-2003]

The US has an excellent human rights records. Every country has made mistakes, but the US has consistently been a champion for human rights and freedom throughout the world. C'mon -- we have the only free, open, and diverse society in the world, and we give 60% of the world's foreign aid.Just ask Europe about WWII and the holocaust, ask East-West Berlin who got the better deal. Ask Chinese Christians or Falun Gong how they like their torture and persecution. Ask women from most Middle Eastern countries how they like their place in society. Actually, most countries in the UN are essentially tin-horn dictatorships with little or no regard for human rights. And rarely does anybody besides the US lead the charge to prevent human rights abuses. Even in Europe -- who led the charge to help the Kosovars(there was no UN resolution there, folks)? Go ahead and bash the US. But without the US the world would be in a lot worse shape today.I don't know how to really look at the Israeli human rights record -- it was great until the intifada and then they had a nest of swarming terrorists on their hands blowing up their citizens. Hard to have a free an open society for non-citizens who want to kill you.We can't guarantee post-war Iraq will have different goals. But its current state is pretty awful, and I can't see how a free society could be nearly this bad.

"Did you even read SLPx's response? It was the same thing repeated over and over: condemning the right wing. He refuted nothing I said with anything of substance. SLPx stated he is not going to post to me again, by default I win."In order for there to be arefutation of substance, one would have had to produce something of substance to refute.You puked up a bunch of "nuh-uhs" and declared victory.Yeah, I guess you win, troll.[This message has been edited by SLPx, 02-04-2003]

First, allow me to remind you:

quote:

---

This is the first - and last - time I will reply to you. You are not even worth the effort.

---

You lack commitment. I am quite disapointed in you.Second I named specific examples to back up my claims (sprinkled with sarcasm and insults for fun). I am sorry they didn't agree with your left wing views.

quote:

---

You puked up a bunch of "nuh-uhs" and declared victory.

---

Actually declaring victory was to get a rise out of you and get you to respond. Which worked. So NOW I can declare victory. Thank you kindly for the satisfaction.

quote:

---

Yeah, I guess you win, troll.

---

Troll is always preferred over simpleton.

hi. sorry i kindof got in late on this one. going back to post two, did splxx actually say anything to counter jdean's points. no. all he did was complain about his right-wing. insults are not a valid response in a debate.

zipzip, I love that reference to middle east women.The soviets had been increasing the quality of life for women in the countries that they "took over." The US repulsed them using fundamentalist factions, with promises that they could reinstate the near slave conditions of women.We allowed this to continue and degrade in Afghanistan up until 9-11. Now we claim how great we are to set them free.Yeah... really humane.Free? We have more people in prison than almost all other countries (percentage to population none the less).Yeah China is worse, so what? Is that how we judge things these days... hey it could be worse?The US has consistently been a champion of human rights in OTHER PEOPLE'S COUNTRIES, and as long as it was expedient (China-US relations, as well as Taliban Afghanistan are cases in point).I agree that the US was relatively the most free and humane up till ww2 (except prohibition era, and treatment of indians). After that its been coasting on its propaganda machine.Have you been to Europe lately? I don't see how anyone can go to most European countries and come away saying America is still the most free and humane country out there (and for some open and diverse either).We aren't the worst, but we certainly are not the best (which is the standard I like to set my goals by).There's only so long you can talk about the past before it's just THE PAST. And only so long you can point out the countries which are worse.You are straight out ignorant regarding Isreali human rights issues if you claim it all started with the intifada. Both sides have been killing each other for so long (before Isreal even existed) its impossible to credibly say "who started it first".But I tell you I'll be glad when they're finally arguing over "who ended it first."holmes

Well, let's see..I'm looking at the posts in question in another window..Jdean makes a false "translation" by misrepresenting what I had actually written (re: Bush's speech written by someone else).Nothing to respond to there...Makes an asinine quip about my statement "seems" ...Nothing to respond to there...Then goes on claiming I "proved myself wrong" when in fact he actually writes that "though I'm sure Bush was concerned about his job", which was my point. So I guess i wasn't "proved wrong" after all. Then writes some un-referenced "matter of fact" statments. I interpret unreferednced statements as opinion.
Nothing to respond to there.After I quote Bush saying at a press conference re:Hussein "After all, this is the guy that tried to kill my dad", produces a few irrelevant quotes in a foolish attempot to imply that I had taken Bush out of context.
I show how one of them was an act of dimwittedness by Reagan. No need to reply to the others.Claims that the "smoking guns" Bush admin. keeps claiming we have is kept hush-hush because of 'national security.'
Better to go to war for no reasons at all, I suppose..Nothing to reply to beyond that."Backs that up" with a claim about Hussein killing spies. Which I correctly point out all governments do. Including our own. What else to respond to?makes claim about Bush admin addressing the "Where's Osama " question.
No references to support it, I hadn't heard of it. Nothing to respond to.Implies that I am stupid - imagine that!I point out that the "Bell Curve" was debunked. What else to say?Claims that the international sympathy for us post-9/11 - which Bush squandered - was a product of the media.
How shall I reply to such conspiracy mongering?I ask about unelected speech writers, he makes a silly quip about "left-wing" speech writers. The 3rd Grade effect, I call it.
What should I have responded with there, Winnie?He makes some blame-Clinton quip. Not worthy of reply.Bashes Jimmy Carter. Not worthy of reply.And then it ends.Tell me, Winston, what exactly in jdean's diatribe warranted a seious reply?You seem to know...------------------
"The analysis presented in this study unambiguously shows that chimpanzees are our closest relatives to the exclusion of other primates. This is an important point that cannot be discounted. Further, the functional genetic differences that are represented by nonsynonymous sites also show this relationship. The notion that the great apes form a functional and evolutionary grade is not supported by our analysis. Rather, humans and chimpanzees are a functional evolutionary clade."
Page Not Found | University of Chicago

