Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - US PR and anti Iranian lies

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

US PR and anti Iranian lies
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 9:38 pm Post subject:

cerulean808 wrote:

Kuros

Quote:

Please show me where any one of these individuals, particularly me, cite Tahiri as evidence of Iran's foul play on this board. Link it.

I'm sorry, Cerulean, but your argument seems to be saying that because Tahiri is a fake, it means that Iran hasn't done bad things.

I'm sorry, Kuros, but your assertion seems to be that I think you or your pals cited Taheri. He was the example to illustrate my argument that there was a concerted PR campaign to flood public debate with pro war propaganda whether that be lies, half truths or selective facts. This is what you parrot.

No kidding the Iran regime has done bad things, but then so has the US. But we're not meant to talk about that. No, that's antiamerican. Everyone knows that Bush and his cohorts represent goodness and are god blessed, and anyone they finger is the 'Evil Empire' just like in the movies.

But then so has the US? But then so has the US?

Sure, Stalin killed his own people (20 million), but then so has the US (A few during atomic bomb tests).

Sure, Hitler conquered other countries, but then so has the US.

Sure, the CCP have tortured people, but then so has the US.

Sure, Cerulean's argument is flawed, but then so is everyone's to some degree.

You're an intellectual midget, dude.

ddeubel

Joined: 20 Jul 2005

Posted: Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:24 pm Post subject:

Quote:

It would be great to see Iran have a moderate democratic regime one day, where religious fundamentalism was rendered inert ( I'd like to see religious fundamentalisim in the US sidelined from politics. ) It's not going to happen through US aggression and meddling in the Mid East in persuit of US interests or neocon ideology. In fact Iran is an eloquent example of fundamentalism energised by Western interference.

Thats why I'm not buying into the current US media beat up on Iran, priming the public for yet another act of aggression, just like Iraq. The Taheri scandal illustrates the lenghts the warhawks will go to achieve their goal, and how easily commercial media are manipulated.

This was well stated and I'm glad others see the folly of aggression and military antics by the U.S of A. .......... it is throwing gas on the fire.....

DD

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:53 pm Post subject:

Quote:

So it isn't fair to mention the US track record of aggression? Your CIA organised the overthrow of a moderate democratic regime in Iran and replaced it with a brutal authoritarian one. Isn't that an act of war? The fundamentalists in turn overthrew the US installed regime, automatically making them a US enemy. Ever since the US has manouvered against Iran.

No actully it was cause the Khomeni followers from day one went after the US. Dojg stuff like taking hostages and planning terror.

Jimmy Carter was neutral at the beinging

Quote:

Thats why I'm not buying into the current US media beat up on Iran, priming the public for yet another act of aggression, just like Iraq. The Taheri scandal illustrates the lenghts the warhawks will go to achieve their goal, and how easily commercial media are manipulated.

Oh a conspiracy .

Bulsajo

Quote:

No. Except to raise the question of who gets to call who a terrorist or terrorist organisation. What's the difference between a terrorist organisation and a resistance movement in your view Bulsajo?

How is blowing up the Jewish community center in Argentina resistance?

Also consider what they fight for Isreal would not be after Lebanon however Hizzbollah is out to destroy Israel.

Roo

Quote:

Taheri is a good source

Sure, like your pal Jimmy 'hotmilitarystuds4men' Gucker.

[/quote]

he is a good source and better than that hate mongering disinformation artist John Pliger.

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sat Aug 12, 2006 10:54 pm Post subject:

ddeubel wrote:

Quote:

This was well stated and I'm glad others see the folly of aggression and military antics by the U.S of A. .......... it is throwing gas on the fire.....

DD

Oh Yes a conspriacy.

Was Iran considering such a law?

