Thru the eyes of a child - seeing the truth.

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter amp
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Eyes
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around a twelve-year-old's essay titled "WHO ARE THE TERRORIST NOW?" which draws parallels between the situation in Iraq and the United States. Participants explore themes of government authority, military intervention, and the moral implications of invasion.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the essay makes inappropriate comparisons between a democratically elected government and a dictatorship, suggesting it is an "apples to oranges" situation.
  • Others assert that the essay describes the U.S. situation as if it were Iraq, questioning the validity of the comparisons made.
  • One participant highlights the historical context of Saddam Hussein's actions, suggesting that acknowledging his wrongdoing does not excuse other actions taken by different governments.
  • Concerns are raised about the portrayal of military actions and whether they constitute theft of natural resources, with questions about foreign ownership of oil supplies.
  • Some participants express skepticism about the authorship of the essay, questioning whether a child could write such content.
  • A hypothetical scenario is presented about a foreign invasion, prompting participants to reflect on their feelings towards occupiers in such a situation.
  • Responses include a mix of support for the idea that intervention could be justified if it replaces a tyrannical regime, while others emphasize the emotional and physical toll of invasion on civilians.
  • There is a mention of the essay being a strawman argument, though this claim is contested by other participants.
  • One participant suggests that understanding the motivations behind actions does not justify them, drawing a parallel to legal consequences in the Western world.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the validity of the comparisons made in the essay, with multiple competing views on the moral implications of military intervention and the nature of the arguments presented.

Contextual Notes

Some participants note the limitations of the essay's argument structure and the potential biases in its framing, as well as the unresolved nature of the claims regarding the authorship and intent behind the essay.

amp
Physics news on Phys.org
While the article draws the same parallels as many on this board have, it makes the same mistake: It compares an elected, limited government being overturned with that of a dictator whose reign was endless (via his heirs). Apples to Oranges.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No, She merely discribes what is happening as though it wasn't Iraq but The U.S.
 
And just before she was born, Saddam killed a few thousand like her
 
And saying that Saddam was bad doesn't give anyone else a free pass, which sems to be the sentiment in this thread...being less horrible than the worst you can think of doesn't define actions as "ok".
 
phatmonky's right. It's not a good comparison. It also repeats things in a negative fashion in order to draw up emotions.

Also, can you say that we stole their natural resources? Do foreign companies now own the oil supply?
 
amp said:
No, She merely discribes what is happening as though it wasn't Iraq but The U.S.


Do I need to spell it out?
The comparison of the US's invasion, tot he same invasion happening to the US IS the comparison of "It compares an elected, limited government being overturned with that of a dictator whose reign was endless (via his heirs). "Apples to Oranges"
 
Misinformed, but well written. The president's efforts in improving our schools is starting to pay off.
 
I can't believe it was written by an 11yr old, where is the proof?
 
  • #10
A 12 year old and the point is forgeting who's in charge of the government. A country invades you ... The question that's in the spotlight.

Suppose a more powerful country existed. Suppose it attacked us, bombed us, killed and mutilated members of your family, irradiated most of the country, invaded us, stole our country’s treasures and its natural resources, set up a militarily-enforced government with members of its choosing to govern us, closed newspapers, continued to occupy this country with armed soldiers and mercenaries, and continued to kill civilians frequently. How would you feel about those occupying your country?”
 
  • #11
amp said:
A country invades you ... The question that's in the spotlight.
Quote:
Suppose a more powerful country existed. Suppose it attacked us, bombed us, killed and mutilated members of your family, irradiated most of the country, invaded us, stole our country’s treasures and its natural resources, set up a militarily-enforced government with members of its choosing to govern us, closed newspapers, continued to occupy this country with armed soldiers and mercenaries, and continued to kill civilians frequently. How would you feel about those occupying your country?”


And my anwer is:

If my country were ruled by an opressive monarch with absolute power who was murdering my people and mutilating my familly members by the hundreds of thousands, killing civillians far more frequently, and robbing me of any and all opportunity to benifit from his natural resources, and those occupying my country were there to throw him out and replace him with a government in which I have a voice and the chance to participate in the choosing of my leaders and their policies, I'd probably feel like this ! :biggrin:
 
  • #12
Looking a the pics of those prisoners who were degraded would you feel the same knowing your occupiers did that.
 
  • #13
LURCH said:
Quote:
Suppose a more powerful country existed. Suppose it attacked us, bombed us, killed and mutilated members of your family, irradiated most of the country, invaded us, stole our country’s treasures and its natural resources, set up a militarily-enforced government with members of its choosing to govern us, closed newspapers, continued to occupy this country with armed soldiers and mercenaries, and continued to kill civilians frequently. How would you feel about those occupying your country?”


And my anwer is:

If my country were ruled by an opressive monarch with absolute power who was murdering my people and mutilating my familly members by the hundreds of thousands, killing civillians far more frequently, and robbing me of any and all opportunity to benifit from his natural resources, and those occupying my country were there to throw him out and replace him with a government in which I have a voice and the chance to participate in the choosing of my leaders and their policies, I'd probably feel like this ! :biggrin:
Well put.

As Adam would point out - the little girl's argument, while well written, is a strawman.

edit: I must admit to not having read the article until just now. The article is reasonably well written, but the poll question is not (not just talking about how loaded it is, I mean grammar). I have a hard time believing a 11/12 year old wrote this.

In any case, its a good study into how not to structure a poll. If the answers are unanamous (to within the margin for error), then the poll is utterly useless.
 
Last edited:
  • #14
Actually the section quoted is not a straw man.
 
  • #15
LURCH said:
And my anwer is:

If my country were ruled by an opressive monarch with absolute power who was murdering my people and mutilating my familly members by the hundreds of thousands, killing civillians far more frequently, and robbing me of any and all opportunity to benifit from his natural resources, and those occupying my country were there to throw him out and replace him with a government in which I have a voice and the chance to participate in the choosing of my leaders and their policies, I'd probably feel like this ! :biggrin:
I doubt it...because of course the invaders claim that they are helping, but what is going to be at the forefront of your mind is that your friends and family have been killed by the invaders.

Hell, the communists claimed that they were only trying to spread world peace too...you didn't just take their word for it, though, did you?
 
  • #16
Understanding it doesn't make it right. You can understand someone is outraged at someone else, and kills him. In the western world this person will be jailed for a long time. You don't set him free because you understand his anger. If you have a problem with this system than you should move to Iran.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
11K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
4K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
5K
  • · Replies 112 ·
4
Replies
112
Views
9K
  • · Replies 51 ·
2
Replies
51
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K