America in the Middle-East

[draighox]

Abu Ghraib.

I said not how a single american commits a crime, but how americans violate human rights in general. The were a few criminals in Abu Ghraib, who violated human rights. You can't judge all americans by the actions of these few.

 

Guantanamo Bay.

What about it? USA courts have ruled that the detainees may challenge their incarcerations before a judge.

Now if you are talking about the unproved torturings, that's a nonsence.

 

That site, amnesty.org, it isn't official, right?

[ThetaOrionis01]

If you want to live in a fantasy world where Americans can do no wrong, that's your choice. However, if you want to make blatantly false statements based on your fantasy reality, expect to be asked to back them up.

 

I have provided examples. Apart from arguing semantics, you have not disproven a single one of those examples.

[draighox]

Are we begining to lack arguments? ;)

 

What don't you like about my answers?

Abu Ghraib? All I said is true.

Guantanamo Bay? I'm not sure what do you mean by it, so I just wrote about the things, you are most likely to have in mind.

[ThetaOrionis01]

It is rather pointless to argue with someone whose world view seems to be based in an alternative reality where USA = good and whatever they do must be right.... Where do you get your information from?

 

 

First of all, if you want to argue semantics, semantics is what you get.

 

Your initial quote was 'Americans don't do that sort of thing'. However, I have provided examples of Americans doing precisely what you claim they don't do, and your claim that those examples don't apply because they involve only some Americans and not all of them acting in unison is invalid. I only had to provide a single example that one American carried out a human rights violation to disprove your point and invalidate your sweeping statement. It's up to you now to back up your sweeping generalisation by showing that no American ever perpetrated human rights abuses.

 

Or alternatively, you could stop making sweeping generalisations that you cannot back up.

 

Abu Ghraib.

The perpetrators of human rights abuses were soldiers of the US army - and it is arguable how high up the level of command this goes - and as such acting on behalf of the US. You can claim that this was carried out by individual 'bad apples' but that doesn't change their nationality - these human rights abuses were still carried out by Americans, and moreover, by employees of the USA during the course of their work.

I quote from this article on the BBC news website:

In August an investigation found that senior Pentagon and military officials contributed to an atmosphere in which prisoners suffered abuse and failed to properly monitor conduct of detention policies.

 

 

Guantanamo Bay

You call the human rights abuses there a nonsense? A nonsense over which several law suits are pending? Even if you want to claim that all the allegations of torture are nonsense, what about prisoners being held without trial, and not being given access to lawyers?

 

 

 

Amnesty International

What do you have to say about the human rights violations mentioned in the article I linked to?

[draighox]

It is rather pointless to argue with someone whose world view seems to be based in an alternative reality where USA = good and whatever they do must be right....

The same is for you. It's rather pointless to argue with someone whose world view seems to be based in an alternative reality where USA = evil and whatever they do must be bad.

 

Where do you get your information from?

News, school and friends mainly.

 

Your initial quote was 'Americans don't do that sort of thing'. However, I have provided examples of Americans doing precisely what you claim they don't do, and your claim that those examples don't apply because they involve only some Americans and not all of them acting in unison is invalid. I only had to provide a single example that one American carried out a human rights violation to disprove your point and invalidate your sweeping statement. It's up to you now to back up your sweeping generalisation by showing that no American ever perpetrated human rights abuses.

OK. My statement wasn't correct. What I meant is 'USA don't do that sort of thing'. (USA is plural, right?) Americans (single americans, not all of them) sometimes do that sort of thing'.

 

Abu Ghraib.

The perpetrators of human rights abuses were soldiers of the US army - and it is arguable how high up the level of command this goes - and as such acting on behalf of the US.

That's it, you said it. Arguable.

 

Even if you want to claim that all the allegations of torture are nonsense, what about prisoners being held without trial, and not being given access to lawyers?

I will repeat myself. USA courts have ruled that the detainees may challenge their incarcerations before a judge.

I couldn't find official statement about 'human right abuses' in Guantanamo Bay. Maybe you know where I can find it?

 

 

Amnesty International.

 

Electro-shock weapons.

It's illegal to use them against prisoners, right?

 

Police brutality.

It's illegal too.

 

The death penalty.

I agree, we have no right to take other people's lifes.

 

Arms exports.

It is said that USA exports electro-shock weapons to countries, where it is used to torture people. But the names of the countries aren't mentioned. I wonder why...

[ThetaOrionis01]

Once again your simplistic world view has managed to astonish me. I can't believe that you can truly be so naive as to view the world in such simple terms as 'good' and 'evil' - terms which are appropriate to computer games and fantasy novels, but not to human interactions. Things are never as black and white as you have been consistently trying to portray them.

 

Quotes like 'Americans don't do that sort of thing', 'communism is evil' and in particular, ' it happens that what is best for USA interests, is best for the most of the world.' might be funny when used satirically - however, if satire was your intent, you've failed to express it. If statements such as these are meant to be taken seriously, they become scary - because they are indicative of a blindly fanatical mindset which ignores all evidence to the contrary and uncritically approves of or rationalises away anything the object of this fanaticism does. It's the kind of mindset that allows human rights abuses to continue, the kind of uncritical thinking that allows freedoms to be eroded and, taken to its extremes, allows dictatorship and totalitarian regimes to rise.

Already in the US, there is an erosion of civil liberties. Blind hatred and fear were a major part of the election campaign. If you truly believe that the US can do no wrong, as your statements would seem to indicate, then I shudder at the future, when you will actually be old enough to participate in the political decisionmaking process, and can only hope that you're an isolated case.

Unfortunately in the US, this seems to be not the case, and far too many people appear to have allowed themselves to be transformed into sheep by the media and the propagandists - even to such a degree that critical thinking becomes 'un-American' or 'unpatriotic'.

 

I really hope that you're just adopting an extreme, exaggerated point of view for the purpose of debate - whether to stimulate debate or whether you just get a kick out of it - rather than actually believing the stuff you've come out with.

 

 

There have been quite a few precedents in human history which have shown where this 'good v evil' uncritical fanaticism leads - and they haven't been pretty. Sadly it would appear that humankind is doomed to repeat the mistakes of the past over and over again.

[draighox]

Nice as your story might seem, you haven't countered a single argument... :P

 

Quotes like 'Americans don't do that sort of thing', 'communism is evil' and in particular, ' it happens that what is best for USA interests, is best for the most of the world.'

'Americans don't do that sort of thing'.

I corrected myself. USA don't do that sort of thing.

 

'communism is evil'

Well, it is.

 

'it happens that what is best for USA interests, is best for the most of the world.'

What is wrong with this one?

[ThetaOrionis01]

You have not provided any arguments to counter :)

[draighox]

True. :) My mistake.