Subject:
|
Re: Outrageous Iraqi Geneva Convention Violation
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 Mar 2003 03:43:44 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
391 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Ross Crawford writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys writes:
> > > "Our" side of this war might regard the conventions more than the other
> > > side, thank goodness, but we'll break the rules if it suits our purposes.
> > Sooo, damning us if we do, and damning us if we don't. Sounds about right.
> You could equally say damning them if they do, damning them if they don't.
> As others have said neither side is squeaky clean in this "War on Terrorism".
If you mean that I damn them if they breach Geneva Conventions, and I damn them
if they abide by Geneva Conventions, but fight to preserve an evil regime, then
yes you could say that.
As far as being squeaky clean, I don't agree that one must be perfect to
confront evil. And I reject the moral equivalence of our actions to theirs.
JOHN
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
42 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
