Joe, those calling for intervention have the onus to prove their morality, not those who are preventing a foreign bombing campaign. You also completely ignore the 2 examples where China and Russia did not stop UN resolutions only to have the US/UK completely exploit them for their own ends, against international law.
It's funny, when someone points out the crimes the US has committed against developing nations, you somehow twist it to imply the same people don't care about the people of developing nations. Heaven forbid we also mention corporate crimes, business is king, it is the reason for everything else and inherently moral.
IMO all the big actors, US, UK, Russia & China are all led by swine. You don't get that much power in the current world by being a good guy. I just think it's incredibly asinine to take the US claims of morality at face value. In the case of Syria, it's not the Chinese and Russians talking about a military intervention, so I don't bother to point out their flaws, as they are not the ones making a moral case for bombing.
I'm not quite sure how you can say "U.S. interventions notwithstanding". US interventions saw nuns raped, priests murdered and the suppression of the peoples grass roots Liberation Theology movement. How many civilians were expendable in the fight against the 'reds'?
Also I think your argument about economics is only true if you look at state vs neo-liberal economics as polar opposites with no middle ground. Pinochet's neo-liberal Chicago economics destroyed the economy. How did the IMF and WB prescription work out for Argentina? Brazil is now more independent from the US than it has been for a long time. Do you really want to bring up Peru to make your case? Reformer, Fujimori, is infamous for his corruption and human rights abuses. Neo-liberal doesn't mean market orientated, it means gutting all public sector services and selling them off for nothing to local elites/western powers and then jacking up the prices outrageously. Neo-liberalism says there is no role for the state in providing basic/necessary services. Great for profit, bad for the average person.
"Russia and China have used their veto to block any effective United Nations Security Council resolution that might lead to regime change."
Perhaps because the US & UK continually take a mile when given an inch. UNSCR resolution 1441 was blatantly misused as an excuse for war. The Russians and Chinese then gave Obama a chance by supporting UNSCR resolution 1973, only to have Obama and co. blatantly call for regime change which was not authorised by the resolution.
With US govt and corporate policy doing so much to flame conflict across the developing world, congress could easily pass some laws that would punish companies for their terrible behaviour at home and abroad. But instead congress does everything is can to protect their corporate allies and instead opt to bomb the foreign regimes that rub them the wrong way.
"Perhaps they do not care if indigenous dictators massacre indigenous protesters, as long as there is no *gasp* international intervention."
For one, I am insulted that over numerous posts, you keep implying that those with differing political views to yourself don't care about indigenous people. Surely you can accept that the people against intervention merely read the political and practical outcomes in a different way than you do? Perhaps those against foreign 'humanitarian' intervention are aware of how often that phrase is abused to start unnecessary wars and conflicts. Since WW2, how many US interventions have resulted in poor civilians making progress vs US interventions resulting in US dictated neo-liberal economic systems that only serve to exploit the poor? How did the US interventions work out for Latin America? Isn't it funny that the Sth American region is doing better now that there is less US influence.
Oh Joe. Please show me an IAEA report that says Iran has a nuke, or that they even have conclusive proof that Iran is working on a nuclear weapon? Only a week ago Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff, Gen. Dempsey, said "that the Iranian regime has not decided that they will embark on the [...] effort to weaponize their nuclear capability".
The most recent report, which represents the consensus of 16 intelligence agencies, indicated that Iran is pursuing research that could put it in a position to build a weapon, but that it has not sought to do so.
pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/world/s_783472.html
Or are you arguing that the US should invade anyone with maybe the potential to build a bomb? Also, you were very quiet about my idea for Israel to give up their nuclear stockpile. Surely Israel is the cause for any nuclear arms race, if there is one.
BTW, you misquote me and interpret what I said in exactly the opposite way it was intended. Perhaps if you had quoted the full sentence you would have been able to comprehend the simple meaning.
Really Joe? You think the US is worried about Iranian nukes? Just like the US was worried about Iraq's WMD? In both cases the experts were/are saying there is no evidence for these fears. Experts don't know anything, keep believing the chicken hawks, they are surely motivated by moral intentions.
Those truly interested in a middle east nuclear free zone, should be pushing Israel to give up their massive nuclear arsenal and not pretend that the US has justified reasons to be scared of Iran.
Elections do have consequences. Only it was the Iraq elections and not the US elections. Sistani forced the US to allow Iraqi elections. The deadline to get US troops out was signed by Bush and the elected Iraqi govt. Obama/Biden did SFA.
BTW interesting comparison between Buddhist Mandala's and the iPhone. After a short time you are supposed throw away/destroy both of them and buy/make a new ones.
Oh and I think the blinking cursor of DOS represents the single point of focus while meditating =P
Jobs didn't invent the GUI, we can thank Xerox PARC for that. Nor did Jobs invent mp3 players or smart phones. He did however understand the appeal of an intuitive interface for consumer devices and great marketing. He accelerated consumer adoption of the above devices, but world changing? Not so much.
Yes Juan, everyone against what NATO is doing in Libya is a Qaddafi supporter and ally of the CIA. Just like your opposition to the Iraq war made you a Saddam supporter and ally of the CIA.
Your blog used to be one of my favourites, now I hardly bother. Not because your stance on Libya is different to mine, but because you have been smearing opponents of the Libyan intervention as being pro Qaddafi time after time. You block comments that highlight inconsistencies in your argument but then are happy to allow posts gleeful that the Lockerbie bomber is going to die the most painful way possible (what value is a comment that celebrates death and adds nothing more to the argument?).
