Originally posted by richhoeyI guess I was confused by the following posts:
Yes I have read the whole thread and no it wasn't what he was arguing. It may be what he believes, and you may happen to know that, but that's not the same thing.
Rich.
Why not simply say it would be the humane and proper thing to do and leave it at that?
We shouldn't improve the treatment of prisoners because it'll make us look good; we should improve the treatment of prisoners because it is the moral and just thing to do. It is irrelevant to me whether other countries think that is a good or bad thing; it's still the right thing regardless of what their opinion is.
Hmmm. Sounds a lot like what you were claiming. Perhaps you are the one who is confused.
Originally posted by howardgeeMore nonsense. People really don't mind corrupt policemen much, so long as they're completing the task given them (policing) in an effective manner. What they don't like are self-appointed policemen repressing them. No matter how well-behaved foreign occupiers are, they're still foreign occupiers and people are going to resist them. So they can give the guys at Gitmo filet mignon brunches and a french maid in every tiger cage and it wouldn't reduce the level of resistance against American hegemony one bit.
The US shouldn't police the world....unfortunately they do!
and with this role comes responsibility.
There are few things worse than corrupt policemen.
Once the people realise how corrupt the force is, they cease to have any respect and start to take the law into their own hands.
This is what has happened the world over with regard to the US.
Guantanmo bay is just one of many indications of this malaise.
Originally posted by bbarrOK, in journalistic convention if you follow someone's name with a colon you are quoting them - not replying to them, as apparently he was doing. But fine, I'm glad my bile was unrequired.
I guess I was confused by the following posts:
[b]Why not simply say it would be the humane and proper thing to do and leave it at that?
We shouldn't improve the treatment of prisoners because it'll make us look good; we should improve the treatment of prisoners because it is the moral and just thing to do. It is irrelevant to me whether other c ...[text shortened]...
Hmmm. Sounds a lot like what you were claiming. Perhaps you are the one who is confused.
Rich.
Originally posted by no1marauderYou would know all about nonsense:
More nonsense. People really don't mind corrupt policemen much, so long as they're completing the task given them (policing) in an effective manner. What they don't like are self-appointed policemen repressing them. No matter how well-behaved foreign occupiers are, they're still foreign occupiers and people are going to resist them. So they ...[text shortened]... y tiger cage and it wouldn't reduce the level of resistance against American hegemony one bit.
"People really don't mind corrupt policemen much" ; what absolute baloney!
Perhaps you are not aware of the complete lack of respect America commands from most developed nations. This is a consequence of situations like Guantanamo. Western Europe for example, sees that the US cannot even uphold such basic human rights as the Geneva convention, let alone observe the Kyoto treaty.
America is reviled the world over, not just amongst the religiously brainwashed fanatical countries.
Originally posted by howardgeeWhat is your point in this thread? If it is to say the prisoners should be treated better, no duh. If your point is that IF they were treated better it would have all kinds of favorable impacts on the opinion of people in the whole wide world, that's BS. Make up your mind what you're arguing and maybe I'll argue with you if I disagree.
You would know all about nonsense:
"People really don't mind corrupt policemen much" ; what absolute baloney!
Perhaps you are not aware of the complete lack of respect America commands from most developed nations. This is a consequence of situations like Guantanamo. Western Europe for example, sees that the US cannot even uphold such basic human ...[text shortened]... ica is reviled the world over, not just amongst the religiously brainwashed fanatical countries.
And if people are rescued from being murdered, they are just as happy whether it was done by a "corrupt" policeman or by Dudley Do-Right!
Originally posted by no1marauderOf course if the prisoners were better treated it would make the rest of the world view the US more favourably (Or rather with less disdain).
What is your point in this thread? If it is to say the prisoners should be treated better, no duh. If your point is that IF they were treated better it would have all kinds of favorable impacts on the opinion of people in the whole wide world, that's BS. Make up your mind what you're arguing and maybe I'll argue with you if I disagree.
...[text shortened]... ed, they are just as happy whether it was done by a "corrupt" policeman or by Dudley Do-Right!
Your personal attitude that 'it does not matter how you treat others, it will not change their opinion of you' is horribly flawed. Unfortunately it is currently reflected throughout the US, which is why you run rough-shod over everyone including the UN.
If there could have been one good thing to come out of 11/9/2001, it would be that the US realised that it cannot piss on the rest of the world without some blowing back in their face.
Unfortunately it has led to the US shitting on everyone instead.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderYou seem to have a very low opinion of the leadership role of the US. The inconsistancy has been in turning a blind eye to some unsavoury countries - generally because to the US at least they have some redeeeming qualities. Pressure has certainly been applied to Saddam's Iraq, Cuba, Libya, Burma and many others.It would be strange to claim this diplomatic pressure has not had some effect.
You keep talking nonsense. What has US support for "human rights" around the world ever accomplished on the few occasions it has been consistently applied? Nothing. And other countries don't "take their lead from the US in de ...[text shortened]... ese types of matters really affects anything, because it doesn't.
I think you would be surprised by how worried small countries are about getting offside with the US. It makes up a large part of the world economy - often it is amongst the largest and most lucrative of any countries export markets.The US can be protectionist and uses trade as an instrument of policy.
European countries have their own morality and US actions have little effect on them. North Korea is one of the few countries without substantial economic ties to the US - so you right in saying they don't care. Most easily influenced are third world countries which often have the worst human rights record and with their exports - clothing, shoes - made almost everywhere and with only a few cents difference in cost between suppliers.
Steerpike, you claim that: "North Korea is one of the few countries without substantial economic ties to the US".
Oh Yeah?
What about the piffling matter of $3 billion dollars of aid the US gave them over the last 5 years!?
Given, I might add on the proviso that they did not invest it in producing nuclear capability. What do you think this dictatorship did with the money?
Yet another example of the US mis-managing the world!
Originally posted by howardgeeWho cares? So long as they didn't spend it on building nuclear weapons we got our money's worth. If the dictator brought the whole Victoria's Secret catalogue for all of his Palace Guard, it doesn't do any harm to me or the world. Would you have preferred a war with North Korea?
Steerpike, you claim that: "North Korea is one of the few countries without substantial economic ties to the US".
Oh Yeah?
What about the piffling matter of $3 billion dollars of aid the US gave them over the last 5 years!?
Given, I might add on the proviso that they did not invest it in producing nuclear capability. What do you think this dictatorship did with the money?
Yet another example of the US mis-managing the world!
Originally posted by no1marauderThey did spend it on developing nuclear weapons!
Who cares? So long as they didn't spend it on building nuclear weapons we got our money's worth. If the dictator brought the whole Victoria's Secret catalogue for all of his Palace Guard, it doesn't do any harm to me or the world. Would you have preferred a war with North Korea?
Do pay attention to world events before offering your opinion, No1Marauder.