6 ms·
I normally wouldn't respond to someone being downvoted, but I genuinely want to help people like yourself see this another way. The child beating scenario is a
by BuckRogers 12y ago
I normally wouldn't respond to someone being downvoted, but I genuinely want to help people like yourself see this another way.
The child beating scenario is a hypothetical. A 1:1 mapping with today's situation is that this child would be in Shanghai. I could fly over and try to save that child. Or, I could rely on those people that are surrounding the child already to have a more vested interest than I do as someone on the other side of the globe.
Am I to fly around the world, saving everyone? Is that even possible? What about the children not immediately near me, but closer than Shanghai? Haiti or Mexico for example.
I think the people in the Shanghai region have more responsibility to save that child than me. When we did try to save that child in Iraq, we ignored the child in Haiti, Mexico and here at home too. And so many unintended consequences (like the region assuming: oh, the US is here, we'll do nothing now).
People are good across the globe, it's naive to think we're the only one interested in saving children. Unfortunately it's usually a political ruse than a genuine interest to help. Instead, the children here, Haiti and Mexico either have no oil, or are already under US political control- so the industrialists in bed with the gov't don't care about children beaten there. That's the real answer.
Also, does anyone honestly believe the people of Shanghai -want- our help saving their beaten children? Just about as much as we want the Chinese coming to San Francisco to save our children in need.
Hypotheticals are good for making points easier to get across. But I wouldn't accept an overly simplified hypothetical like yours without qualifications. The way you framed yours lines up with how the war profiteers want the argument to be framed. I mean, Shanghai is a big enough city that you know for a fact that there is literally a child being beaten there, right now. There's many good reasons you're not buying a ticket personally to go find that child and save him or her.
You could say, "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Well then, best order your ticket now. Think about those reasons why you aren't doing that. Those are the same reasons we shouldn't be sending guys with -guns- over there either to "help". If you do this exercise you'll understand how absurd the whole thing is.
- hueving 12y agoIt was not a metaphor. You said you would never fight unless someone took a swing at you. If you walked down the street and spotted a person beating another helpless person to death, would you stand by and do nothing because you had not been attacked? Also, drop the condescending tone in your response about 'helping people see another way'. I gave you a simple hypothetical and you dumped a page of text without answering it because you didn't understand a simple question. You're not helping at all.
- BuckRogers 12y agoI did answer you, very clearly. If you understood my response you'd know that I would help that person. The issue is that your supposition has no correlation to the wars in the mideast and US involvement at all.