I was making the assertion that violating another’s rights denigrates the abuser, and putting it into the context of carpet bombing people who are under a tyrannical rule, some of whom would every bit like to not violate anyone’s rights.
One cannot voilate rights which do not exist. Passively supporting a middle eastern dictator equals passively supporting terrorism equals passively supporting terrorist attacks. It is not “denigrating” to stop terrorist attacks, and it is not “denigrating” to kill passive terror supporters to do so, if it makes the job safer.
Oh, and thank you Jessie, for the “one-sided” comment. “One-sided” almost always means “consistant.”
Well it’s good of you to be uprooting militants for me, however I’d think you’d know that not everyone in Iraq was supporting Saddam just by being there. They may have had no recourse other than denouncing Saddam in the streets (suicide), so please excuse me for finding it a tragedy that even one of these people, American or Iraqi, who believed in freedom, should have died.
I agree that it is a shame. But when someone is trapped under a dictator, thier choices are active support, passive support, activly fighting against. Anyone doing any sort of productive work under a dictator is supporting that dictator’s govenment.
And besides this, any rational individual living in such conditions will recognise that any attempt to overthrow their government will have possibilities of their own death. They should consider that possibility to be much better than living forever under dictatorship.
Any irrational person would consider it their own duty to overthrow the government when they already know that the penalty for this would be death… Any rational person would realise that in putting their life in danger in order to defeat an authoritarian government, they would get nowhere, as the government is so powerful and emotionless that by killing people to avoid defeat is nothing new to authoritarians. I mean, perhaps the Iraqis would be seen as “honourable” for attempting to do this, but it is possible that many would see this as another life lost… And the American’s first priority when going into a country that is not theirs should be the preservation of civilians, and then follows the abolishment of the government.
And the American’s first priority when going into a country that is not theirs should be the preservation of civilians, and then follows the abolishment of the government.
You are suggesting that I should place the lives of those who (albeit passively) make it possible for things like 9-11 to happen above my own. This is the most irrational thing I have heard in this forum for along time.
Their civilians as well as ours, our soldiers have just as much a right to life as any of these ideal civilians of the foreign country who do resist. Moreover, those who understand the evilness of the regime should understand that to allow a regime to perpetuate further crimes is not an acceptable option. At this point it comes under the umbrella of what objectivism speaks of as suicide because there is no prospect of life without freedom.
To sum up, I restate that the loss of civilians is a tragedy which must be avoided if possible, but if your life would be forfeit under the heel of the dictator or in order to promote freedom (and this is the question at hand) which would you choose?
“Moreover, those who understand the evilness of the regime should understand that to allow a regime to perpetuate further crimes is not an acceptable option”
That they can understand the evilness of the regime is certainly hindered by several factors.
For many people Did not have access to anything other than state run media.(perception)
The educational system was so fucked up that “concept formation” was certainly hindered. So too was history etc(Concept formation_)
Much of Saddam’s wrath was directed at his perceived troublemakers and was 12 years ago, for many others he was just the “prick that is responsible for me having to bribe Dr’s”(Judgement)
When Blatant incidents happened, Saddam actively tried to distort reality and make it appear as if others were more
Certainly there were many people that should have known that not dying was an awful evasion, that wasnt the case for all.
No access to media does not prevent a person from discovering and using his mind.
No, but it prevents them from getting what amounts to perceptual information By which to make judgements about the full horror of Saddam’s regime.
“Miseducation does not prevent a person from discovering and using his mind”
Why Bother educating your children then?
Also, why have a philosophy of education if it does not matter how one educates?
“Saddam’s wrath does not prevent a person from discovering and using his mind.”
that wasnt my point RE where Saddam directed his wrath. My point is that people less effected by his wrath would not necessarily choose to kill him,
"Saddam’s mendacity does not prevent a person from disscovering and using his mind. "
Yes it does… My physically manipulating who was allowed to be where when, he prevented people from discovering via direct sense data, and by physically limiting people’s access to anything but false indirect sense data. he limited their ability pass accurate judgements on those particular situations.
No, but it prevents them from getting what amounts to perceptual information By which to make judgments about the full horror of Saddam’s regime.
