MedVision ad

中文歌詞! (4 Viewers)

withoutaface

Premium Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
15,098
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
JKDDragon said:
First you seem to imply you don't support this policy.

Then you seem to imply it's necessary.

Doesn't matter what you do, if you support his foreign policy which involves kissing American butt, then effectively you approve of his American butt kissing. So yes, I find it a baffling concept that you should hold such contempt against a minor issue like American English yet seem not bothered by the Australian government kissing George Bush's butt and spending billions on a pretty fruitless war.. for what, national security? I wasn't aware Saddam had intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of reaching Australia, if you do please educate me about them.

Thanks, done.
I'm sorry if beheading a totalitarian regime seems to be a fruitless effort to you, I really am. I do not support the war in Iraq because of the WMD issue, and never did, and my only regret is that George Bush Sr didn't finish it off in 1991. National security doesn't necessarily have to be behind every issue, and heaven forbid if a little bit of altruism might slip through! :eek:

Seeing a policy as necessary doesn't mean I like all of its effects, namely I don't like the way that American and Australian cultures are becoming synonymous with one another, and while you may see spelling as a minor issue (which it is), in my mind it is one of many indicators of a loss of identity as a nation.
 
Last edited:

transcendent

Active Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
2,954
Location
Beyond.
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
How about diplomacy? Or assassination? Why not covert operations? America wanted oil more then getting rid of Saddam or finding WMDs. That is my problem with the war.
 

withoutaface

Premium Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
15,098
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
transcendent said:
How about diplomacy? Or assassination? Why not covert operations? America wanted oil more then getting rid of Saddam or finding WMDs. That is my problem with the war.
Diplomacy: How would one go about nicely asking a political leader to stand down? If 10 years worth of it solved nothing, what makes anyone thing that further sustained diplomacy would solve anything?

Assassination/Covert Ops: If Saddam were assassinated Uday or Qusay would have taken power. If they were assassinated some other militant nut would have done the same. The only way to remove a tyrant is to remove both him and all of his supporters, and assassination is hardly going to acheive the latter.
 

transcendent

Active Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
2,954
Location
Beyond.
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
Exhausting diplomacy would mean you at least gave it a chance.
Yes I understand that another person would take over but I thought the point of removing Saddam was because HE ordered the massacres. :rolleyes:
 

withoutaface

Premium Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2004
Messages
15,098
Gender
Male
HSC
2004
transcendent said:
Exhausting diplomacy would mean you at least gave it a chance.
Yes I understand that another person would take over but I thought the point of removing Saddam was because HE ordered the massacres. :rolleyes:
Would his sons or someone who had the same mindset as him (ie his inevitable successor) not continue along the same path?
 

transcendent

Active Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
2,954
Location
Beyond.
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
You are judging them based on the actions of his father without giving them the benefit of the doubt. If they do commit genecide them any military action would be justified, but then this rationality doesn't penetrate as far into the Bush Administration now does it? America is way too trigger happy.
 

jm1234567890

Premium Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Messages
6,516
Location
Stanford, CA
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
transcendent said:
How about diplomacy? Or assassination? Why not covert operations? America wanted oil more then getting rid of Saddam or finding WMDs. That is my problem with the war.
political assasinations are never a good thing. It will just strengthen the resolve of the regime
 

transcendent

Active Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
2,954
Location
Beyond.
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
True but if it DOES get any worse then the Bush Administration will have a REAL reason to 'invade' Iraq. The left would look stupid to disagree with assassinating Saddam, and the only complaint from the invasion would be that they incited any anger from the former Saddam regime which I think is a weaker argument then the War for Oil campaign which just sickens me cause they are actually going to prevent more lives from being destroyed they purely for selfish exploitive reasons such as oil.
 

AsyLum

Premium Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
15,899
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
So, i pose the question, if we find something wrong with another culture, do we have a right to go in and change this?

And if so, are nation-states nothing more than provinces for an imperial western empire ?
 

jm1234567890

Premium Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Messages
6,516
Location
Stanford, CA
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
AsyLum said:
So, i pose the question, if we find something wrong with another culture, do we have a right to go in and change this?

And if so, are nation-states nothing more than provinces for an imperial western empire ?
But that is besides the point. It is a question of responsibilty.

What the regime was doing is considered detrimental to the advancement of the human race and it is the responsibilty of humanity in general to rectify that. It just isn't useful for the inhabitants of iraq to live in fear of sadam's regime.
 

paper cup

pamplemousse
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
2,590
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
AsyLum said:
So, i pose the question, if we find something wrong with another culture, do we have a right to go in and change this?

And if so, are nation-states nothing more than provinces for an imperial western empire ?
well it depends doesn't it...that's a really tricky issue. What woule be percieved as wrong in one culture may be perfectly acceptable in another. :/ and you may end up bungling things worse than they already are
/dumbass comment
 

AsyLum

Premium Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
15,899
Gender
Undisclosed
HSC
N/A
cherryblossom said:
well it depends doesn't it...that's a really tricky issue. What woule be percieved as wrong in one culture may be perfectly acceptable in another. :/ and you may end up bungling things worse than they already are
/dumbass comment
No thats the exact thing i was going for thank you.

jm, if you dont understand that concept, then you are going down the very line of thought of all empires, all tyrants, all dictators, and every supremacist.