I think it is pretty clear that politicians in the US were using the ends justifies the means mentality to fight Communism. Bad men were allowed to remain in power to stem the tide of what was considered the greater evil -- expansionist Communism and possible Communist takeover of the entire world, including the West. Although I may not agree with the methods, I do agree with the aims.Part of our problem in the prisons is that those people are in prison because they deserve to be there. In China you are probably there for some other reason. We have a lot of very free people in this country who are unfortunately free to do bad things and hurt other people.As far as your argument for Europe. Don't get me wrong, I have been to Europe recently and have a number of European friends that I have deep affection for. But by and large, Europeans are dissipated, work 30 h weeks (if you have ever had to work on a European timetable, you start to wonder how anything ever gets done -- these guys are lazy), pay incredibly high taxes (70%) to live in a coddling, stifling socialist network and allow the US to take the brunt of enforcement of UN resolutions when there are any. I do not see how Europe has been a lone champion of human rights in any way.As far as the discussion topic of this thread goes -- it is a joke to hear Germany warn about the path to war -- c'mon, you are still smarting from giving the world Hitler. And France -- c'mon, the last time you were in this position, you let the Nazi war machine roll right over you unimpeded. Maybe we shouldn't go to war, but I would prefer that the histrionics not come from our European friends, who have a historical knack for screwing things up.As far as Israeli human rights...what exactly would you do different? The Arab world is rabidly anti-Semitic, period. These two groups cannot live together and never will, and I see no way out except isolation of the two groups. Obviously suicide bombings need to stop --these are murder and an act of war. If Canada started sending suicide bombers across the border, the border would be closed and/or we would go to war. I realize that the occupied territories are not Canada, but there is not good analogy because the PA is a demonstrably corrupt organization that funds terrorism against Israel.[This message has been edited by zipzip, 02-05-2003]

With regards to Iraq and WMDs, I have this theory that I've been working on.Those chemical weapon warheads actually came from somewhere else. They were washed into working position at preexisting military bases by a rogue surge from the Persian Gulf. They could have come from anywhere!Think I'm close?

Edge, are you implying that TB has been handling Iraq's reporting on WMD? He has been suspiciously quiet here lately. And PB has also gone to ground. Does that mean that Saddam Hussain has recruited him to develop his GUToB and unleash it on western civilisation with catastrophic effects? Now that's really terrifying.

"Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people don't want war: neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship... [v]oice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country." --Hermann Goering (Second in command to Adolf Hitler, from a published conversation that took place at the time of the Nuremberg trials"

Yes, let's see indeed Winston.I am following SLPx's crazy smart technique of looking at a post in another window also and making sure every one knows.I make an educated assumption everything SLPx was listening/reading is left wing in nature. I instruct you to his entire post for reference of this guess. Also note no reference was given for these town hall discussions. By SLPx's definition, everything stated in discussions were opinion and not fact, regardless if discussions cited legitimate facts.I point out he didn't actually hear or read the speach (which in my opinion is important if you are going to flame what was said).I point out the contributing factors why the US-Iraq conflict prematurely ended. Whereas numbskull leads us to believe Bush Sr. was only concerned with re-election. Typical left wing rhetoric used to discredit Bush.SLPx uses an out of context quote to stregthen his absurd opinion of impending war. I point out the evil of using quotes out of context by citing quotes from slpx on this forum.I make logical reference as to why the Bush Administration does not reveal it's entire poker hand whereas SLPx states nothing but opinion.I state Hussein has been known to kill our spies. Slpx agrees all governments kills spies but doesn't understand why revealing intelligence would put these people in danger and compromise their position.I state the Bush Administration recently addressed Osama and Al-Qaeda, however, foxnews and cnn must be too obscure for his news palate.I ask him where he considers himself on the bell. No implication of being retarded was made, however, he took it as that.Apparently calling the bell curve theory "a rascist tome by a right-wing twit" proves it is false. Of course no reference was given, so once again this is opinion.I state internation sympathy is the same. Which is true. I guess all those palestinians parading and cheering in the street on 9/11 were not celebrating our tragedy but merely their way of cheering us up at our time of need.I respond to his rhetorical question. I find it amusing SLPx is bitching about speech writers although he never bothered to actually hear the speech.I post N. Korea utilized the nuclear reactor Clinton bestowed to them for manufacturing war grade uranium. SLPx resorts to calling me an evil right winger since he cannot refute the statement.I mock his stupitidy with a smart ass quip about holding hands and singing.I understand why you are confused Winston. SLPx creates a thread spouting off why we shouldn't go to war with Iraq but at the same time states the US should have finished the WAR the first time. .The real kicker is his entire diatribe is all about a speech he never even heard.Not very scientific is it?

quote:

---

Well, our interst in human rights and freedom seems to wax and wane these days. The US doesn't have the greatedt record in the world on human rights, and Rumsfeld wants to severely curtail civil rights for a great many people.

---

I think Shraf and I have found something to agree about. I doesn't matter how much better the US is in it's human rights record than other countries...the truth is that we are getting much worse than just 3 years ago. Also The US objections to a countires human rights record tends to be less vocal when we are profiting from them either financially or politically.It's hard to back a government that has such a shakey foriegn policy as ours.