Does the US or UN have a right to force their ideology onto other countries?, Is ther

#1
OrangeEmpire

OrangeEmpire

The White Debonair
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
74,988
Likes
59
#1
Let's say Afghanistan does get taken over by the Taliban, and they decide to subjugate women, kill adulterers and homosexuals, cut off the hands of thieves, kill non Muslims, then does the US or the UN have the right to intervene and demand the US or the UNs values be established in Afghanistan? Is this true in any country that they must adopt values that mimic the US or the UN?

Goodness I hope not. It sets a very dangerous precedent and is completely problematic from a consistency point of view, as the only nation/people who will be the object of this moral subjugation would be the nations powerful to resist by military force. In other words, the U.S., Russia, China, Europe, etcetera, can play its own moral fiddle while by the use of force compel other nations to sing along to its tune.

Thoughts?
 
#2
#2
I see your point and agree that the UN is definitely doing that. Trying to bend the world to what they want (A world wide beaurocracy funneled through their power brokers). As far as the US is concerned I agree as well mainly for the fact that we have to stop being the world's body guard while everyone else just watches from the sideline, sitting on their hands. However, when a country's gov't is allowing terrorists to freely run around a train and organize, than ya we need to move in for security reasons.

With that said, I do think the more countries that become true Democracies and Free Markets, the safer place the world becomes. However, would it be worth the price both in money and human life to do it? That would be the key question.
 
#3
#3
We have a right to protect our interests but not to impose our ideology onto other countries. Unfortunately, it's a very blurry line and tough to do one without doing the other to some extent.
 
#4
#4
If the sovereignty of any UN member nation is threatened, then yes. If it's not a member of the UN? Why should they? More likely than not, both sides in the conflict would see any intercession as threatening, and it wouldn't work out.

In my opinion, it's completely against the ideology of the US to pick and choose what should be done on a global scale.
 
#7
#7
It is a very tough subject, when we see video of horrendous treatment of human beings our first instinct is to try and help. I agree with VBH though.
 
#8
#8
It is important to keep in mind that the UN is an arena more than an agent, so all of it's action are influenced by certain countries (specifically the security council). The main issue is what role sovereignty should play as the world becomes more globalized and inter-connected...
 
#9
#9
The main point that scares me most is many of the ideology points the Taliban hold dear are points the conservative right in this country hold dear. Now, for right now the idea of killing individuals for beliefs is outlawed, but as I sit and watch the nightly news its like watching prophecy being fulfilled, a movie you've seen before following a script. As smart as humans are, are we just following a script thats been in stone since Genisis chapter 1?
 
#10
#10
dan4vols said:
The main point that scares me most is many of the ideology points the Taliban hold dear are points the conservative right in this country hold dear. Now, for right now the idea of killing individuals for beliefs is outlawed, but as I sit and watch the nightly news its like watching prophecy being fulfilled, a movie you've seen before following a script. As smart as humans are, are we just following a script thats been in stone since Genisis chapter 1?
Click to expand...

you sir are a damned fool if you are comparing me to a terrorist. Are you jeneane Garafalo?
 
Last edited:
#11
#11
US does, if we give these countries billions, then we have the right to get something back. UN doesn't do crap.
 
#13
#13
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
you sir are a damned fool if you are comparing me to a terrorist. Are you jeneane Garafalo?
Click to expand...


I think his point was that zealotry is not confined to Islam.

Now, obviously, the number of right wing folks in the U.S. who act violently in the name of their religion or political point of view is tiny, tiny, tiny. But it does occassionally happen (Oklahoma City bombing, bombing abortion clinics, etc.)

The percentage of Muslims who become terrorists is also very tiny, relative to the total number of Muslims.

Just as it is wrong to label all right wing or very religious Christian conservatives in the U.S. as violent based on the acts of a few folks here, so is it wrong to label all Muslims terrorists.
 
#14
#14
lawgator1 said:
I think his point was that zealotry is not confined to Islam.

