English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

ex. why couldn't we have went to iraq told those people we are here to oust your leader because he dangerous to othe people trying to live peacefully on this earth and if you get another one like we'll do it again

2006-10-02 11:32:59 · 20 answers · asked by sbarnes 1 in Politics & Government Civic Participation

20 answers

Say what now?

2006-10-02 11:34:19 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

The problem is that one person's common sense is another's definition of interference. It's really hard to get groups of people to cooperate and the larger and more diverse the groups, the more difficulties are encountered. The downside of all these diversities is that virtually nothing can be done about common problems. I've no answers, just observations. I will say this though, if we as a species cannot join together somehow, we will All wither and die as a result. This is the inevitable outcome of our inability to join together for the common good.........note common good, not the good of a few, but of everyone.

2006-10-02 18:40:00 · answer #2 · answered by ron k 4 · 1 0

First, what is "common sense" that is a factor that is dependent upon cultural values, and if you have not noticed we have, even among our own citizens, variations in culture. There are even variations in culture from urban to rural within a geographical region. Hence the common sense of Sacramento, California is different from that in Pensacola, FL, and that varies from Chicago, IL, which in turn varies from Dallas, TX. The second factor within this discussion is that when you get a group of lawyers together rules become word play. As with the Terry v. Ohio case, you come up with "stop and frisk" is not "search and seizure." Why? a legal word play to strengthen Crime Control over Due Process. It is not exactly "common sense."

2006-10-02 20:05:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Well, you might need better communication skills to put forth what you call "common sence".
You can't just go into a country and oust a leader.
There are even laws in our books that prohibit this.
You must go through the political route first, but then that would require common sense!
What would stop someone from using your "logic" to alleviate the U.S. President from his position? Some people think that would be common sense.

2006-10-02 18:40:29 · answer #4 · answered by mailatac 3 · 1 1

That was behind the reasons for the United Nations, to run the world simply and effectively through mere human common sense. But that is not what happened. Instead of common sense we got greed and power-struggles and the worst of the human animal rose to the surface.

Humans need another ten-thousand years to purify themselves before they can do anything that is best for the species.

You are just going to have to wait.

2006-10-05 22:41:17 · answer #5 · answered by Mr.Been there 3 · 0 0

If we told people we were there to take out their leader, since he was evil, then all the other countries with evil leaders would want us to take out thier leaders. But since there is invested interested in Iraq (oil) we had to come up with some reason to get in there, and Saddam being evil was a great excuse. You don't see us going into Cuba or some of these other countries with dictatorship and corruption, because there isn't an invested interested on our side.

We are as much to blame, since we have become so dependant on oil. If we were to invest in renewable energy (water, wind, solar) then we wouldn't have this oil crisis.

2006-10-02 18:43:38 · answer #6 · answered by The New Mrs. Nguyen 4 · 1 1

I think the world could be run with common sense. Unfortunately, these days common sense seems to be extremely rare. Myself, I'm for coddling terrorists until they relax enough to tell us why they're blowing themselves up. I expect it has something to do with imperialistic Americans.

2006-10-02 18:45:47 · answer #7 · answered by socrates 6 · 0 0

In spite of what Bush thinks, we are not the world police. It is none of our business how they want to live and be governed. Notice we don't go to China or North Korea and try to run their country. We don't pick on countrys that can fight back.









l

2006-10-02 20:39:04 · answer #8 · answered by lcmcpa 7 · 1 1

Did you not learn proper grammar in school? The reason the country cannot run on common 'sense' is because there is too little of it here.

2006-10-03 10:47:12 · answer #9 · answered by Felicia P 1 · 0 1

Hey Sbarnes, there ain't nuthin common about common sense!
Isn't that a Bummer!

2006-10-02 21:18:18 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

i see your view of common sense does not involve good english spelling, but anyway, common sense is exactly what it says--- common. the problem comes with the fact that what is common to me is not common to you. for example, if i told you to go out and get something for dinner, common sense would tell you to go to the supermarket or fast food. if you told someone in a third world country that lacked resources, that may consist of fetching water, building a fire, etc. so common sense is not so common to everyone.just apply that to running the country..................

2006-10-02 18:39:31 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers