| Viewing Single Post From: LD topics | |
|---|---|
| +Reaver | Jan 7 2009, 09:36 PM |
|
Troll
![]()
|
Not at all. They can tell us we're comitting a human rights violation and ask for our opinion if action X is a human rights violation. THat's in now way enforcing their will on us, especially since the United States would agree that crimes against humanity are wrong. If it's our will before they try to force it on us, they can never impose it on us. Because stopping crimes against humanity involves toppling a regime without any set building plans, right? The Iraqi people would've greeted us as true liberators had we taken out some bastard tyrant who was oppressing them. We did so much damage - including the destruction of propery and acting as the catalyst for religious insurgence - that counteracts whatever good we did in ending human rights violations. You can't say: "Well golly gee, you've destroyed the barrier preventing relgious warfare in Iraq, gotten on the bad side of multiple countries, killed 100,000 innocent Iraqis, mismanaged the job, and ultimately drove Iraq into a worse state of affairs, but because you've stopped human rights violations it's allllllright.". |
Favorite Staffer Summer 2008 -- Send me a Personal Message | |
![]() |
|
| LD topics · Debate Forum | |





8:16 PM Nov 28






