The US's unilateral action to remove an evil dictator and instil democracy but with evident economic motives, or China's and Russia's unwillingness to get involved with Iran's blatant disregard of the UN because of their econmic interests? Should we accept this wrong/evil if it is believed that it will ultimately help a country?
I know you're all going to say the US has in no way helped Iraq but discuss not the practicalities of this but the theory.
2006-09-26 23:16:55 · 22 answers · asked by AaronO 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
Some good answers and Im glad to see (some) people discussing some valid ideas. I especially like the theme that governments always have national interests at heart. If the US and her allies had not secured oil supplies, how many green and liberal voters would have been piss*d that they couldnt afford to drive to a protest rally?
2006-09-27 01:10:45 · update #1
I'll pick a best answer soon but I must get back to my tent (which obviously comes with an internet connection) and feed my camel...
2006-09-27 01:12:22 · update #2
2006-09-26 23:29:02 · answer #1 · answered by babyeddieuk 3 · 6⤊ 2⤋
I can think of several evil dictators in sub-Saharan Africa. Why have we not moved against them? Oh yeah, they didn't put a hit on Bush's dad's head, like Saddam. Well, we're there now and can't practically leave until they can defend themselves. I would be more concerned that Russia and China aren't putting preasure on Tehran. Perhaps we could go lighter on Iran if we can get Russia and China to agree to side-line all leniency if Iran does something horrible and/or murderous with their nuclear capabilities. We really should make sure they never can develop the bomb in the first place, cause eventually every Middle Eastern monarch and petty third world leader will think that they have a 'god-given' right to atomic weapons. Bush has no credibility to loose anymore so he might as well do the right thing and level Iran's various buildings invovled with their nuclear research project. He would do jail time, if he's caught, but it would be worth it to make it clear that noone needs to have nuclear weapons.
2006-09-26 23:47:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
When you are talking about countries and governing, the name of the game is self-interest, long, middle and short term. Evil or good does not enter the equation. That is for lesser beings (you get my drift). The point is if you want your government to provide you with all the services and rights and priviliges you want, then evil has to come into it, simply because the world revolves around money and power, and you do not get your share by being nice. When there is more money to be made by selling arms, and more power to be had by limiting the others' access to the same, we will have to face evil at every turn and accept it as an integral part of the system.
2006-09-26 23:29:22 · answer #3 · answered by Jhan 3 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The Greater Evil?
1. Using religion to control a herd of sheep.
2. Using Democracy and Power to benefit just one country over the rest of the world.
3. Putting puppets in the US goverment so Neo-conservatives could achieve thier goals without any objectives
-Giuliani or H. Clinton will be the next Puppet ( already selected)
4. Control the US media. Sometimes using threats.
= Corruptions! The greatest evil currently in our US goverment.
2006-09-26 23:32:36 · answer #4 · answered by Taco 3 · 4⤊ 1⤋
if we discuss theory, the point of a govt. is to act in the national interests, which america has done so, to more peoples detriment than anyone else. so maybe we should scrap govt's or accept that a govt. will always act in its own interest no matter how underhand or ethically wrong its actions maybe. so in answer to your question they are all as bad as each other, which is why i would like to live in sweden apart from its too cold there so i'll stay here an moan.
2006-09-26 23:49:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
If you think that disregard of the UN is evil, then think of the country which is the biggest reciepient us US protection + tax dollars and can disregard the UN as it pleases.
Evil, democracy etc are very subjective ideas, even though most agree on the basics.
2006-09-26 23:32:08 · answer #6 · answered by Nothing to say? 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Would u ever allow ur neighbour or townfellow to take control over ur home in ur presence ? Would u ever allow someone to take all ur house hold things to his/her home without any reason even when he/she has all that things of his own?
Of course ur anwser would be **no**
then why u think it good that america has all rigths to bombard any country and then take control of it without any reason
America is the only evil in this world it has no rigth to take control of other country resources coz to benefit its own natives
if u think it is true then i think why should Us only do it then evry country has the rigth to make more & more resources avalible 4 its native ? America should quit Iqar as soon as possible coz it has no rigth to be there
2006-09-27 04:21:05 · answer #7 · answered by fizzakhan 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Saddam gassed the Kurds!. There was no political motive just the fact its not right to kill someone because of their beliefs. Look at the Nazis. If no one acted how many jewish people would have survived. You can say that the US has not helped. I disagree. Sometimes you have to go through hard times to reach the good times
2006-09-26 23:37:29 · answer #8 · answered by bootycreord 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Its all a Con - to control us all with the fear of war, no world leader wants to risk his position of luxury by invoking war on another; its all staged, and the Worlds Population is Blind to the Truth.
The greatest Evil is our general inability to recognise the truth over the lies we readily accept
2006-09-26 23:37:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Both of extriforms of republicans and d. have comtributed to generation of hatry around the world. Current state of american capitalism would be the sourses of problems.
2006-09-28 06:59:01 · answer #10 · answered by JAMES 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