Quote:

It is unclear whether the report that such a law would require non-Muslims to wear different colored badges is correct. There is a legislative proposal that has been considered by the parliament for two years that would impose dress codes on Muslims and non-Muslims.

http://www.nysun.com/article/33095

Well it seems there was. What kind of state would even consider such a law.

cerulean808

Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Location: Seoul

Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 6:04 pm Post subject:

bucheon bum

Quote:

You equated the US government with Iran's.

Wrong again. They are to be judged by the same standard. Thats what you American rightwingers cant handle, like your pal Kuros freaking out:

Quote:

But then so has the US? But then so has the US?

Instead you use a selfserving a priori logic, the US is by definition the good guy therefore by definition its actions are good. And only haters of America would believe otherwise.

Which explains why incredibly you try to rationalise the US role in the destruction of Iranian democracy:

Quote:

Aided the overthrow of a crappy Prime Minister (I suggest you read up on the guy, he wasn't that gifted of a leader)

'Aided', use what weasel word you like, the US was involved. The overthrow of a PM? It was a democratic regime that was overthrown, another weasel tactic. International gossip said the PM was 'crappy', 'he wasn't that gifted of a leader'. Well what better justification to destroy another state's democracy and install a tyrant. Geeze what have I been thinking all this time! The US president is crappy, he isn't that gifted of a leader, I suggest you read up on the guy, bucheon bum. So using your rationalisation, US democracy ( at least whats's left of it ) can be squelched, and a dictator installed who sticks hot eggs in peoples bottoms if they don't like him.

Quote:

[The US] gave arms to Iraq during the Iran-Iraq war (BUT also gave weapons to Iran ha ha)

Ha ha, yeah that's a real belly laugh. Supplying weaponry and resources for one of histories most destructive wars; Iranian child soldiers, Iraq chemical attacks. Sure give them more weapons to do it, the war merchants get rich, you have a laugh. What a great sense of humor you got there bucheon bum,just like your ethics.

Quote:

The US gov't has not killed any Iranians

Flight IR655 ring a bell? Shooting an airbus out of the sky, then awarding the crew of the US warship that did it combat action ribbons, the airwarfare coordinator awarded a Commendation Medal for 'heroic achievement' and 'ability to maintain his poise and confidence under fire'. What kind of state would even consider doing that?

Quote:

[Iran] defied the international community and continued its nuke program

And Israels nuclear program, defiance of the international community?

So your little accounting table there doesn't add up bucheon bum. Its another transparent beat up job, like with Iraq, by a sleazy, fundamentalist, morally bankrupt, incompetent US administration.

Roo

Quote:

Jimmy Carter was neutral at the beinging

Only in the sense that because the US backed the loser ( hardly neutral ) it then had to watch helplessly as the fundamentalists consolidated power.

Quote:

How is blowing up the Jewish community center in Argentina resistance?

Bulsajo

Quote:

but it's pretty easy in this case [ Hizbullah being a terrorist organisation ], don't you agree?

No. Its difficult and controversial. What probably gets up your rightwing American jacksie about Hizbullah is they scuppered the senile Reagans attempt to turn Lebanon into a NATO base. Hizbullah forced a superpower into a humiliating retreat. It forced that superpowers ally into a retreat. That ally failed again just now to destroy them. It takes more than a cowardly terrorist organisation to do that. The screeching about Hizbullah being nothing more than a despicable terrorist outfit is selfserving political rhetoric.

Roo

Quote:

he is a good source

You referring to your pal Jimmy 'hotmilitarystuds4men' Gucker?

bucheon bum

Joined: 16 Jan 2003

Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2006 7:42 pm Post subject:

cerulean808 wrote:

bucheon bum

Quote:

You equated the US government with Iran's.

Wrong again. They are to be judged by the same standard. Thats what you American rightwingers cant handle, like your pal Kuros freaking out:

Quote:

But then so has the US? But then so has the US?

To be judged by the same standards? I'm not disputing that at all.

So how am I wrong? Are you saying the Iranian government is worse? better? Can't be the same because then I'd be right (that you believe they're equal in their behavior).

