America’s Moral Compass

Dear godot

Please pardon my tardy response. I was indisposed, it wasn’t a snub. Just A few points regarding your post #141

First, I wish you had not given such a crass example (ugly unlovable woman – welcomes rape). Your confrontational polemics seem to suggest that you are far too emotionally committed on this issue. Otherwise you would not take leave of your good taste.

Now, to answer your inquisition “… How do you define a “criminal” act?...” I shall have to refer you back to my same old post # 139 wherein I wrote… “Now whether the original act was a crime or not is another debate that cannot be resolved because it is an emotive issue. Opinions will differ. …”

Clearly, I have no wish to get into a pissing contest with you or anyone else for that matter. So please don`t expect “a lesson in history” as you put it. The facts are there for all to see. We can each take what we want from the available information. As for my definition of crime that you asked for [“… How do you define a “criminal” act? …”], please let me refer you to the following source: http://costofwar.com

You may understand where I am coming from.

…SR

And to think that by invoking the ``mysterious ways`` one can disclaim any responsibility to his heinous deeds..............there is a greater mystery that awaits him.................

Islamic theocracy in a democratic setup would never survive...............it would undeniably follow the Pakistani way.....oscillating between dictators with each accusing one another of NOT following Islam in the ``truest`` and ``purest`` form.....................and further crushing the `poor`, `children`, `women` and other weaklings into slavery..............

Re: # 159

That wasn`t a metaphor. You need to choose your terms more carefully.
Even more carefully do you need to choose your analogies. There can be no justification for rape.

Re: # 159
Thank you kindly.
I know what metaphor means.Other people are never as stupid as you think they are and you`re not as smart!
I did see where this came from. As for your earlier comment that those who had to understand, understood- I don`t see that. Neither hamid_m nor SR agreed.
If you had any empathy at all towards abused women, you would not have used that metaphor.
I will let this be, because you are not going to admit it was insensitive.

Re: # 158

2 suggestions:

1. Look up the word ``metaphor``

2. Go back and read the posts to understand how this metaphor was established in this exchange.

Re: # 156
I do understand the dilemna. I hate to tell you this, but it`s not very hard. You are still justifying rape here, where all you`re trying to say is you have to be cruel to be kind sometimes, or as my surgeon friends say, sometimes you need to amputate a limb to save the patient. There were other ways of saying the same thing. Your premise remains strange because if the woman was so desperate to have a child, she might have agreed to have sex. In any case, if you`ve ever worked in an emergency department, you learn that all sorts of women get raped; you hear of it as well from the most beautiful film stars to the women with acid-burnt faces in Bangladesh. Plus the woman might just want sex, why bring the child into it?

Ordinary Muslim #151 Ha! ha! Good post. I always knew the Ordinary Muslim had much more sense in his head than the uniformed and/or bearded clowns who try to lord it over them.

Re: # 153

nb

Those who needed to understand the metaphor and the dilemma posed understood it.

I think that Bush`s desire to democratise the Middle East is actually good for the Islamic World although not in the way Bush thinks. Allah works in mysterious way and Bush (who thinks god talks to him anyway and that he is doing god`s work!) may well be an instrument in His plan (azza wa jal -Glorious is He!). Let`s be honest here, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, the Gulf States are all run by dictators who do nothing but oppress the common man. These people will not be removed internally so if the US, in trying to bring secular democracy to these countries, uses force to get rid of these regimes, it will actually be good for the Muslims: just as is happening in Iraq, as soon as the people of the Middle East get a chance for free elections, they will pick Islamic parties thereby bringing real Islamic governance to this area for the first time since the decline of the Caliphate. Therefore by bringing democracy to the Islamic World Bush will actually be helping to build a Middle East where there is a series of nation states all having democratically elected Islamic leaders running Islamic theocracies from Egypt to Pakistan. This is what the Muslims have wanted for decades but their own oppressive tyrannical rulers, such as Saddam, have been preventing them from doing so. By forcefully ridding the Muslim nations of these tyrants Bush will be doing a great service--although he doesn`t realise it.

Re: # 64

On the basic topic of fairness, no society is completely just and fair, but the USA comes closest to it in the modern world.

Actually, that is WAY wrong. In terms of fairness the whole of Western Europe trounces the USA and especially the Nordic countries. In the USA there is gross disparity between the rich and the poor. A country like Sweden is probably the closest in practise to a fair society on earth.

Re: # 141
Godot, I find it extrememly distressing that you justify rape in any way. I know you are trying to make a point, but please do rethink this. Why, by the way could the woman not go to a sperm bank?

Ordinary_Muslim

``Can greybeard Sistani force a hyperpower to hold elections? If so why didn`t he force Saddam to hold elections? ``

Because, to their credit, the Americans would not persue a policy of Genocide (although they did so in Cambodia) in Iraq.

Second, the current state of Iraq is one in which insurgent forces have free reign. The tight control Saddam had on Iraq is one which the Americans desire, however have found seriously elusive (despite being a HyperPower).

So your comparison of Saddam and USA is a bit off. The fact is, Sistani did force the elections on threat of a full scale Shia insurgency. That Saddam could control them (ultimately) and the USA can not is an exercice for you to work out. I`ll give you a hint: Americans have the luxury of leaving.

Re: # 123

``In actuality, the USA govt. has been trying its best to avoid holding real elections in Iraq, including this January one. It was forced to hold them by Sistani.``

Can greybeard Sistani force a hyperpower to hold elections? If so why didn`t he force Saddam to hold elections?

All Chowkies should take their hats off to Romair. He gives us guffaws all the time. Many Pakistan military people do not realise that their stupidity will be ridiculed. Chowk is not a Pakistan military unit where brain dead automata believe their CO cannot be wrong.

Perhaps such pseudo intellectuals should remember this saying. ``It`s better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt.`` - Abraham Lincoln.

Re: # 133

{If the Saudi monarchy gets toppled by a populist Wahabbi uprising, let it get toppled. If the a popular Islamic brotherhood takes out, ``the five time elected with no opposition`` Mubarak in Egypt, let it happen}


Question for Romair: If democracy at any price is what he recommends, then here`s the question. What if Romair lives in a country where fanatical mullahs win an election. How long will it take him to courageously run away? If Romair does not want to live under mullah-rule (even if it is democratically elected), why should others?

Let`s not forget that Adolf Hitler was democratically elected. If Romair and other America bashers from Pakistan`s military are so fixated on democracry, why didn`t Paksitan`s military accept the results of elections in 1971?

What if a democratically elected mullahcracy results in a mushroom cloud over Manhattan? Sounds far fetched? Well, the September 11 barbarism sounded far-fetched on September 10.

>> Iraq has been destroyed worth an amount of tens to perhaps hundreds of billiions.

Iraq`s GDP is $30 billion ! (Apparently they don`t teach Math or Economics at Risalpur. That`s why Romair types know only fuzzy economics !)

>> If America had simply pressurised Israel to hand over the tiny 3% of land that it is refusing to, and given it $50 billion dollars, most of these problems would have been solved.

So simple !

I wonder if he has heard of this:
``For every problem, there is one solution which is simple, neat and wrong.``--H. L. Mencken (1880--1956), U.S. journalist

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts