Leave a comment

Comments 14

bart_calendar September 27 2015, 11:46:17 UTC
The thing is that Afghan thing isn't just one kid. It's hundreds according to the most recent news reports ( ... )

Reply

andrewducker September 27 2015, 11:53:23 UTC
But what about the rest of it - the line I can certainly see the American military command making cold-blooded calculations and saying “It’s not worth destroying our mission in Afghanistan and alienating one of our only allies just for the sake of one kid.” is where he finishes that argument.

Reply

bart_calendar September 27 2015, 11:55:50 UTC
Well. having a sane policy where we simply say "If you want to be a US supported military leader in the new Afghanistan stop stealing kids from local villages and raping them" makes the rest of the argument moot.

Reply

andrewducker September 27 2015, 11:56:56 UTC
That works if they need our help more than we need theirs.

So far as I can tell, that's not the case here. Otherwise the soldier wouldn't have been ordered to do that...

(Edited because I got a bit the wrong way around)

Reply


supergee September 27 2015, 12:00:04 UTC
And now the homophobes will have a new theory of what marriage equality leads to.

Reply


nancylebov September 27 2015, 13:18:07 UTC
I took a crack at whether people should just do their jobs, but I'm not sure I got my point across.

Reply

andrewducker September 27 2015, 21:54:03 UTC
I thought you did a good job.

(And I think that people trying to say that it's ok for people to have religious objections, unless they're religions objectoins they don't like, are doing a pretty bad job of arguing coherently.)

Reply

nancylebov September 28 2015, 15:43:28 UTC
Thank you.

However, I don't just want to convince people who would naturally agree with me, I want to convince everyone. I realize this isn't reasonable.

Reply

andrewducker September 28 2015, 21:29:14 UTC
I've very-much given up on that. Except when idiots disagree with me on the internet. Then I have to go for a walk.

Reply


kalimac September 27 2015, 14:50:57 UTC
Wait - did Ashcroft's hit-job of a biography of Cameron actually reveal a story of Cameron doing the right thing politically? Or is Ashcroft one of those Tories who's still furious at him for doing it?

Reply

ext_2864067 September 27 2015, 15:08:59 UTC
Even an...evil, vindictive clock is...honest and fair twice a day?

Reply

cartesiandaemon September 27 2015, 15:25:55 UTC
I wondered that. From the way it was presented, it sounded like Ashcroft claimed it was electoral suicide and didn't think the issue was that important, but the way it came across, yes, I was like, "OK, there's at least one thing Cameron did that was great."

Reply


mlknchz September 27 2015, 15:53:13 UTC
When "just doing your job" leads to misery, death, or oppression, you have a moral responsibility to object. When doing so does not fulfill the above criteria, and one still has moral objections, then one should still object, but be prepared to face consequences. Kim David seems to want to be a "martyr" without the pesky consequences of martyrdom.
Bottom line in all cases; can I live with myself and the consequences of my actions

Reply


Leave a comment

Up