what gives America the moral right to talk about human rights when the Iraqi death toll exceeds well over one hundred thousand?
Well, the counter argument is that by this logic nobody can talk about human rights. Until very recently in human history the Europeans brutally conquered half the world and effectively turned the "savage people" that were unlucky enough to survive the raping and the pillaging into slaves. Listening to anyone who points out legitimate human rights violations is better than listening to no one who points out legitimate human rights violations. It's just more constructive this way.
Killing ten Iraqis to save an American soldier is not justifiable, any which way you look at it.
This is rhetoric, and isn't an interesting statement about what happened in this video, how it was handled by the military, or how it was marketed and leaked by wikileaks. What possible constructive purpose could this statement serve?
> Until very recently in human history the Europeans brutally conquered half the world and effectively turned the "savage people" that were unlucky enough to survive the raping and the pillaging into slaves.
It wasn't just the Europeans. This is the story of conquerors.
Well, the counter argument is that by this logic nobody can talk about human rights...
All I was saying was that when you don't practice what you preach, your credibility suffers.
This is rhetoric, and isn't an interesting statement about what happened in this video...
Isn't this exactly what is happening on the ground, in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan? Do you read any local news (easily available on the internet) from those countries?
I don't think many people understand the magnitude of suffering in those countries. Do the math, Iraq is a tenth of the size of the US. Work out the per-capita "suffering".
> Until very recently in human history the Europeans brutally conquered half the world and effectively turned the "savage people" that were unlucky enough to survive the raping and the pillaging into slaves
Yep, but it seems at least the Europeans have evolved from that point.
Well, the counter argument is that by this logic nobody can talk about human rights. Until very recently in human history the Europeans brutally conquered half the world and effectively turned the "savage people" that were unlucky enough to survive the raping and the pillaging into slaves. Listening to anyone who points out legitimate human rights violations is better than listening to no one who points out legitimate human rights violations. It's just more constructive this way.
Killing ten Iraqis to save an American soldier is not justifiable, any which way you look at it.
This is rhetoric, and isn't an interesting statement about what happened in this video, how it was handled by the military, or how it was marketed and leaked by wikileaks. What possible constructive purpose could this statement serve?