|[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]||Indexes: Main | Date | Thread | Author|
I am sorry if you consider this flaming, but I am right now very disappointed to the US administration, most of the US people and the discussion on this mailing list.
However, I'll try to be analytical and present reasonable arguments.
Henry K van Eyken wrote:
This discussion group and some associated groups are about complex
problems people everywhere face and about the potential of digital tools
to help them arrive at better decision-making.
For me it sounds a little technological determinist to study the potential of digital tools to achieve better decision making when it seems that the majority of US people are lacking such a basic cultural features of humanity as respect of human rights, sense of justice, compassion and solidarity.
For me on these topics there is not much to argue about or need of decision making. Just a check of the UN declaration of Human Rights is enough. And this is not dogmatic argument. In the history of humankind and international community some issues just have been already considered to be "right". Also the decisions are already made and most of the countries are committed on them.
I think that what I did - tried to do - is to look at some of the
arguments made in favor of it. I have taken exception with some of those
arguments ("helping" the people of Iraq; the link with Al Qaeda) and I
have added some arguments not publicly used by those with a pro-war
stance in the U.S. and the U.K. (that not acting now may cause us to
have to cope with a number of rogue regimes simultaneously; the passing
of the baton to ever more dangerous people (cf.
The lack of sense of justice is expressed when you think that US have the right to decide who holds the "batons" in other countries.
The justification that the regime is not democratically elected and the "people" of the foreign country will survive is very weak when there is very little evidence that this would not be the case in US, too.
The lack of democracy in US is demonstrated in the very low turnout of voters (less than 50%) based on the need to registered to vote and in the very corrupted two party system where both parties receive billions of financial assistance from corporations.
Also, in a country where about 10 000 people are murder every year with handguns and half of them are children (please, correct me if I am using old statistics), and where the justice is considered to happen with death penalty, one could claim with good reason that the people are "suffering".
What I am trying to point out is that with exactly the same reasoning the Iraq regime could attack to USA and try to "help" and free the people of US.
Still both, the Iraq and the USA are internationally recognized countries and members of the United Nations.
Like stated already earlier in this mailing list, international surveys show that people around the world feel that the most dangerous country in the world is the US (84%, followed by Iraq 8% and Korea 7%). Have you ever thought why is it so?
Office: + 358 9 756 30 296
GSM: +358 50 351 6796
Media Lab, UIAH Helsinki
Future Learning Environment 3