Joe, those calling for intervention have the onus to prove their morality, not those who are preventing a foreign bombing campaign. You also completely ignore the 2 examples where China and Russia did not stop UN resolutions only to have the US/UK completely exploit them for their own ends, against international law.
It's funny, when someone points out the crimes the US has committed against developing nations, you somehow twist it to imply the same people don't care about the people of developing nations. Heaven forbid we also mention corporate crimes, business is king, it is the reason for everything else and inherently moral.
IMO all the big actors, US, UK, Russia & China are all led by swine. You don't get that much power in the current world by being a good guy. I just think it's incredibly asinine to take the US claims of morality at face value. In the case of Syria, it's not the Chinese and Russians talking about a military intervention, so I don't bother to point out their flaws, as they are not the ones making a moral case for bombing.
I'm not quite sure how you can say "U.S. interventions notwithstanding". US interventions saw nuns raped, priests murdered and the suppression of the peoples grass roots Liberation Theology movement. How many civilians were expendable in the fight against the 'reds'?
Also I think your argument about economics is only true if you look at state vs neo-liberal economics as polar opposites with no middle ground. Pinochet's neo-liberal Chicago economics destroyed the economy. How did the IMF and WB prescription work out for Argentina? Brazil is now more independent from the US than it has been for a long time. Do you really want to bring up Peru to make your case? Reformer, Fujimori, is infamous for his corruption and human rights abuses. Neo-liberal doesn't mean market orientated, it means gutting all public sector services and selling them off for nothing to local elites/western powers and then jacking up the prices outrageously. Neo-liberalism says there is no role for the state in providing basic/necessary services. Great for profit, bad for the average person.
"Russia and China have used their veto to block any effective United Nations Security Council resolution that might lead to regime change."
Perhaps because the US & UK continually take a mile when given an inch. UNSCR resolution 1441 was blatantly misused as an excuse for war. The Russians and Chinese then gave Obama a chance by supporting UNSCR resolution 1973, only to have Obama and co. blatantly call for regime change which was not authorised by the resolution.
With US govt and corporate policy doing so much to flame conflict across the developing world, congress could easily pass some laws that would punish companies for their terrible behaviour at home and abroad. But instead congress does everything is can to protect their corporate allies and instead opt to bomb the foreign regimes that rub them the wrong way.
"Perhaps they do not care if indigenous dictators massacre indigenous protesters, as long as there is no *gasp* international intervention."
For one, I am insulted that over numerous posts, you keep implying that those with differing political views to yourself don't care about indigenous people. Surely you can accept that the people against intervention merely read the political and practical outcomes in a different way than you do? Perhaps those against foreign 'humanitarian' intervention are aware of how often that phrase is abused to start unnecessary wars and conflicts. Since WW2, how many US interventions have resulted in poor civilians making progress vs US interventions resulting in US dictated neo-liberal economic systems that only serve to exploit the poor? How did the US interventions work out for Latin America? Isn't it funny that the Sth American region is doing better now that there is less US influence.
Oh Joe. Please show me an IAEA report that says Iran has a nuke, or that they even have conclusive proof that Iran is working on a nuclear weapon? Only a week ago Chairman Of The Joint Chiefs Of Staff, Gen. Dempsey, said "that the Iranian regime has not decided that they will embark on the [...] effort to weaponize their nuclear capability".
The most recent report, which represents the consensus of 16 intelligence agencies, indicated that Iran is pursuing research that could put it in a position to build a weapon, but that it has not sought to do so.
pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/world/s_783472.html
Or are you arguing that the US should invade anyone with maybe the potential to build a bomb? Also, you were very quiet about my idea for Israel to give up their nuclear stockpile. Surely Israel is the cause for any nuclear arms race, if there is one.
BTW, you misquote me and interpret what I said in exactly the opposite way it was intended. Perhaps if you had quoted the full sentence you would have been able to comprehend the simple meaning.
Really Joe? You think the US is worried about Iranian nukes? Just like the US was worried about Iraq's WMD? In both cases the experts were/are saying there is no evidence for these fears. Experts don't know anything, keep believing the chicken hawks, they are surely motivated by moral intentions.
Those truly interested in a middle east nuclear free zone, should be pushing Israel to give up their massive nuclear arsenal and not pretend that the US has justified reasons to be scared of Iran.
Elections do have consequences. Only it was the Iraq elections and not the US elections. Sistani forced the US to allow Iraqi elections. The deadline to get US troops out was signed by Bush and the elected Iraqi govt. Obama/Biden did SFA.
Susan Rice pontificates about civilian casualties while the US intentionally uses drones to bomb funerals in Pakistan.
link to salon.com
If Obama and Susan Rice are liberals, I weep for the future of the US.
BTW interesting comparison between Buddhist Mandala's and the iPhone. After a short time you are supposed throw away/destroy both of them and buy/make a new ones.
Oh and I think the blinking cursor of DOS represents the single point of focus while meditating =P
Jobs didn't invent the GUI, we can thank Xerox PARC for that. Nor did Jobs invent mp3 players or smart phones. He did however understand the appeal of an intuitive interface for consumer devices and great marketing. He accelerated consumer adoption of the above devices, but world changing? Not so much.
Yes Juan, everyone against what NATO is doing in Libya is a Qaddafi supporter and ally of the CIA. Just like your opposition to the Iraq war made you a Saddam supporter and ally of the CIA.
Your blog used to be one of my favourites, now I hardly bother. Not because your stance on Libya is different to mine, but because you have been smearing opponents of the Libyan intervention as being pro Qaddafi time after time. You block comments that highlight inconsistencies in your argument but then are happy to allow posts gleeful that the Lockerbie bomber is going to die the most painful way possible (what value is a comment that celebrates death and adds nothing more to the argument?).