Sorry, but while I appreciate the problems with our not allowing bribery, I'm not ok with just going along with it. If you have a better solution, post it.
Sorry, but while I appreciate the problems with our not allowing bribery, I'm not ok with just going along with it. If you have a better solution, post it.
I think there is a long forgotten fact the warmongers should remember - you can make someone your slave by force, but you won't force his mind.
This goes for nearly anything, from people to countries. You just cannot solve third-world crap by giving stuff no one over there has ever worked - blood, tears and sweat - to make. It has no value and will be used to continue quarrels.
Food, medical supplies, arms, you name it.
If a country manages to pull itself together then the will is there, any help can be used...but said country must start by itself. Look at people who changed their lives from crap to good - it is almost always a self-made revelation, then a decision to carry out a better path.
You cannot force Syria to play nice, except by extreme force. Likewise you cannot make the rebels (who? they are from all over) talk about the lovely weather while making plans to rebuild Syria.
Why do we have to pretend the entire world holds our standards? Let those who long for war, have it, until they are no more. Consider helping those who ask, and act.
This goes for nearly anything, from people to countries. You just cannot solve third-world crap by giving stuff no one over there has ever worked - blood, tears and sweat - to make. It has no value and will be used to continue quarrels.
Food, medical supplies, arms, you name it.
If a country manages to pull itself together then the will is there, any help can be used...but said country must start by itself. Look at people who changed their lives from crap to good - it is almost always a self-made revelation, then a decision to carry out a better path.
You cannot force Syria to play nice, except by extreme force. Likewise you cannot make the rebels (who? they are from all over) talk about the lovely weather while making plans to rebuild Syria.
Why do we have to pretend the entire world holds our standards? Let those who long for war, have it, until they are no more. Consider helping those who ask, and act.
EK, there's not that much local stuff to put nuance on the policy of taking action against Assad for killing thousands with Sarin. It makes sense.
We could just do nothing and make Sarin a useful weapon for dictators to deal with these messy citizens when they complain.
Let's just applaud while Saddam, Qadafi, Yemen, Tunisia, Mubarak and others put down any rebellion with Sarin. Heck, just the threat might stop rebellion without using it.
And wouldn't it be handy for Sarin to be supplied to Al Queda and Taliban forces to use for their needs, including against our troops? And we can use it on them. No problem.
We could just do nothing and make Sarin a useful weapon for dictators to deal with these messy citizens when they complain.
Let's just applaud while Saddam, Qadafi, Yemen, Tunisia, Mubarak and others put down any rebellion with Sarin. Heck, just the threat might stop rebellion without using it.
And wouldn't it be handy for Sarin to be supplied to Al Queda and Taliban forces to use for their needs, including against our troops? And we can use it on them. No problem.
I don't think there's a way to change a country that runs on bribery at all levels overnight, from the outside. I think it takes generations and the will of the citizens.
Given that, the options I see for effective short term aid are:
- Bribery. Effective but distasteful.
- Massive use of force. We tried this in Afghanistan and Iraq, but the corruption was still present (we looked the other way) and stability is declining in both countries now that we are withdrawn / withdrawing.
- Do nothing. Let them starve / die / kill each other.
Those are some misguided comments, after the first paragraph.
Giving destitute people food and medicine is not using force against them.
There are over 2 million Syrian refugees now. They need help terribly. Some idiotic attitude about 'let them decide to fix things' does nothing but make them suffer for no reason.
Syria is about one dictator, with his internal and external allies, wanting to keep power against a large number of the citizens who want him out.
It's a tragic and deadly conflict.
Simple answers don't help much. That's the sad nature of these proxy conflicts when the big powers want to control the small ones and brutal means are used to keep control.
Whether it's us helping Marcos rule the Phillippenes with an iron fist or Russia helping Assad rule Syria with an iron fist or China protecting North Korea's horrors.
BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,562
- 9
- 81
You forgot what we do now, which is to prohibit bribery, which puts us at some disadvantage, but we have other advantages that help compensate.
We can make efforts to pressure countries to reduce bribery for their own good and our good as well.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
Dave pointed out the problems and the ways around it.
You seem to indicate that you disagree with such approaches.
Why should he have to come up with a better solution rather than one that works.
You are implying that there is a better solutions - please explain what it is and then why our country is not using it.
