Another reason why the UN is a joke...

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger
Your flamebaiting and ignorance of history aside, which independent measurement of "human rights" do you want to use?

The only ignorence here is your continous US sucks routine while refusing to acknowledge that China blows.

Funny how you responded without bothering to deny any of that.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Here comes that moral relavatism again. So which is it...we stand up for all human rights abuses, or we adhere to relavatism? Clearly Tunisia is an oppresive regime, albeit somewhat better than its neighbors. Why aren't we invading?

Don't make Bush start - he would like that idea

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
Are you really this stupid? You don't put a person in prison for life for a misdemeanor or even a minor felony. You save the worst punishment for the worst crimes. The same concept applies to human rights violations. You don't invade a country unless the violations are particularly heinous.

So, what heinous human rights violations were going on in Vietnam that warranted our invasion, that were worse than things going on elsewhere at the time?

But we don't even have to go as far as invading. What about just condemning? Look at Saudi Arabia. Absolutely one of the worst human rights records imaginable. A dictatorship wherein the citizens are subjected to everything Libya does and worse. A government where the prince has openly stated the desire for the destruction of the Jewish people. And yet, not only are we not invading to right their wrongs, we're ALLIED with them! We're turning our heads because...it's in our national self interest. Oil matters more than humanity, it seems. So don't feed me the bull**** propaganda that the U.S. government cares about defending human rights around the world, as reality just doesn't support that.

Even if the crimes are heinous, you have to actually be able to build support for the intervention and carry it out.

Right, we had that international coalition in Vietnam. Oops, no we didn't. And aren't we the ones threatening to invade Iraq with or without international support?

And what other nations were behind us in our meddling in South America, Iran, etc? How about that Spanish-American war?

Vietnam was a struggle to stop communism. I never said that it was heroic. Most struggles aren't.

Government line. Vietnam was fought as a continuation of Imperialist policies and for military and economic interests. It was more a fight for American prestige than to save anyone from communism. If we were so interested in protecting the people of Vietnam, why did we drop three times more explosives on the country than we dropped in all of WWII, the a-bombs included?

[Bereta_Eder]

UN

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Jaakko
What do you guys think the UN should be? Some gentlemen's club where the enlightened nations pass down edicts to the barbarians? Do you REALLY think the human rights movement will benefit that way?

Well.............yeah. What would be wrong with that? Is there something wrong with enlightenment? I'm not talking about the French ( chop, chop ) type mind you.

[Roland]

It's a political committee. You might just as well ***** about Ashcroft being supposed to uphold the civil rights act - actually, a better idea, cause it's more serious on the implications.

[Dr Strangelove]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


So, what heinous human rights violations were going on in Vietnam that warranted our invasion, that were worse than things going on elsewhere at the time?

It is a well established fact that long before the Us got involved in Vietnam the Viet Cong used terror tactics throughout the South. Anyone who failed in the least to give them what ever they wanted - food, shelter, support, troops, women, etc. was executed without a second's thought. Ever heard of the Hmong? They were a hill tribe that had been nearly rendered extinct by the VC before the US got there. The hills weren't the only place where the VC applied similar "persuasion" tactics.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Dr Strangelove


It is a well established fact that long before the Us got involved in Vietnam the Viet Cong used terror tactics throughout the South. Anyone who failed in the least to give them what ever they wanted - food, shelter, support, troops, women, etc. was executed without a second's thought. Ever heard of the Hmong? They were a hill tribe that had been nearly rendered extinct by the VC before the US got there. The hills weren't the only place where the VC applied similar "persuasion" tactics.

That doesn't answer my question, really, if you read the last phrase. I certainly wouldn't categorize the Vietcong as nice people. What I am asking is what it was that made this a more pressing concern than the other human rights abuses going on around the world at the time.

It's been convenient that we can use defending human rights as a justification for imperialism. Americans are good, compassionate people. Unfortunately, that makes it easy for cynical governments to manipulate public sentiment in favor of wars by appealing to that compassion, although the real reasons are far more base.

[SlowwHand]

The U.S. and allies have to learn to play by the same rules their enemies play by.
Let's take assassination. Do you think for a minute all countries abhor the concept?
Personally, I'd rather seen Hussein, for instance, dusted by a single shot, than have to put our young military members at risk; but since that's not currently a viable option...

[DinoDoc]

It's cute that you people still care who heads a particular UN body.

[Lars-E]

I'd rather be in an American prison, than any other countys'.

Why would you do that to yourself?

I know a guy who spent 3 days in a Californian jail. He described it as 'hell'. A jail in Scandinavia OTOH is almost hotel standard.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Lars-E
I know a guy who spent 3 days in a Californian jail. He described it as 'hell'.

Silly man! It's supposed to be like that. They'd rather that you didn't feel like coming back.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Chris 62
Yes, we ran over our citizens with tanks when they wanted a better life...no wait that was China.

In the 1980s a train carrying military supplies for the murderous governments of Central America ran over a protestor who was clearly visible to the train conductor moving at five miles an hour.

And then we arrested a bunch of them because they created a new religion...oh, that was China, sorry.

Waco?

At least we occupy Tibet...no, that was China again.

Puerto Rico?

Well, we do attck unarmed recon planes in international airspace...no wait, that was China.

The Iranian airliner?

That was weak Chris. You should have nailed them on the mass executions of political dissidents as well as the use of torture. While political dissidents are occassionally assassinated or tortured in the US, it's illegal (unless the dissident is already in prison in which case the guards always claim something like "he was pulling a gun out of his afro!" or that he's malingering)

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

At least we occupy Tibet...no, that was China again.

Puerto Rico?

If you insist on saying that Puerto Rico is under occupation, can you explain why they have repeatedly rejected cutting the apron strings in the past?

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
In the 1980s a train carrying military supplies for the murderous governments of Central America ran over a protestor who was clearly visible to the train conductor moving at five miles an hour.

?

Waco?

You posting "waco", this was a damn silly post by you.
Reno "claimed" she feared for the life of the children in the compound, did our Beijing friends have such fears?

Puerto Rico?

Half assed, your slipping.
In the last referendum they held this year, they voted overwhelmingly to remain a US common wealth.

The Iranian airliner?

You mean the one that the Iranian government cleared to take off and fly directly at a USN cruiser while it's patrol boats attacked said USN cruiser in neutral waters?

That was weak Chris. You should have nailed them on the mass executions of political dissidents as well as the use of torture. While political dissidents are occassionally assassinated or tortured in the US, it's illegal (unless the dissident is already in prison in which case the guards always claim something like "he was pulling a gun out of his afro!" or that he's malingering)

I was on, as UR didn't respond, but you were very weak here Che, I expect better from a Communist.
Give yourself three capitalist demerits for this.