Fair Trade?

2008-06-07 12:33:49

#51

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6833|'Murka

Turquoise wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Turquoise wrote:

Israel doesn't have the right to bomb Iran.
Sure they do. And they have the right to deal with the consequences.

Every sovereign nation has the "right" to do whatever the hell they want, both domestically and internationally. With that, though, comes the responsibility for your actions.
No they don't. You don't have the right to just bomb whoever. No one has that right. You're mistaking ability for right.

No, I'm not. Rights apply to individuals, not countries.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-06-07 14:28:02

#52

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6827|North Carolina

FEOS wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
FEOS wrote:

Sure they do. And they have the right to deal with the consequences.

Every sovereign nation has the "right" to do whatever the hell they want, both domestically and internationally. With that, though, comes the responsibility for your actions.
No they don't. You don't have the right to just bomb whoever. No one has that right. You're mistaking ability for right.
No, I'm not. Rights apply to individuals, not countries.

You just said that Israel has the right to attack Iran. They don't, unless they are attacked first or catch them attempting to do so.

2008-06-07 15:07:37

#53

Bell: Frosties > Cornflakes; +362|6972|UK

Turquoise wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
No they don't. You don't have the right to just bomb whoever. No one has that right. You're mistaking ability for right.
No, I'm not. Rights apply to individuals, not countries.
You just said that Israel has the right to attack Iran. They don't, unless they are attacked first or catch them attempting to do so.

Define rights? I think it was Carlin (your sig reminded me of it) who said, you have no rights, there an idea. If rights can change from country to country, who is to say someone doesnt have a right to do whatever? It's the same with countries. The USA and her allies had no 'right' to go into Iraq, there intentions noble or otherwise doesnt come into it, they did it and as far as am aware there was little to no implications for the USA.

Internation law? Aye right. If we saw someone as a threat to us, however unlikely, we would rail road our way through despite rights to protect our interests, I see no difference here.

How can you say they dont have the right? And by the same token, how can anyone say they do. Like Carlin said, there an idea. Put in place by the men in power and can be taken away as seen fit.

My/Georges take on it.

Martyn

Last edited by Bell (2008-06-07 15:10:22)

2008-06-07 15:38:21

#54

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6833|'Murka

Turquoise wrote:
FEOS wrote:
Turquoise wrote:

No they don't. You don't have the right to just bomb whoever. No one has that right. You're mistaking ability for right.
No, I'm not. Rights apply to individuals, not countries.
You just said that Israel has the right to attack Iran. They don't, unless they are attacked first or catch them attempting to do so.

Having the "right" and having justification for the action are different things.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-06-07 16:17:03

#55

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6827|North Carolina

Bell wrote:
Turquoise wrote:
FEOS wrote:

No, I'm not. Rights apply to individuals, not countries.
You just said that Israel has the right to attack Iran. They don't, unless they are attacked first or catch them attempting to do so.
Define rights? I think it was Carlin (your sig reminded me of it) who said, you have no rights, there an idea. If rights can change from country to country, who is to say someone doesnt have a right to do whatever? It's the same with countries. The USA and her allies had no 'right' to go into Iraq, there intentions noble or otherwise doesnt come into it, they did it and as far as am aware there was little to no implications for the USA.

Internation law? Aye right. If we saw someone as a threat to us, however unlikely, we would rail road our way through despite rights to protect our interests, I see no difference here.

How can you say they dont have the right? And by the same token, how can anyone say they do. Like Carlin said, there an idea. Put in place by the men in power and can be taken away as seen fit.

My/Georges take on it.

Martyn

....good point... It's hard to counter Carlin... +1

2008-06-09 01:02:11

#56

liquix: Member; +51|6876|Peoples Republic of Portland

rammunition wrote:
Israel has been building nuclear plants in secret for decades, a whistle blower by the name of Mordechai Vanunu was kidnapped when caught and has spent the last 20 years in jail for exposing Israel's secret nuclear program.

Also Israel is the biggest proliferator in the region. Not Syria, not Iran.
Israel is armed to the teeth and attacks everyone but the other country should shut up and receive this without flinching?

one more thing i will add. 189 countries have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, which is a treaty to limit the spread of nuclear weapons. 5 nations on the list have nukes. Only 4 countries haven't signed this treaty. Israel with being one of them who hasn't signed and the only nation in the middle east who hasn't.

ISRAEL ARE HYPOCRITES!!!
LONG LIVE IRAN!!!

and to your question, a fair deal but would Israel come clean about its nuclear weapons program?? it still remains a mystery

yay for taking away women's rights. I'm a fan, that's for damn sure.

2008-06-09 01:34:47

#57

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7097|Canberra, AUS

I applaud the intention, but I baulk at the idea of nuclear weapons being a commodity. Those things have a very, very, very, VERY special purpose, and they should not be used as bargaining chips.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

BF2S Forums Fair Trade?

Turquoise wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Bell wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

FEOS wrote:

rammunition wrote:

Board footer