|
|
#1
09-25-2007, 04:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
The good guys
I understand that many people feel that American foreign policy is a force for good in the world.
Do any supporters of American foreign policy feel that disagreement, to the point of violent confrontation, with the legitimacy of American tactics cannot possibly be justified? In other words, is it possible that one (say an iraqi citizen) could view US policy as morally repugnant and be morally justified in attacking US troops? I personally think it is quite possible to hold both views concurrently. One can feel that moving into the middle east as we've done will be of long term benefit to the world, while thinking those who attack our troops could be morally justified in doing so. 
|
|
#4
09-25-2007, 04:36 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The good guys
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I understand that many people feel that American foreign policy is a force for good in the world. [/ QUOTE ] Where would that be, that many people felt so? [/ QUOTE ] The place where there is lots of white but no black - 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
|
|
#5
09-25-2007, 04:37 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The good guys
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I understand that many people feel that American foreign policy is a force for good in the world. [/ QUOTE ] Where would that be, that many people felt so? [/ QUOTE ] Mostly in America, but certainly in other places as well, American interventionism has many advocates in central and eastern europe. Even in France and England large parts of the country are sympathetic even if the population is certainly as a whole anti-america's foreign policy.
|
|
#6
09-25-2007, 05:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The good guys
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I understand that many people feel that American foreign policy is a force for good in the world. [/ QUOTE ] Where would that be, that many people felt so? [/ QUOTE ] Mostly in America, but certainly in other places as well, American interventionism has many advocates in central and eastern europe. Even in France and England large parts of the country are sympathetic even if the population is certainly as a whole anti-america's foreign policy. [/ QUOTE ] Uh!? I thought, for sure, the large majority of US citizens were not supportive of current foreign policy. The same definitely apply to most European countries. Come to think of it, most asian countries as well, with, perhaps, India as an exception for the time being. Maybe we read different newspapers. Some might consider the policy right as "aligned to US interests" but not a force for good in the world. That would be definitely a minority in almost any country, including the USA. Of course if your definition of "many" is a "minority", I was out of order.
|
|
#9
09-25-2007, 05:30 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The good guys
[ QUOTE ]
i never meant majority, i thought that was clear, my apologies. [/ QUOTE ] No need to apologize, dude. I simply misunderstood. However why would a small minority think so? Because either they have a vested interest (they benefit from the war), or they have lesser intellectual capability than the large majority! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
|
|
#10
09-25-2007, 05:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The good guys
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] i never meant majority, i thought that was clear, my apologies. [/ QUOTE ] No need to apologize, dude. I simply misunderstood. However why would a small minority think so? Because either they have a vested interest (they benefit from the war), or they have lesser intellectual capability than the large majority! [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] suffice to say, i do not agree with this. I can think of pretty justifiable real politick reasons for Iraq, Korea, Vietnam even if i don't necessarily agree, I really can't plausibly refute with any certainty. As for moral arguments i don't think anyone can make any unassailable statements.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