I did say "effective" short term aid
What are the advantages of not using bribery in a country that expects it, for example when it is a major part of a person's income?
After a disaster or conflict, how much pressure do you think we can realistically apply to that country?
Edit: I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to change that country, but I think that needs to be a separate, very long-term goal worked on separately from relief efforts.
Last edited:
The U.S. govt is going to escalate this war and there is nothing the people can do about it. To answer the topic though:
The U.S. govt should not continuing waging war against Syria because
the American State is no more legit than Assad's regime.
The U.S. govt cannot convince me that Assad used chemical weapons.
the American people will not gain anything from it.
the public spending needs to stop.
obama knows damn well that he would become more brutal than assad if just one State even tried to secede.
The U.S. govt should not continuing waging war against Syria because
the American State is no more legit than Assad's regime.
The U.S. govt cannot convince me that Assad used chemical weapons.
the American people will not gain anything from it.
the public spending needs to stop.
obama knows damn well that he would become more brutal than assad if just one State even tried to secede.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
DooKey
Golden Member
- Nov 9, 2005
- 1,811
- 458
- 136
There's no reason to get into this civil war. Let them kill each other. I don't recall us going into Rwanda when 100's of thousands were being wiped out. Dead is dead regardless if it's sarin gas, bullets, clubs, or machetes. We have no National interest in Syria until they venture outside of their borders and attack an ally.
I dunno... As I age I ask us what gives US (No pun meant) the right?
Go back 200 some odd years. What if ALL of Europe banded together and said "NOPE, you are going to be Britian's bitch for a long time" and interceeded and helped Britain maintain control.
We used Nukes MANY years ago. Think that was all "Military Targets" that perished in those 2 horrific explosions?
Yet, we feel full of ourselves enough, to tell OTHERS who can and cant have the big toy.
Again, what gives us the right?
We have SO many issues here. I do think we need to turn our backs to the world and start cleaning our OWN house.
This AM. Horrid story on the NY news. A baby shot dead. Father was believed to be the target. Gang related (Supposedly). And the father is NOT cooperating with the police.
DEAR LORD what is wrongt with this country? And yet..... We try to impose our will. MAybe they dont want it........
Go back 200 some odd years. What if ALL of Europe banded together and said "NOPE, you are going to be Britian's bitch for a long time" and interceeded and helped Britain maintain control.
We used Nukes MANY years ago. Think that was all "Military Targets" that perished in those 2 horrific explosions?
Yet, we feel full of ourselves enough, to tell OTHERS who can and cant have the big toy.
Again, what gives us the right?
We have SO many issues here. I do think we need to turn our backs to the world and start cleaning our OWN house.
This AM. Horrid story on the NY news. A baby shot dead. Father was believed to be the target. Gang related (Supposedly). And the father is NOT cooperating with the police.
DEAR LORD what is wrongt with this country? And yet..... We try to impose our will. MAybe they dont want it........
@ Eagle Keeper:
To the first question... all govts are initiated by force to perpetuate force, the Constitution was no different. The installation of Washington as President was a coup because America didn't have an executive or standing army before and because popular rule was overthrown.
Both to the second question and it never will.
To the first question... all govts are initiated by force to perpetuate force, the Constitution was no different. The installation of Washington as President was a coup because America didn't have an executive or standing army before and because popular rule was overthrown.
Both to the second question and it never will.
I did say "effective" short term aid
What are the advantages of not using bribery in a country that expects it, for example when it is a major part of a person's income?
After a disaster or conflict, how much pressure do you think we can realistically apply to that country?
Edit: I'm not saying that we shouldn't try to change that country, but I think that needs to be a separate, very long-term goal worked on separately from relief efforts.
The advantages are not taking part in, increasing, the corruption. It's an effort to start opposing the corruption.
If you're only talking about something very situational, like an emergency where the good done by bribing very much outweighs the harm, I'd consider that case by case.
There is no anarchistic utopia. Never has been, never will be. Get three people in one, and one will start to be dominant.
Washington was an elected leader. Even without the United States, there would be thirteen colonies each with governors that were effectively presidents of their states.
Before that there was the King of England. There's always going to be power. Questions are, how much say will the people have, what are the limits on the use of that power etc.
You really turn people off to anything you have to say when you say things like 'the government of the United States is no more legitimate than the government of Assad'.
The US is not run by a strongman using force to stay in office, using mass killings to do so.
