Are you for or against intervening in Syria?

[IamInuit]

Situational ethics.

I wonder, if it was China that did this or accused of doing so?

How about North Korea? A modern day killing fields. Probably responsible for more murders then Pol Pot.

[Gandalf]

Situational ethics.

I wonder, if it was China that did this or accused of doing so?

How about North Korea? A modern day killing fields. Probably responsible for more murders then Pol Pot.

The West postures when it wants to, but as far as I can see Egypt shot dead its own protestors with US funded military equipmentand we fail to acknowledge a coup, China shot hundreds dead in Tiannamen and we rewarded China with investment so that labour could be exploited and the exploiters got rich, in Syria we respond by saying there must be regime change. Judging by historical precedent Assad must be feeling very hard done by. I guess you either have to be a US puppet or at least allow their corporations to abuse you. Tut, tut Assad for being a little too independent.

We also forget the golden rules. Never get involved with a country that can defend itself to an expected degree and has no resources of its own. China owns the US fiscally and now has global trade and resources links, it is too powerful. Plus the trade ties with China are still working for the US corporatists. North Korea has no resources, but it has nukes and is equipped.

Morally North Korea is a great case in point, but we don't approach these things morally. We give lip service to morality, our big thing is power and control either in terms of strategic interest or obtaining resources.

[IamInuit]

Situational ethics.

I wonder, if it was China that did this or accused of doing so?

How about North Korea? A modern day killing fields. Probably responsible for more murders then Pol Pot.

The West postures when it wants to, but as far as I can see Egypt shot dead its own protestors with US funded military equipmentand we fail to acknowledge a coup, China shot hundreds dead in Tiannamen and we rewarded China with investment so that labour could be exploited and the exploiters got rich, in Syria we respond by saying there must be regime change. Judging by historical precedent Assad must be feeling very hard done by. I guess you either have to be a US puppet or at least allow their corporations to abuse you. Tut, tut Assad for being a little too independent.

We also forget the golden rules. Never get involved with a country that can defend itself to an expected degree and has no resources of its own. China owns the US fiscally and now has global trade and resources links, it is too powerful. Plus the trade ties with China are still working for the US corporatists. North Korea has no resources, but it has nukes and is equipped.

Morally North Korea is a great case in point, but we don't approach these things morally. We give lip service to morality, our big thing is power and control either in terms of strategic interest or obtaining resources.

This species has been sociopath in nature since we left the tree. Nothing has proven that out more then foreign policy. Actually its more then that, its downright schizophrenic. I blame it as the years go by for my growing indifference. Which in a way makes me a sociopath.

[Andre]

Situational ethics.

I wonder, if it was China that did this or accused of doing so?

How about North Korea? A modern day killing fields. Probably responsible for more murders then Pol Pot.

The West postures when it wants to, but as far as I can see Egypt shot dead its own protestors with US funded military equipmentand we fail to acknowledge a coup, China shot hundreds dead in Tiannamen and we rewarded China with investment so that labour could be exploited and the exploiters got rich, in Syria we respond by saying there must be regime change. Judging by historical precedent Assad must be feeling very hard done by. I guess you either have to be a US puppet or at least allow their corporations to abuse you. Tut, tut Assad for being a little too independent.

We also forget the golden rules. Never get involved with a country that can defend itself to an expected degree and has no resources of its own. China owns the US fiscally and now has global trade and resources links, it is too powerful. Plus the trade ties with China are still working for the US corporatists. North Korea has no resources, but it has nukes and is equipped.

Morally North Korea is a great case in point, but we don't approach these things morally. We give lip service to morality, our big thing is power and control either in terms of strategic interest or obtaining resources.

This species has been sociopath in nature since we left the tree. Nothing has proven that out more then foreign policy. Actually its more then that, its downright schizophrenic. I blame it as the years go by for my growing indifference. Which in a way makes me a sociopath.

Capital! Lets join forces and go up against the Republicans and Liberals with a new formed political party The Sociopaths. Im in.