> If you look on as a woman is raped and beaten, and you have
> the power and authority to prevent it...
> does that make you in some way responsible?
>
> 'criminally responsible' in this article was clearly
> emotional rather than a factual statement. By international
> law the US/UN was not criminially responsible, although I'm
> sure that not acting went against the UN Charter.
>
> So answer the question.
> Why did the US/UN not help?
I'll be honest and say I have no idea.
> And does this not imply a degree of hypocrisy.
But doesn't that imply we can't help ONE country if we can't help them ALL?
A sad as it is, we simply cannot help everyone. Maybe we should only
consider the # of deaths and nothing else, but by that logic would it make
sense to help a country that despises us (didn't we recently send a butt
load of supplies to Iran?) over a country that is friendly to us. I have no
problem saying we should help our friends before our enemies.
-rc
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
