12-10-2014, 08:08 PM
It's the biggest problem with conflict of this scale; I'm not sure there is a right and wrong or it's just all wrong. It's definitely not alright.
America has a lot to be proud of for being the police of the world for so long, and maintaining a reasonably fair and just global community. And some things not to be proud of as well, but were probably necessary to keep things on a steady course as a whole.
I read this on a rock or a plaque or a wall somewhere once "Whilst ever we have humans we will have greed and whilst ever we have greed we will have war". I think you can change that 'greed' to differences or a few other words and that statement will still ring true. Conflict will never desert this planet whilst ever there are people walking around on it.
So when we have this conflict, is it better to sit back and watch the other side carry on with heinous tactics whilst we play fair just to claim the moral high ground? I don't know, like HotD says, it's highly subjective and a huge grey area. There just is no easy answer.
What I do think though, is if we look from a neutral viewpoint, if both sides are playing the same tactics, how can one side claim to be any better than the other? How is cutting the head of a journalist on camera any worse than shoving food up somebody's ass until they are haunted for the rest of their life or die of toxic shock? The terms 'Terrorist' and 'War on terror' and all that other stuff then just become propaganda to keep our side hating, and the appropriation of funds for the good fight easier to come by.
America has a lot to be proud of for being the police of the world for so long, and maintaining a reasonably fair and just global community. And some things not to be proud of as well, but were probably necessary to keep things on a steady course as a whole.
I read this on a rock or a plaque or a wall somewhere once "Whilst ever we have humans we will have greed and whilst ever we have greed we will have war". I think you can change that 'greed' to differences or a few other words and that statement will still ring true. Conflict will never desert this planet whilst ever there are people walking around on it.
So when we have this conflict, is it better to sit back and watch the other side carry on with heinous tactics whilst we play fair just to claim the moral high ground? I don't know, like HotD says, it's highly subjective and a huge grey area. There just is no easy answer.
What I do think though, is if we look from a neutral viewpoint, if both sides are playing the same tactics, how can one side claim to be any better than the other? How is cutting the head of a journalist on camera any worse than shoving food up somebody's ass until they are haunted for the rest of their life or die of toxic shock? The terms 'Terrorist' and 'War on terror' and all that other stuff then just become propaganda to keep our side hating, and the appropriation of funds for the good fight easier to come by.