Now admittedly, if the tea party (it'd be them) rose up in violence to remove that illegitimate Kenyan from the White House, than yes, the US government would use force, including killing them, to protect our government from our own citizens - and protect our election. But that's a far cry from the multi-generation, mass-killing tyrant Assad.
The US president's election - corrupt as our elections have become with big money - gives him far more legitimacy than Assad. He operates with a lot more limits on the use of power.
Saying the US and Syra's governments are equal in legitimacy just tells people you have a very warped and incorrect understanding of the issue.
At the end of the day,the bottom line is the morality of the policy.
You could have a completely democratic vote where the people vote for the Holocaust, and you could have a 'benevolent dictator' who is greatly respectful of individual rights.
The form of the government doesn't guarantee the morality of the policy.
But nonetheless, we recognize the people as 'the best' ruler, and therefore support democracy.
What gives us the right? What gives Assad the right to use Sarin to kill the people who oppose his rule?
You aren't going to find any neat answer to why it's 'our right'. We try to have some rules to avoid the worst abuses of power, but sometimes the right thing can be force.
When you try to point at one case of a nation using force for reasons it wants to, and compare it to another case of their doing so, the bottom line can be how good the reasons are. One invasion cen be for humanitarian reasons while another is to exploit the resources and oppress the people to do so.
You're right to have concerns about this. But what's better - our using unilateral force to oppose mass killings by Sarin, or our respecting Assad's autonomy to use it?
Admittedly it's tricky to say 'it's a good idea to do it this time' and somehow distinguish that from the next time President Jeb Bush used force on a false pretense of doing good.
Do you have a better answer? I'm ok with out taking a stand on the use of Sarin, with the caustions and protections we have in place, wary of the next time of using force.
This is a case where there's a lesson of the post-WWI period, when the world was so weary of war, that it ignored the growing threats.
As bad as our allowing lies to win out on Iraq was, it would make things worse to say 'now all use of force is a bad idea because of Iraq'.
BoberFett
Lifer
- Oct 9, 1999
- 37,562
- 9
- 81
I've gotta say, it's refreshing to see someone like Craig retroactively support the Iraq War.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_poison_gas_attack
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_poison_gas_attack
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
He pointed out a solution; You said there should be a better solutions and did not present such.
In other words; you upped the ante;
Whats the goal/point of the US attack? Seriously, what do we hope to accomplish? Show Assad we can fire some missiles from a few hundred miles away?
Say we do that, then what? A few military buildings got destroyed, a few innocent people get accidentally killed. Assasd is still in power.
What will the USA have gained?
Say we do that, then what? A few military buildings got destroyed, a few innocent people get accidentally killed. Assasd is still in power.
What will the USA have gained?
No, 'allow bribery' and 'let them all kill each other' are not 'better solutions'.
You called those 'ways around the problem'. No, those are the problem.
It's funny, I think he and I are largely agreeing - he agreed those are not solutions, but only 'short-term' options that can be done.
You're the only one claiming that 100% allowing bribery and 'let them all kill each other' are any sort of 'ways around the problem'.
Cause him pain for his use of WMD to give him a price for doing it so he's disenctned to do it again. What's the point of any punishment for any crime? What is so confusing about it?
There are issues with just making 'assassinate the leader' our response to anything anyone does wrong.
Our track record on that is pretty problematic. We've assassinated for wrong reasons.
There's a reason why, following the revalations of our history on it, we banned ourselves from assassanitation as a policy ever since - even if we have been pretty dishonest about that, 'oh we're not trying to kill Saddam, we're just bombing 50 possible locations he's at because they are believed to all be military command and control centers'. 'Oops, we bombed Qadafai's home and killed a baby there, his grandson, but we weren't trying to kill him, of course not!'
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
A few missiles has not deterred any ME dictator.
Libya
Sudan
Iraq
Afghanistan (no real dictator there though)
It is an expected cost of war. Value of the population has no meaning to them.
Libya
Sudan
Iraq
Afghanistan (no real dictator there though)
It is an expected cost of war. Value of the population has no meaning to them.
- Oct 30, 2000
- 42,589
- 5
- 0
I am not claiming such nor did I initiate such in the discussions.
You stated that his solutions were not good. Implying that there should be a better solutions and asking him for it.
Do you have a better solution?
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 411
Facebook
Twitter