Quote:

Instead you use a selfserving a priori logic, the US is by definition the good guy therefore by definition its actions are good. And only haters of America would believe otherwise.

Where did I say that?? You're the total opposite: The US must be bad in its actions.

Quote:

Well hell, if another country can do that, more power to it. I'll be pissed off as hell I imagine, and so were numerous Iranians. I never said Iranians weren't justified being upset at the US for its involvement. I was merely arguing that it wasn't as bad as killing Iranian citizens.

Quote:

[

Ha ha, yeah that's a real belly laugh. Supplying weaponry and resources for one of histories most destructive wars; Iranian child soldiers, Iraq chemical attacks. Sure give them more weapons to do it, the war merchants get rich, you have a laugh. What a great sense of humor you got there bucheon bum,just like your ethics.

Dude, you're too serious. I was poking fun at the united states and its rather unhumane actions at times. FYI, the world ain't black and white. Just because I defend the USA sometimes doesn't mean I have blind alligence to it. Learn irony, it's useful sometimes.

Quote:

The US gov't has not killed any Iranians

Wow, one good point. I stand slightly corrected.

Quote:

[Iran] defied the international community and continued its nuke program

Quote:

And Israels nuclear program, defiance of the international community?

Did I mention Israel? Was I defending it? No. This was strictly US and Iran. Are you refering to the US aid to Israel? I'll assume you are. I whole-heartedly agree the US should not give assistance to Israel for a variety of reasons.

Quote:

Jimmy Carter was neutral at the beinging

Quote:

Only in the sense that because the US backed the loser ( hardly neutral ) it then had to watch helplessly as the fundamentalists consolidated power.

Eh, that's called the real world. What do you expect??

Quote:

No. Its difficult and controversial. What probably gets up your rightwing American jacksie about Hizbullah is they scuppered the senile Reagans attempt to turn Lebanon into a NATO base.

Turn Lebanon into a NATO base? Are you serious? What's next? 9/11 was not done by Al-Qaeda but instead the US gov't?

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2006 1:15 am Post subject:

Quote:

You mean the US ought to have done nothing while Iran was going around spreading its revolution and terror.

I tell you what if Iran had not been trying to spread its revolution and spread terror then they us would have stayed out.

Quote:

accident and the US paid compensation.

Quote:

And Israels nuclear program, defiance of the international community?

Iran is out to destroy Israel - slight difference.

Quote:

So your little accounting table there doesn't add up bucheon bum. Its another transparent beat up job, like with Iraq, by a sleazy, fundamentalist, morally bankrupt, incompetent US administration.

Yawn

Roo

Quote:

Jimmy Carter was neutral at the beinging

Quote:

Only in the sense that because the US backed the loser ( hardly neutral ) it then had to watch helplessly as the fundamentalists consolidated power.

not neutral?

Bulsajo

Quote:

a Well funded -well armed terror organization .

I would bet you that Israel would have liked it if there was no cease fire.

But Israel would have gotten out of Lebanon well before 2000 if Lebanon had agreed to stop Hizzbollah from attacking.

Roo

Quote:

You referring to your pal Jimmy 'hotmilitarystuds4men' Gucker?

No Amir Taheri.

He is certainly better than that bigot and fake anti war scumbag John Piliger.

As I said before you -like Piliger are a supporter of any war against the US or Israel.

Quote:

No. Its difficult and controversial. What probably gets up your rightwing American jacksie about Hizbullah is they scuppered the senile Reagans attempt to turn Lebanon into a NATO base.

As I said cerulean808 opposes a 2 state solution he supports Hizzbollahs' war and he supports Iran's war.

Quote:

Wrong again. They are to be judged by the same standard. Thats what you American rightwingers cant handle, like your pal Kuros freaking out:

All one has to know is what one side fights for and what their objectives are and well then the situation is clear.

cerulean808

Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Location: Seoul

Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2006 4:21 pm Post subject:

bucheon bum

Quote:

Dude, you're too serious.