We are of a higher moral ground, we are the right, therefore they are wrong, therefore war/invasion/suppresion is justified.
 

paper cup

pamplemousse
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
2,590
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
(^o^) said:
lol I weeped. =')
Then my friend watched it today at my house, she cried, I weeped again and half laughing.
:D

移植視網瞙是不是?

omg I think my chiense is wrong :S

@Carmei: my mum nags me to bed sometimes... at like.. 2am LOL
wept.
:p

(shuddup)
 

paper cup

pamplemousse
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
2,590
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
AsyLum said:
No thats the exact thing i was going for thank you.

jm, if you dont understand that concept, then you are going down the very line of thought of all empires, all tyrants, all dictators, and every supremacist.

We are of a higher moral ground, we are the right, therefore they are wrong, therefore war/invasion/suppresion is justified.
yeppers, like in Australia we're pretty tolerant towards homosexuals, transsexuals (relatively) - what if some conservative Arab or Asian nation decided they didn't like this and used it as justification for coming and invading us?
 

poloktim

\(^o^)/
Joined
Jun 15, 2003
Messages
1,323
Location
Wollongong
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
jm1234567890 said:
But that is besides the point. It is a question of responsibilty.

What the regime was doing is considered detrimental to the advancement of the human race and it is the responsibilty of humanity in general to rectify that. It just isn't useful for the inhabitants of iraq to live in fear of sadam's regime.
But it sets a precendent to shit over the soverignty of any country now. Because we totally decimated the soverignty of a country, who is to say we won't do it again? I mean, lots of people think what Indonesia is doing to Corby is a detrement to humanity, why don't we march in there? Why must we respect the legal system of Indonesia if we don't respect those of other countries?
You might think this is a silly argument, but think about it? Terrorists keep attacking Jakarta, the Australian embassy, and in Bali. The mastermind was only given two years, most Australians think that's injust. Why are we not being responsible and moving into Dempsar and taking him by force? Because we respect the soverignty of Indonesia. Why? Most likely because they're democratic. Seems pretty supremist to me. :)

What you said is beside the point in my opinion. But I guess it comes down to whether or not you believe the ends justifies the means.

In case somebody didn't realise, I don't think the end is important, it's how we get there. :)
 

jm1234567890

Premium Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Messages
6,516
Location
Stanford, CA
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
AsyLum said:
jm, if you dont understand that concept, then you are going down the very line of thought of all empires, all tyrants, all dictators, and every supremacist.

We are of a higher moral ground, we are the right, therefore they are wrong, therefore war/invasion/suppresion is justified.
I'm refering to the potential to condect research and development.

But i know what you mean. it is difficult to simply say, i'm right your wrong, do this or I'll kill you.

However, there are global standards that are set and it is resonable to say they aren't following them. It is also reasonable to say their ideals are in the minority.
In addition, they have not shown any desire to match these global standards.

For example, if I were to create a factory designed to capture and torture kittens. Because I don't like kittens (which isn't true, btw, just hypothetically). Would my factory be allowed to opertate? or would it be forcefully shut down?
 

paper cup

pamplemousse
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
2,590
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
poloktim said:
But it sets a precendent to shit over the soverignty of any country now. Because we totally decimated the soverignty of a country, who is to say we won't do it again? I mean, lots of people think what Indonesia is doing to Corby is a detrement to humanity, why don't we march in there? Why must we respect the legal system of Indonesia if we don't respect those of other countries?
You might think this is a silly argument, but think about it? Terrorists keep attacking Jakarta, the Australian embassy, and in Bali. The mastermind was only given two years, most Australians think that's injust. Why are we not being responsible and moving into Dempsar and taking him by force? Because we respect the soverignty of Indonesia. Why? Most likely because they're democratic. Seems pretty supremist to me. :)

What you said is beside the point in my opinion. But I guess it comes down to whether or not you believe the ends justifies the means.

In case somebody didn't realise, I don't think the end is important, it's how we get there. :)
state sovereignty. we must respect the state sovereignty of Indonesia and other nations, just like they respect ours. if we didn't have this then chaos would erupt.

kittens jm? where did you suddenly get this idea from...it's just where you set these moral standards. we all have different moral standards because of our various contexts...and that goes for countries....cultures. so that's where the tricky stuff comes in...do you think there are really standards that can be defined as 'global'?
because it's all relative...all contextual...(i realise I sound really stupid but you do get what I mean right?)
 

jm1234567890

Premium Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2002
Messages
6,516
Location
Stanford, CA
Gender
Male
HSC
2003
cherryblossom said:
kittens jm? where did you suddenly get this idea from...it's just where you set these moral standards. we all have different moral standards because of our various contexts...and that goes for countries....cultures. so that's where the tricky stuff comes in...
I'm not talking about moral standards, I'm talking about international laws.
 

paper cup

pamplemousse
Joined
Apr 24, 2004
Messages
2,590
Gender
Female
HSC
2005
jm1234567890 said:
I'm not talking about moral standards, I'm talking about international laws.
yes but the moral standards have a direct influence on the laws.
whoever made those laws would have taken into mind their particular moral standards, ethical standards when drafting them. so are they right, to the exclusion of others?
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 4)

Top