A Problem From Hell: Why America should prevent every single possible genocide from Rwanda to Romania, from Uganda to Uzbekistan, everywhere everytime

FmdOWb6WIAA9VFd
 
After 26 months in Constantinople, Morgenthau left in 1916. He could no longer stand his impotence to convince America to stop the Armenian genocide. "My failure to stop the destruction of Armenians made Turkey for me a place of horror. I have reached the end of my resources"
 
was Jesus "the world's policeman" because he spread Christianity around the world?
He didn’t, of course. But even if He had, your faux question is clearly not just a non-sequitur but also a deflection.

Is it your contention that America is (or ought to be) the World’s Policeman? If so, why?
 
He didn’t, of course. But even if He had, your faux question is clearly not just a non-sequitur but also a deflection.

Is it your contention that America is (or ought to be) the World’s Policeman? If so, why?
yes! why? read everything i said on the thread...it's not like i didn't state my case and give specifics
 
He didn’t, of course. But even if He had, your faux question is clearly not just a non-sequitur but also a deflection.

Is it your contention that America is (or ought to be) the World’s Policeman? If so, why?
my son actually inspired me to make this thread. he's a bibliophile at just 12 years old and keeps reading unusually grim books about ethnic slaughter. he recently read Nobel Prize winner Henryk Sinkiewicz's "Quo Vadis?" which recounts Roman emperor Nero's massacres of Christian converts. although my son says he's atheist, all his friends are Christian. He was horrified that Nero could feed Christians to the lions in front of a cheering crowd and asked me how such a thing was possible. that led to my interest in the topic. upon doing my research, I happened upon Samantha Power's work where she says America should intervene to prevent genocide, so i made this thread basically to make the case...happy now?
 
history is much wiser than lawyers and statesmen, not to mention clueless fools like BackAgain. those who study history like me know that the crime of barbarity repeats itself with near biological regularity. UNLESS AMERICA DOES SOMETHING, NOTHING WILL CHANGE
 
He didn’t, of course. But even if He had, your faux question is clearly not just a non-sequitur but also a deflection.

Is it your contention that America is (or ought to be) the World’s Policeman? If so, why?
if women, children, and old people were being murdered 100 miles from where you live, wouldn't you run to help? then why do you stop this decision of your heart when the distance is 3,000 miles instead of 100?
 
yes! why? read everything i said on the thread...it's not like i didn't state my case and give specifics
Ok. So now that you admit that you were talking about Americans (making your concern about them not being a “race” an obviously retarded deflection effort), we can get to the second part of my question.

On what basis should the Americans assume the responsibility for being the policeman of the world (with or without the help of other nations)?
 
Ok. So now that you admit that you were talking about Americans (making your concern about them not being a “race” an obviously retarded deflection effort), we can get to the second part of my question.

On what basis should the Americans assume the responsibility for being the policeman of the world (with or without the help of other nations)?
it will actually be a shame to go on living happily, to be proud to belong to the human race, if steps are not taken to halt one more chapter in the greatest crime in history: genocide. NO MORE!
 
Jewish Supreme Count Justice Frankfurter said : “Mr. Karski, a man like me talking to a man like you, has to be completely honest. So I have to say: I can't believe you ". This is in reference to Karski’s report on the upcoming German genocide. Even the Jews refused to believe Karski.
 
my son actually inspired me to make this thread. he's a bibliophile at just 12 years old and keeps reading unusually grim books about ethnic slaughter. he recently read Nobel Prize winner Henryk Sinkiewicz's "Quo Vadis?" which recounts Roman emperor Nero's massacres of Christian converts. although my son says he's atheist, all his friends are Christian. He was horrified that Nero could feed Christians to the lions in front of a cheering crowd and asked me how such a thing was possible. that led to my interest in the topic. upon doing my research, I happened upon Samantha Power's work where she says America should intervene to prevent genocide, so i made this thread basically to make the case...happy now?
No. I don’t care what Samantha suggests.

I want your analysis.

We agree that some genocidal maniac trying to wipe out a people is horrific. But who gives the badge to America? Are you actually suggesting that international law should be suspended in any case where one nation is slaughtering the people of some other nation or ethnic group? We somehow have a right to invade some foreign land because our humanitarian instincts trump sovereign borders and international law?

And we have some obligation to have our people shed their blood and lose their lives when we have no particular national interest in the “genocide” in some other land beyond the humanitarian instinct?
 
Jan Karski told FDR: “Without outside help, the Jews in Poland will perish.” Karski then told Justice Felix Frankfurter, who listened in stunned disbelief.
 
it will actually be a shame to go on living happily, to be proud to belong to the human race, if steps are not taken to halt one more chapter in the greatest crime in history: genocide. NO MORE!
Communist China is savagely oppressing and killing their Muslim population. Should we march in?
 
No. I don’t care what Samantha suggests.

I want your analysis.

We agree that some genocidal maniac trying to wipe out a people is horrific. But who gives the badge to America? Are you actually suggesting that international law should be suspended in any case where one nation is slaughtering the people of some other nation or ethnic group? We somehow have a right to invade some foreign land because our humanitarian instincts trump sovereign borders and international law?

And we have some obligation to have our people shed their blood and lose their lives when we have no particular national interest in the “genocide” in some other land beyond the humanitarian instinct?
you don't want to intervene to help humanity. you don't drink. you don't smoke. WHAT DO YOU DO? damn goody two shoes!
 
you don't want to intervene to help humanity. you don't drink. you don't smoke. WHAT DO YOU DO? damn goody two shoes!
Nice deflection effort. A fail, as per your usual effort. But a valiant try.
 

Forum List

Back
Top