Don't worry you're not giving me much reason to take you seriously, your justification for taking out a democratic leader is a laugh, did you even manage to keep a straight face when you typed that up?

Quote:

Well hell, if another country can do that, more power to it. I'll be pissed off as hell I imagine, and so were numerous Iranians.

Again, funny. Seems like your saying if a state has the power then its ok for it to do what it likes to other states - some kind of Hobbesian Sate of Nature.

Quote:

I never said Iranians weren't justified being upset at the US for its involvement. I was merely arguing that it wasn't as bad as killing Iranian citizens.

Iranians were killed and tortured for decades. That coup and regime had US support, its implicated in those actions. But lets say hypothetically there was a bloodless coup, its still an act of aggression, incredibly destructive and a crime.

Quote:

FYI, the world ain't black and white.

You come up with a clumsy accounting table of Iran vs American actions and your saying I see things black and white?

Quote:

Are you saying the Iranian government is worse? better?

Iran internally worse, externally the US has a worse record of aggression. Behaviour towards other states, respect for international law, they both get a fail mark.

This thread started with the Taheri scam as a recent example of what the US neo cons are willing to do, what they have to do, to keep the US public marching in step to their war drum. Its a beat up on Iran by US neo cons, there's nothing there to justify an attack against Iran. Those crimes it is guilty of, the US and its various client states have committed at one time or another. That's why I raised Israels nuclear program when you raised Irans nuclear program. It's hypocrisy even a child could spot.

Quote:

Turn Lebanon into a NATO base? Are you serious? What's next? 9/11 was not done by Al-Qaeda but instead the US gov't?

There's lots of US military bases all round the globe, has been for a long time, nothing conspiratorial about that. Early 80's Cold War, US military foothold in Lebanon, where would the conspiracy be in that? Lame strawman tactic.

Roo

Quote:

Amir Taheri. He is certainly better than that bigot and fake anti war scumbag John Piliger.

Sure, says you and your girlfriend Jimmy 'hotmilitarystuds4men' Gucker.

bucheon bum

Joined: 16 Jan 2003

Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2006 6:17 pm Post subject:

cerulean808 wrote:

bucheon bum

Again, funny. Seems like your saying if a state has the power then its ok for it to do what it likes to other states - some kind of Hobbesian Sate of Nature.

Exactly! Good job!

Quote:

A crime? A nation-state can commit a crime against another? What law are you refering to exactly? Who enforces such a law?

Quote:

You come up with a clumsy accounting table of Iran vs American actions and your saying I see things black and white?

Let's say, for arguments sake, my accounting table WAS clumsy. How does that apply, in any way, to seeing things in black and white??

Quote:

Iran internally worse, externally the US has a worse record of aggression. Behaviour towards other states, respect for international law, they both get a fail mark.

Well perhaps that's merely because Iran has not had the means to be the aggressor. It's a developing country. It has antagonized its neighbors in the only ways it can: through support of guerrilla/terrorist groups and espionage.

Quote:

This thread started with the Taheri scam as a recent example of what the US neo cons are willing to do, what they have to do, to keep the US public marching in step to their war drum. Its a beat up on Iran by US neo cons, there's nothing there to justify an attack against Iran. Those crimes it is guilty of, the US and its various client states have committed at one time or another. That's why I raised Israels nuclear program when you raised Irans nuclear program. It's hypocrisy even a child could spot.

Yes there is: Israel is not a threat to the US in any way. Iran, on the other hand, is, due to its actions taken against the US. (and I admit Iran can view the US as a threat because of US actions in the past).

Sure, it's hypocritical trying to get the world to sanction Iran for nukes and not Israel, but such is politics sometimes.

Quote:

US military bases, yes. NATO though? Not until Afghanistan recently.

