DonQuixote99
pfm Member
"Moscow" was criticized, so you hurried to point out that the US was 'famous' for the same fault. Why?This is Moral Relativism.
Moral Relativism was condemned on here not so long ago.
"Moscow" was criticized, so you hurried to point out that the US was 'famous' for the same fault. Why?This is Moral Relativism.
Moral Relativism was condemned on here not so long ago.
The Great Satan is the source of all known evil. Surely you know that.Aha! Another opportunity found to suggest that the US, among all nations, is especially bad! This from the person who condemns any suggestion that any Russian 'national' character tendencies exist as racism!
Consider that 'joy riding,' however offensive if one identifies with the feeling of the victim, is actually a good description of the feelings and motivations of a certain class of perpetrator. From that point-of-view, the term is not an euphemism at all, it's an apt reflection of reality. Of course, if the term is wrongly applied to the activities of professional car thieves, then it becomes an euphemism. By the same token, 'ethnic cleansing' is an accurate description of the motives of many who support such policies. They indeed, however wrongly, view certain others as 'pollutants' in 'their' populace. Funny attitudes about 'cleanliness,' for example, the conviction that members of a disfavored group are dirty and diseased, along with heightened revulsion reactions to the possibility of dirt and germs in the actual environment, are a feature of the mindset of many bigoted persons. Propagandists exploit this by linking hate targets to disease and vermin.
Are you saying that US foreign policy ISN'T especially bad?Aha! Another opportunity found to suggest that the US, among all nations, is especially bad!
Did you miss the articles this weekend celebrating the 20th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, and the peace and prosperity it brought to the region?Are you saying that US foreign policy ISN'T especially bad?
You see what you see - and you’re welcome to it.Oh I see. SMO means people who think there is a moral case for only considering the use of euphemisms to excuse civilian death and destruction when it comes from one side.
No. Have you replied to the wrong person?Did you miss the articles this weekend celebrating the 20th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, and the peace and prosperity it brought to the region?
One should pause to consider Iraq continuously under Saddam and after his passing under his nice sons all the way to today.Did you miss the articles this weekend celebrating the 20th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, and the peace and prosperity it brought to the region?
The choices were not binary. Containment of Saddam was also an option.One should pause to consider Iraq continuously under Saddam and after his passing under his nice sons all the way to today.
I am pretty sure you would be mum on the numerous attrocities committed by them in the last 20 years. After all this would be native attrocities - nothing European intellectuals historically cared about.
Sure, but that never stopped him from mass atrocities against his own population before. His sons, by all reports raised to be fine torturers and rapists, would have been a fitting and natural follow up.The choices were not binary. Containment of Saddam was also an option.
You stand by that even if the car was indeed stolen by three 16-year-olds for the thrill of it?If one is a defence lawyer one can easily see why this deceptive language is useful. But deceptive it remains, and actually it is dissembling in reality. Glossing something illegal with a soft view of the perpetrator ... Politicians, lawyers and propaganda ministries love dissembling like this if it helps those without critical thinking skills accept the message, prima face.
George
You stand by that even if the car was indeed stolen by three 16-year-olds for the thrill of it?
Nope. I condemn all murderous thugs. Including Putin and Saddam.One should pause to consider Iraq continuously under Saddam and after his passing under his nice sons all the way to today.
I am pretty sure you would be mum on the numerous attrocities committed by them in the last 20 years. After all this would be native attrocities - nothing European intellectuals historically cared about.
Wrong again.Sure, but that never stopped him from mass atrocities against his own population before. His sons, by all reports raised to be fine torturers and rapists, would have been a fitting and natural follow up.
Morality of nation's actions and historical outcomes are very loosely related, if at all.
Consider the historical arc where Putin took Ukraine in a week like he planned and successfully forced NATO back to 1997 lines. I guarantee there would have been no ICC indictment of Putin, Taiwan would be negotiating a surrender to China and you would be out front demanding a peace deal now.
The future would have belonged to Xi, Putin, Jong-un and Khamenei, with our frayed democracies in a historic retreat and our own populations voting for Trumps, Johnsons and further curtailment of our freedoms. That future would certainly reflect on the great victory against the West very positively - it would be celebrated worldwide as the "final death of Western imperialism and the rise of true people's democracy."
I am sure that you consider your position to be clear and morally consistent.Wrong again.
I despise all bullies and authoritarians including Putin.
And Trump and Johnson.
My position is entirely clear and morally consistent.
I expect anyone or any government that is doing something morally wrong will try to dress the action up in euphemistic language. "Pax Britanica" being one splendid example. Or Putin's, "Special Military Operation."
Best wishes from Goegre
I don't think "Yugoslavia" existed in 1999 and its very fine people have been killing each other for a decade with much abandon.You can't beat
"Noble Anvil"
For NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999.
Because the criticism of Moscow as the sole user of euphemisms is not true. The truth is that the US is famous for the same fault. The demand that moral judgements are ring fenced to exclude comparisons is not moral"Moscow" was criticized, so you hurried to point out that the US was 'famous' for the same fault. Why?
That’s a silly projection. Nobody said that.The Great Satan is the source of all known evil. Surely you know that.