RE: Landmines RE: US Foreign Policy Re: *DO* we share a civilization?

[Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLBD/BGM/SVM/SGM]

> -----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
> Van: Dan Minette [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Verzonden: Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:36 PM
> Aan: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Onderwerp: Re: Landmines RE: US Foreign Policy Re: *DO* we share a
> civilization?

> > > >BTW, I'm still waiting for you to cite a few sources that support
> > > >the pro-landmine views of the US.
> > >
> > > The nice thing about this argument, from my perspective, is that I
> > > don't have to do that.
> >
> > Thank you. Your statement is sufficient proof for me that your
> > beliefs are not based on facts -- otherwise you would have had no 
> > problem providing sources that contradict anti-landmine sources.
> 
> Gautam and I have both explained why the standards of proof for your
> position are greater than for ours.  Your position is that no
> reasonable moral human being could hold the position taken by the
> United States government.  Gautam and my position is that reasonable
> people can differ on this subject.  The evidence needed to prove that
> reasonable people can't differ on a subject is higher than the evidence
> needed to demonstrate that they can.  Indeed, as Gautam pointed out,
> one doesn't have to prove that reasonable people can differ on a
> subject, it is reasonable to assume that, in absence of any proof
> either way, reasonable people will disagree.

Clean your glasses, clean your computer screen, then read my messages again.
I never asked anyone to prove that reasonable people can differ on a
subject. Here is what *really* happened: the credibility of the sources I
cited was questioned; I then asked to provide sources that prove my sources
wrong, but my repeated request has been met by outright refusal to provide
such sources.

This is a set of double standards: I must provide sources to back my claims,
but when you disagree with them, you apparently don't have to provide
sources to back your claims.


> Further, since the US has a representative government, you are accusing
> those of us who are Americans on the list with complicity in crimes
> against humanity when you accuse the US government of those crimes.  
> That is a very very significant accusation.

No, I called the US government's refusal to sign the Landmine Ban Treaty a
crime; I did not accuse the American population of committing crimes. You
can't hold a population responsible for the crimes of its government.

According to your statement, whenever a *government* of a country commits a
crime, the *people* of that country are also guilty of that crime. That is
obviously not true. Hitler (who was democratically elected!) has committed
genocide; by your standards, the entire German population of that time is
guilty of genocide. By those same standards, the entire US population would
be responsible for the deaths of people assassinated by the CIA.


> Finally, I think you are making an assumption about connectiveness.
> Even though the sites you mentioned make no claims to any significant
> deaths due to the land mines used in Korea,

At least one of those sites mentions that several (IIRC, over 1,000) US
troops were killed by their own landmines. Their families will be happy to
know that you consider the deaths of their loved ones "insignificant".


> you seem to argue for a connectiveness between the use of these mines
> in Korea and deaths elsewhere on the globe.

The key phrase here being "seem to". Where did I say there was a connection
between landmines in Korea and deaths elsewhere? I'll answer my own
question: I didn't say that. I mentioned civilian deaths worldwide to show
exactly why landmines should be banned entirely.


Jeroen

_________________________________________________________________________
Wonderful World of Brin-L Website:                    http://go.to/brin-l