Basically, what it comes down to is you have an idealist view of the world. It isn't based on reality- no offense. Sure, what you envision would be grand, but a nation cannot base its foreign policy on the optimistic (and i'd say naive) belief that if you act ideal and try to be as humane and kind as possible, you'll be treated the same way back. That's just not the case.

edited: quotes to clean up.

Last edited by bucheon bum on Wed Aug 23, 2006 8:52 pm; edited 1 time in total

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2006 8:45 pm Post subject:

Curl

Quote:

Sure, says you and your girlfriend Jimmy 'hotmilitarystuds4men' Gucker

Well your opinion is that of a left wing radical who supports Iran's war.

& Pilger is still a left wing bigot

Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003

Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2006 8:52 pm Post subject:

CURL

Quote:

Again, funny. Seems like your saying if a state has the power then its ok for it to do what it likes to other states - some kind of Hobbesian Sate of Nature.

what matters is what they fight for and the US was right to fight the cold war. Did the US makes some mistakes sure . But the US was right to fight the cold war.

CURL

Quote:

yes and cause the US helped the Shah come to power so the US is resposible for everything bad the Shah did. Not only that because of that Iran revolutionary agenda . it's support of terror and its attacks on the US are justified.

Moonbat logic.

CURL

Quote:

You come up with a clumsy accounting table of Iran vs American actions and your saying I see things black and white?

??

CURL

Quote:

Iran internally worse, externally the US has a worse record of aggression. Behaviour towards other states, respect for international law, they both get a fail mark.

the US has done more good things and as I said the US was right to fight the cold war.

Besides most of the time the US supported bad guys against other bad guys.

CURL

Quote:

This thread started with the Taheri scam as a recent example of what the US neo cons are willing to do, what they have to do, to keep the US public marching in step to their war drum

Was Iran considering such a law yes or no

CURL

Quote:

. Its a beat up on Iran by US neo cons, there's nothing there to justify an attack against Iran.

except that Iran has attacked the US

Shipment of high explosives intercepted in Iraq
Most sophisticated of roadside bombs reportedly coming from Iran
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8829929/

Quote:

9/11 Commission Finds Ties Between al-Qaeda and Iran
Senior U.S. officials have told TIME that the 9/11 Commission's report will cite evidence suggesting that the 9/11 hijackers had previously passed through Iran

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,664967,00.html

Quote:

On June 25, 1996, Iran again attacked America at Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, exploding a huge truck bomb that devastated Khobar Towers and murdered 19 U.S. airmen as they rested in their dormitory. These young heroes spent every day risking their lives enforcing the no-fly zone over southern Iraq; that is, protecting Iraqi Shiites from their own murderous tyrant. When I visited this horrific scene soon after the attack, I watched dozens of dedicated FBI agents combing through the wreckage in 120-degree heat, reverently handling the human remains of our brave young men. More than 400 of our Air Force men and women were wounded in this well-planned attack, and I was humbled by their courage and spirit. I later met with the families of our lost Khobar heroes and promised that we would do whatever was necessary to bring these terrorists to American justice. The courage and dignity these wonderful families have consistently exemplified has been one of the most powerful experiences of my 26 years of public service.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003518

Iran responsible for 1983 Marine barracks bombing, judge rules
Friday, May 30, 2003 Posted: 11:14 PM EDT (0314 GMT)
Marines search through the rubble for their missing comrades after the 1983 barracks bombing in Beirut, Lebanon.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Iran is responsible for the 1983 suicide bombing of a U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, that killed 241 American servicemen, a U.S. District Court judge ruled Friday.
http://www.cnn.com/2003/LAW/05/30/iran.barracks.bombing/

Amir Taheri: Khomeinists hammering new strategy to oust 'Great Satan'

Quote:

But at almost exactly the same time, militants from some 40 countries spread across the globe were trekking to Tehran for a 10-day "revolutionary jamboree" in which "a new strategy to confront the American Great Satan" will be hammered out. The event is scheduled to start on February 1 to mark the 25th anniversary of the return to Iran from exile of the late Ayatollah Khomeini, the founder of the "Islamic Revolution".