Now, obviously, the number of right wing folks in the U.S. who act violently in the name of their religion or political point of view is tiny, tiny, tiny. But it does occassionally happen (Oklahoma City bombing, bombing abortion clinics, etc.)

The percentage of Muslims who become terrorists is also very tiny, relative to the total number of Muslims.

Just as it is wrong to label all right wing or very religious Christian conservatives in the U.S. as violent based on the acts of a few folks here, so is it wrong to label all Muslims terrorists.
Click to expand...

really? im almost positive that the number is higher then you think there buddy

to make that comparrison is a stretch, thats almost along the nancy pelosi logic lines
 
#16
#16
nickknx865 said:
............or lower than you think.
Click to expand...

give me a number and a source, cause im sure we have been in a war for several years against terroists, and the reason why they havent attacked here is because of a lot of President Bush's security policies, like it or not. so what is your source there nick nack paddywak
 
#17
#17
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
to make that comparrison is a stretch, thats almost along the nancy pelosi logic lines
Click to expand...

Not really. There are violent factions of any religion, and Christianity is no exception to that. 95% of all Muslims, I'd say, are people who just want to live their life and do good. The 5% gives the 95% the bad name.

95% of all Christians just want to live their life and do good. The 5% give the 95% a bad name(People who bomb abortion clinics, Westboro Baptist Church, the TVUUC shooter, etc.)
 
#18
#18
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
give me a number and a source, cause im sure we have been in a war for several years against terroists, and the reason why they havent attacked here is because of a lot of President Bush's security policies, like it or not. so what is your source there nick nack paddywak
Click to expand...

There is no possible way to quantify who exactly is an extremist, and who isn't. Yes, we have been fighting a war against Islamic extremists. But, they are just that, extremists. They don't represent Islam as a whole.
 
#19
#19
nickknx865 said:
There is no possible way to quantify who exactly is an extremist, and who isn't. Yes, we have been fighting a war against Islamic extremists. But, they are just that, extremists. They don't represent Islam as a whole.
Click to expand...

see i cant he how anyone can defend a religion based upon violence, i mean just look at the way the koran says to treat women..
 
#20
#20
Sura 4:34 (a chapter in the Koran ) states, "Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other." On page 36 of his book, The Women and Islam, Ahmed Zaki Tuffaha wrote, "God established the superiority of men over women by the above verse (Sura 4:34), which prevents the equating of men and woman. For here man is above the woman due to his intellectual superiority…."
 
#21
#21
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
Sura 4:34 (a chapter in the Koran ) states, "Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other." On page 36 of his book, The Women and Islam, Ahmed Zaki Tuffaha wrote, "God established the superiority of men over women by the above verse (Sura 4:34), which prevents the equating of men and woman. For here man is above the woman due to his intellectual superiority…."
Click to expand...

Yes, and.......................

Women were only treated marginally better in the Bible, than in the Qu'ran.
 
#23
#23
GASOUTHERNVOL said:
Sura 4:34 (a chapter in the Koran ) states, "Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other." On page 36 of his book, The Women and Islam, Ahmed Zaki Tuffaha wrote, "God established the superiority of men over women by the above verse (Sura 4:34), which prevents the equating of men and woman. For here man is above the woman due to his intellectual superiority…."
Click to expand...
If I could only hammer this in my wife's head...

1 Timothy 2:11-14 (New International Version)


11A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. 12I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent. 13For Adam was formed first, then Eve. 14And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner.
Click to expand...
 
#24
#24
I think I remember reading that British policy back prior to the revolution was "To make the World England". While I dont find that we, as Americans expect or want to do the same, the fact that we more often than not bail out foriegn countries when they get in a bind may seem to be the same line of thinking as England.

Regardless of that, the UN does not do it's job and it falls back on US shoulders. I say we protect our intrests, and stop playing Grandpa Money Bags to everyone with their hand out.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top