CP: until you decide to accept that human life is important, we have nothing more to discuss. People who dont value human life, who do everything for personal gain, who care nothing for others are called sociopaths.
Whatever you call it, it is much more rational, and since (ideal) arguments are rational constructs in the first place, yours falls apart.
Why the devil is human life so important when there are six billion on the planet that reproduce very rapidly? (not to mention that everyone is complaining about overpopulation) Sure, humans are a very important resource, but one in great supply too. This is like saying that chairs are inherently valuable, and that we should respect their existence; it simply makes no sense.
Anyway, the governments today just say this stuff to gain popular support because it is emotionally appealing; since they are still around and in place today, they must have learned the truth long ago.
Yes the world is not fair, but it SHOULD be fair. I act in the way that things SHOULD be, because if everyone accpets tryanny, greed, opportunism, then it will remain that way. You talk of how the sneakiest, most corrupt, most bloodthirsty country is the smartest one.
That is pretty much an unjustified assertion with a particular definition of "fair" attached to it. I can say that it SHOULD NOT be fair, and I would be just as correct as you are, so we do not get anywhere; we need a more objective and scientific way of looking at these things. And like I said in that other thread, we need to be fair to the chairs, so stop sitting on them.
But really, there is no way to measure "should" other than what
is, so if anything "should" be, it would already be so. Now you can act in this way it "should" be, but the world will
still remain that way regardless of such mindsets, because people like you will not be able to compete with the "evil" guys (which will pretty much always exist as long as there is more than one human around) and will just get smashed after a while; a good real world example of this is Gandhi. Do you see my point? It's all about what produces the practical results, since in the end it is all meaningless anyway. And yes, those traits do indeed characterize the smart nations, because they are the ones who survive and come out victorious in the end; if you look a little carefully at history, you will find that the victors are the "evil" guys who manage to make the general population think that they are the good guys.
Well maybe, but I would rather have a country that is good and charitable and wise, you can always get more tanks.
Alright, but your country will be the one to get overrun by the ones with the tanks (and consequently, the wisdom). Would you rather be a fair and honorable but dead man or an evil and unjust winner? This is what today's conflict is all about, and I would take the latter choice any day.
there is absolutly no way Sadam is leaveing power alive
You tell him nicely to give up his weapons and leave the country. Or, you threaten him by tripling the number of inspectors!