It is not clear how many militants will attend, but the official media promise a massive turnout to underline the Islamic Republic's position as the "throbbing heart of world resistance to American arrogance."

The guest list reads like a who-is-who of global terror.

In fact, most of the organisations attending the event, labelled "Ten-Days of Dawn", are branded by the US and some European Union members as terrorist outfits. For more than two decades, Tehran has been a magnet for militant groups from many different national and ideological backgrounds.

The Islamic Republic's hospitality cuts across even religious divides. Militant Sunni organisations, including two linked to Al Qaida, Ansar al-Islam (Companions of Islam) and Hizb Islami (The Islamic Party), enjoy Iranian hospitality.

They are joined by Latin American guerrilla outfits, clandestine Irish organisations, Basque and Corsican separatists, and a variety of leftist groups from Spartacists to Trotskyites and Guevarists. Tehran is the only capital where all the Palestinian militant movements have offices and, in some cases, training and financial facilities.

http://archive.gulfnews.com/articles/04/01/28/109235.html

Nah Iran hasn't been engaged in a war against the US

LOOK WHY DOESN'T IRAN JUST GIVE UP THEIR WAR?

THEN THERE WOULD BE NO WAR.

CURL

Quote:

Those crimes it is guilty of, the US and its various client states have committed at one time or another. That's why I raised Israels nuclear program when you raised Irans nuclear program. It's hypocrisy even a child could spot.

buty Iran is out to destroy Israel , not the other way around.

Quote:

RAFSANJANI SAYS MUSLIMS SHOULD USE NUCLEAR WEAPON AGAINST ISRAEL

TEHRAN 14 Dec. (IPS) One of Iran�s most influential ruling cleric called Friday on the Muslim states to use nuclear weapon against Israel, assuring them that while such an attack would annihilate Israel, it would cost them "damages only".

"If a day comes when the world of Islam is duly equipped with the arms Israel has in possession, the strategy of colonialism would face a stalemate because application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world", Ayatollah Ali Akbar Hashemi-Rafsanjani told the crowd at the traditional Friday prayers in Tehran.

Analysts said not only Mr. Hashemi-Rafsanjani�s speech was the strongest against Israel, but also this is the first time that a prominent leader of the Islamic Republic openly suggests the use of nuclear weapon against the Jewish State.

http://www.iran-press-service.com/articles_2001/dec_2001/rafsanjani_nuke_threats_141201.htm

CURL

Quote:

Most of the nations that have US military bases WANT them.

and most of the US miltary bases around the world are because of the cold war. The US was justifed in fighting the cold war.

CURL

Quote:

Sure, says you and your girlfriend Jimmy 'hotmilitarystuds4men' Gucker]

Pliger is still a bigot and you are a left wing radical.

cerulean808

Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Location: Seoul

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 5:50 pm Post subject:

bucheon bum

Quote:

Exactly! Good job!

Ok, your now on record as holding a Hobbesian State of Nature aka State of War position. Which I think dovetails into...

Quote:

A crime? A nation-state can commit a crime against another? What law are you refering to exactly? Whoenforces such a law?

Hobbes was attempting to build a secular philosphical argument to legitimise an absolute ruler, his Leviathan. The State of Nature/War he conceived was hypothetical, he wasn't trying to be an anthropolgist or historian. He argued that life was so brutal, dangerous and short in this situation ( for everyone, even the powerful, as even they could not be assured of complete safety ), individuals for the sake of self preservation were eager to enter a rational contract transfering all their freedoms or rights to an absolute ruler in return for equal protection from one another.

So its absurd for you bucheon bum to be holding a purely abstract, philosophical position that is in fact only a initial step of a larger philosophical argument for authoritarianism, and then want to claim I'm not in touch with reality. Laughing

As for your subsequent rhetorical questions about state and international crimes and law enforcement, here's a good start; the Nuremberg Principles, used to bag the Nazi leadership, followed by the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court.

