The fight against the hypocrites

I was in my ancient history class, and we were dicussing the hypocritical workings of the world.

American President, George Bush, indicated to the world that the reason that the entered Iraq was for the war on terrorism and the fught against oppression. But yet the war on terrorism doesnt stretch to africa. Why?
Does robert Magabe have so much power?
Or is that Africa has no natural resources to exploit? Or is it that there is no value to Africa, so that the people should suffer because of that?

Actually That particular country in Africa is rich in oil, they just know better than to start flying planes into into buildings.
They send children with guns into towns instead. Yes, it sucks and its wrong but whats any armed military going to do when the ones they're up against are a bunch of doped up kids?

Magarbi?!? Hypocrates?! You didnt learn this in class or you would know how to spell them. Your point, despite this, is a solid one. If NATO forces dont want to get involved in Zimbabwe, they shouldnt get involved in the middle east. Its one way or the other, it seems to me the arguements are these:

a) Mugabe is a tyrant/despot and needs to be stopped, its a violation of human rights and democracy to stand by and let him continue. However as always it would only be Britain and America getting involved (perhaps with the token Cypriot here of there), if Zimbawe are going to be liberated it's all or nothing, we can have anymore British and American soldiers dying. If we're so big on bringing democracy to the middle east, we should be in Zimbabe, no question.

b) It is not our place to police the world, to get involved in foreign wars is a violation of the culture and way of life of others. Its all cultural relativism, it isnt out place as Westerners to decide what is right and what is wrong, you cant judge a culture untill you have lived it. Its a waste of men and resources which we both sorely need, as America's and Britain's economies are heading for a recession as it is.

regarding b) well, sure, for example the sharia is something you as a woman should definitively try out for yourself, it's a cultural experience you won't forget...

also, according to your arguments in WW II nobody should have cared for "foreign wars", also the cultural achievement of genocide should have been given a bigger chance...

besides, a) and b) contradict each other.

and, it's not just american and british soldiers dying (even if they think they are the world's saviours), in Iraq (which you are refering to) many other countries are involved and therefore have casualities too, as they have (in the form of eg UNO soldiers) in all the other countries where wars are waging, but which aren't as profitable.

I know they contradict each other!! Im not a fucking idiot, I gave what I thought were the two main arguements either way.

Bael, the point is, if you are to believe cultural relativism, as many a ethnographer does, we are too wrapped up in our own culture to be able to read into sharia law without being bias. It might very well be an enjoyable experience to a strict muslim, to experience penance in the name of a God that they have devoted their life to, we cannot begin to comment.

Finally, it IS mainly yanks and brits getting killed in Iraq..I cant really decode what you are trying to say in the final point I'm afraid.

If I gave my actual opinion on the matter, I believe that sometimes political movements can be more potent than military ones, the world have denounced Mugabe's actions and he is definately feeling the pressure. I personally think that we should keep our nose out for a change (military wise).

ok, i won't comment that unlogical contradiction then.

oh i'm sure those women who get stoned for being "unfaithful" after being raped die with a smile on their face...

also, what is there to decode? the american led wars don't have american and british exclusive casualities, that's all i wanted to say. i don't know why you point those two nations out when many more are waging war together with them, and therefore also have soldiers dying. what's funny though, nobody thinks of the many soldiers dying out there in all those countries where no resources or political power can be gained for the illusion of "world piece", and who aren't of precious american or british nationality.

well, that's a pity. sure, they've invested most of the "human resources" but in exchange certainly have reaped enough of material resources from Iraq. i hope they will last through the recession...

it payed well off for a small elite and their shareholders. all others of course payed in $ or lives.

I so wanna join into this conversation, but I refuse on the principle that the original poster can't spell a simple word like 'hypocrites'. :P

p.s. and why would George W. Bush and Mugabi be discussed in Ancient History class? Talk about going off tangent. lol

Titles been changed!!!! huzzah

"Actually That particular country in Africa is rich in oil, they just know better than to start flying planes into into buildings"

No, they're just not unlucky enough to have had 'Dubya' decide that they did, when they didn't.

"I say we just nuke em an eye for an eye"

Death toll on 9/11: 2,998
Death toll on 11/3: 191
Death toll on 7/7: 56

Death toll in Iraq War: 151,000+

But, yeah, let's break out the nukes and kill a few million more people. Each American and European eye is worth at least a few thousand Iraqi ones.

(Oh, and nevermind the fact that the Iraqis had nothing to do with 9/11 nor any other Al Qaeda terrorist attacks in the first place. All foreigners-- especially the non-white, non-Christian, non-English-speaking ones-- are de facto terrorists. That's why we MUST attack Iran next!!!1)

Its actually easy to predict which nation gets invaded next:

Hey prelude, what a great diagram...
very nice

I guess i should've given credit to where i found it, though the site hasnt been updated in years:
www.rationalenquirer.org/

Yeh...
But the difference now is, that people have the brains and intellegence to know what is wrong and what is right...
Im not saying people didnt have intellegence and brains back through history, It just seems that you would have thought by now people would have a heart and see whats wrong and not be to imtimidated to do something about it...