Ahhh… but does it not also provide enough reason in itself to reject that regime.
Why Bother educating your children then?
Good education is helpful but bad education is not an excuse for ignorance (although it probably was a factor, it does not dismiss someone from responsibility).
My point is that people less effected by his wrath would not necessarily choose to kill him.
This is quite irrelevant… It is the passive support of attacks/danger on America which is the discussion, not passive support of attacks on oneself (although surely a lack of freedom is attack enough).
he limited their ability pass accurate judgments on those particular situations.
It is what one is/does that matters in this discussion, not how one got there. Now, I sympathize with the people who lived under Saddam, but if someone supports mass killings, they support mass killings. While it is surely a tragedy that they were deluded into doing so, delusion is not an excuse.
Old Geezer , nothing prevents a person from discovering and using his mind save for untimely death. Discovery and use of one’s rational faculty is fully one’s choice. You can be discouraged or encouraged to think; but nobody can force you to think or not to think: only you can do that to yourself. Everybody ought to have been aware that one cannot live as a slave. Nobody can rightly claim the excuse: “if I had thought about it, Saddam would have hurt me.”
Many of your points are irrevalent, in fact many of your opinions are irrevalent as well… You are not welcome here if your points are simply to argue that you are right… Some educated insight would be nice instead
Many of your points are irrevalent, in fact many of your opinions are irrevalent as well… You are not welcome here if your points are simply to argue that you are right… Some educated insight would be nice instead "Jesse
Jesse, how about some “educated insight” into how his points are irrelevant instead of mere attacks on his motives???
“Old Geezer, nothing prevents a person from discovering and using his mind save for untimely death” y feldblum
Physical reality prevents someone from “discovering”… and when access to physical reality is unjustly denied or manipulated, (as Saddam often did) one is physically prevented from “discovery” of that which is relevant to this discussion
“Everybody ought to have been aware that one cannot live as a slave” y feldblum
to an extent, you are living as a slave, why is it you are not willing to die for that cause?
Ahhh… but does it not also provide enough reason in itself to reject that regime. RH
reject yes
Good education is helpful but bad education is not an excuse for ignorance (although it probably was a factor, it does not dismiss someone from responsibility). RH
what do you mean by factor???
"This is quite irrelevant… It is the passive support of attacks/danger on America which is the discussion, not passive support of attacks on oneself (although surely a lack of freedom is attack enough). "RH
it is relevant because unless they were AWARE of unjustices being carried forth on others the only basis on which they would have decided whether Saddam was worth dying for or not was what inustices he carried out that effected them.
Saddam may forbid some actions and mandate others - with chains. But it is physically impossible for him to forbibd some thoughts and mandate others unless his victims allow him to.
Saddam may forbid some actions and mandate others - with chains. But it is physically impossible for him to forbibd some thoughts and mandate others unless his victims allow him to.
The problem is Saddam has forbid people to state their thoughts, and they have not “allowed” him to do this, but he has forced them to submit themselves to oppression since if they do state their thoughts, they will be killed. If they were to all state their thoughts I would have no doubt in my mind that millions would die under Saddam’s regime.
One cannot voilate rights which do not exist. Passively supporting a middle eastern dictator equals passively supporting terrorism equals passively supporting terrorist attacks. It is not “denigrating” to stop terrorist attacks, and it is not “denigrating” to kill passive terror supporters to do so, if it makes the job safer.
One can, however violate ‘rules’ that do exist… If an Iraqi were to speak up about their thoughts on Hussein, they would be killed, just as people who openly disagreed with Hitler were punished…
Ayn Rand was somehow able to become educated and resist becoming “indoctrinated” while living under the Soviet system. She recognized the reality and possible consequences of continuing to live in such a place. If she stayed she could have died during WWII (that would have been a tragedy). Were she not permitted to emigrate it’s not unreasonable to suspect she would have fled in the same manner that Kira tried to in “We the Living”.
By choosing her values and acting on them, her story is what we know today and not merely just another anonymous tragedy. People in Iraq, like the rest of us, can choose their values, or not, and can live by those values, or not. But none of us can escape the consequences. That may be “tragic”, but it is reality.