Quote:

Let's say, for arguments sake, my accounting table WAS clumsy. How does that apply, in any way, to seeing things in black and white??

Accountants put things in + and - columns hence 'black and white'. Reminds me of a time I helped a friend move house and her accountant brother turned up to organise, 'A place for everything and every thing in its place!' he repeatedly declared. Inside of 10 minutes wanted to drop a heavy box on him.

Quote:

Basically, what it comes down to is you have an idealist view of the world. It isn't based on reality- no offense. Sure, what you envision would be grand, but a nation cannot base its foreign policy on the optimistic (and i'd say naive) belief that if you act ideal and try to be as humane and kind as possible, you'll be treated the same way back. That's just not the case.

The rule of law and justice are ideals, and they are put into practice inside many states. Why suddenly at the international level can't it be done? The situation in say Britain or Australia isn't perfect but no one is saying its reason to quit and lose what has been gained, more likely its reason to work harder towards those ideals. Same internationally, we either strive for the rule of law,justice and peace which are achievable or we continue as in the past and end up seeing the same horrors of the 20thC repeated, as some ancient put it 'The powerful do as they can, the weak suffer as they must'.

TheUrbanMyth

Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:37 pm Post subject:

cerulean808 wrote:

The rule of law and justice are ideals, and they are put into practice inside many states. Why suddenly at the international level can't it be done? .

Because there is no real mechanism (other than "world opinion" which is fickle and has a short attention span anyway) to punish sovereign states. Sure you can launch sanctions against states..but that didn't seem to work so well with Iraq in the Saddam era and doesn't seem to be working with North Korea. And who is going to commit financial suicide by suggesting launching sanctions against America? As one of the permanent five on the Security Council it can veto any such resolution attempted to pass through the U.N.

Kuros

Joined: 27 Apr 2004

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:52 pm Post subject:

Quote:

Dude, Hobbes argued that the central power had to be above everyone else to act as the executor of contracts. In other words, he had to be beyond contracts and beyond the law himself in order to enforce the law upon everyone else. This is one of the central formulations of his theory.

The world has no such force. The UN is accountable to individual nation-states' votes and vetos, and as such cannot act as a seperate and distinct objective verifier and executor of contracts between nations. Not to mention the fact that the UN has no army of its own or real force with which to do so.

So BB's description of the world as being a state of nature AMONGST NATIONS is a correct description insofar as it lacks a Leviathan and might require extraordinary measures. If the world has a Leviathan, it most certainly is not the UN. Laughing

cerulean808

Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Location: Seoul

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:26 pm Post subject:

Kuros

Quote:

The absolute ruler like I stated...

In a nut shell your saying ' ( At the international level ) I can't see Hobbes Leviathan anywhere around here, can you? So like bucheon bum thinks, its true, we must be in Hobbes State of War.'

Only if you buy into Hobbes argument. I don't. Not his State of War, not his Leviathan, not his take on human nature.

At a certain point in history Hobbes was putting together a particular political philosophy. Makes interesting reading as part of the history of philosophy. Providing a philosophical foundation for contemporary politics? Forget it. The problems with it come out loud and clear with your qualifications Kuros; 'in so far as', 'AMONGST NATIONS'. I guess the appeal to conservatives like yourself is the negative view of human nature in Hobbes and the subsequent authoritarian mentality.

I might agree on a Lockian State of Nature. At least in that version individuals have some inherent self restraint and humanity. I believe that's a much more accurate description of human nature. After all the development of international institutions and laws has derived most of its momentum from the experiences of the first half of the 20thC culminating in the Holocaust, and the desire to never see that repeated, surely a postive reflection on human nature. There's huge obstacles and a long way to go.

What's the alternative? 'The powerful do as they can, the weak suffer as they must'. You, TUM, bucheon bum and the usual suspects seem satisfied with that arrangement. Sad.

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
Page 6 of 7

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe