Every government feels that it itself does not have to abide by the laws and rules that it itself has established. The only reason most in society follow laws is becuase of the consequences that breaking them would result in. Becuase a government has no one in authority over it they can do whatever they truly want, hence dictators, kings, etc. To the people they can give any half assed excuse they want, propaganda, etc. The most interesting things though is that if there was a civil dispute throughout the whole country would the government use non lethal forms of weaponry? The thing is that they soldiers seem to be brain washed, and society, into thinking that the government can do anything for them, that they are invincible, the invincible US. In reality if they die they can't be brought back to life, no amount of money can suffice a families loss and no amount of celebrations or honors or pins can have him speak at his own funural procession. It's interesting how this world we live in define's peace. Peace is when we are not at war with another country. In the same vein school's teach history of the world. Yet have failed to learn from it. Children aren't taught to learn from history just spew it from wrote. Instead they are teaching children that violence is okay. That killing someone of another culture is okay. While also teaching them to be open minded and not racist and love on another. No wonder so many kids are screwed up.
wow, derailed like Amtrak! like I said, I don't advocate torture, or shady politics. I agree that lessening the collateral damage is always a good thing. Winning the hearts and minds of a people you are at war with is pretty tough if you only have the choice between killing/not killing in a hostile situation.
or rail #177 from Unbreakable... There shouldn't have to be a choice of killing or not killing. History proves that using violence to try and stop violence only silences it for a little while. It never ends it fully nor does it create in the nations a true sense of security. The governments have developed billions on lethal forms of weaponry. Why not the non lethal types? Becuase to the governments casualties are really of no concern to them. As long as they have enough men to fight, the ones who've lost their lives they conclude "oh we'll just make them decorated" or "let's give them some money they'll shutup." It's a sad fact of life at the moment. The only true reason the government has in helping with aide in the tsunami relief is so that the world might change it's perception of the U.S. Take some heat and focus off the war effort.
Guys, come on... Seriously, how do you know that it's right? Are you a White House cabinet member or one of the Joint Chiefs of Staff? You're basing your opinions on pure speculation and conjecture. The US has always given relief aid in all forms in the past, this isn't the first time.
Basing it on historical fact and of life. It doesn't take an intellectual or person in high authority to see that there is something wrong with the political nations of today. Considering, tsunami relief is one way to make a showy display of power and the ability to help under crucial moments in humanity. BUT, have we forgotten about the many homeless, sick, starving, without jobs, pennyless, etc...? Even just within our own country? Billions of dollars in this way is good but the true motives seem to be lost when you count what we've, even in our own country, experience. Let alone the milliions world wide who are in turmoil every day, not counting the tsunami aid victims now. There have been countless times the U.S. could have been helping with money and support. Yeah I know you can't help everyone, but don't you see why they are truly doing it? In the end it's greed though. Political nations really in the end only care about the interest of self. If we do this for this country what can we get from them. Think about the U.N. and the main members in power there, very interesting. Ask a politician and he will lie to you. There is no true justice. What is the fighting in Iraq going to truly do? Every time there's an uprising, oh let's go kill them? Humans killing humans to suffice some revenge is hardly logical. It's more animalistic then anything. An animal when feeling threatened for territory will in fact attack. Animals don't have as good of a forethought as humans and the ability to reason out the future for themselves. This is what makes us so much more dangerous. That's why we are the very top of the food chain. The humans today feel threatened and will do anything to secure a sense of peace. Even if that means killing one another in the process. They say "it's the price of peace." If that's the price of peace, I want nothing of it.
There's a difference that you can't really relate a nurse to and a soldier. A nurse is there to save ANY lives. And who put's the standard on right and humane?
Although I agree that there is something wrong with politial systems, I wouldn't go as far as saying that the only reason the US (or anyone else for that matter) has donated money/resources to the relief efforts is for ulterior motives only. In addition I also agree that more money should be spent on interior problems and less on other nations problems. I've always subscribed to the notion that you can't help someone else if you can't help yourself. Lastly, yes, I can see why we're truly doing it. They are human beings in desperate need, we are human beings who can help. The US has always been there to help people in need, maybe we focuc too much on foreign aid and not enough on internal aid, but we've always been there to help in some form. No offense intended, but how old are you? It doesn't mention it in your profile.
I'm 22. No doubt the government has helped with aide with various aspects of humanity. I wasn't denying that. But it seems all to irrelevent when you look at the bigger picture. We are killing people here and saving people there. It's like a double standard of morals. If we were at War with the countries that were hit with the Tsunami, would the U.S. have been as gleefully happy to help save mankind?
If Iraq was hit with this, I would think that we would. We're not at war with the people of Iraq, we're trying to fight the terrorists and Saddam loyalists. We are attempting to provide humanitarian aid to as many covilians as we can in Iraq and Afganistan just like we are trying to provide aide to the people in the tsunami stricken areas. When I was 22, I had somewhat the same outlook as you do on situations such as this. That was back in 1991 - does that year ring a bell?
Of course, I was leary of bringing up my age becuase if you were older you would play the old card on me, but I did it anyways thinking you'd be mature about it. "Oh when I was your age I thought like that..." Like you said before, how would you know how they would react?
I'd never be anything but mature about it. I have come to find that most of the time, especially on this board, the "older" people here generally think along the same lines as I do while the younger crowd thinks similar to you and us older folk are GREATLY outnumbered Now, that's not to say there aren't exceptions, but for the most part, that's how it is. In fact, back when Gulf I broke, I felt basically the same as you do now, so I can understand what you are talking about and how you're thinking about it. Know what I mean?
Yes, I understand your old heh... j/k I guess as we get older we get hardened to the distresses of the world. Also, as time progresses the world get's worse. So by the time I'm 34 it'll be even worse, perhaps a war in every country.
Honestly, I don't think that the world gets worse, I think it's that the preception we get because of the influx of mass and high-speed communication. 20-years ago hardly anyone had a computer in their house, let alone the Internet so information was gathered by the nightly news or a newspaper. Now, with email alerts and access to the world press at a moments notice just allows averyone access to any news at any time so we are more informed. There has always been wars, fighting and the like going on in every part of the world, we just know about it now.
That's what I meant by worse. People have always acted this way. We just are able to access it when we want to.
