- #31
- 23,829
- 11,305
I disagree. Its not kooky, its absurd.
Or maybe rediculous? Asinine? Hmm, where did I put that thesaurus...Why Is There a Double Standard in Criticizing the United States?
- Context: News
- Thread starter russ_watters
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Standard
Click For Summary
Discussion Overview
The discussion revolves around perceptions of a double standard in the criticism of the United States, particularly in the context of military actions and international relations. Participants explore the implications of holding the US to a higher standard compared to other nations, examining both historical and contemporary examples of American actions and their reception globally.
Discussion Character
- Debate/contested
- Conceptual clarification
Main Points Raised
- Some participants argue that criticisms of the US often overlook similar actions by other countries, suggesting a need for a balanced perspective on culpability.
- Others propose that the US should be held to a higher standard due to its global influence and military interventions, though this does not imply perfection is expected.
- One participant notes that many Americans may not support actions taken in their name, while another counters that a significant majority supports military actions, indicating a divide in perceptions of public opinion.
- Concerns are raised about the potential consequences of prolonged military engagements, including increased casualties and geopolitical shifts.
- Some participants express pride in the moral scrutiny applied to the US, interpreting it as a recognition of Western cultural values, while others suggest that fear of US power may drive the double standard.
- There are references to specific historical events, such as the gassing of Kurdish civilians by Saddam Hussein, to illustrate perceived disparities in global outrage towards American actions versus those of other nations.
Areas of Agreement / Disagreement
Participants express a range of views on the double standard, with some agreeing on the existence of a disparity in criticism while others debate the reasons behind it. The discussion remains unresolved, with competing perspectives on the implications of holding the US to a higher standard.
Contextual Notes
Participants reference various historical and contemporary military actions, but the discussion does not resolve the complexities surrounding public opinion, moral expectations, or the motivations behind international criticism.
Or maybe rediculous? Asinine? Hmm, where did I put that thesaurus...- #32
amp
Greetings,
Alias, Russ are you aware of the US conviction by the International Court? Since this is off topic I'll start a new thread, but here is the judgement- http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/icases/inus/inus_isummaries/inus_isummary_19860627.htm
Alias, Russ are you aware of the US conviction by the International Court? Since this is off topic I'll start a new thread, but here is the judgement- http://www.icj-cij.org/icjwww/icases/inus/inus_isummaries/inus_isummary_19860627.htm
Last edited by a moderator:
- #33
- 23,829
- 11,305
Thats nice, amp... So you are saying that American intervention in Nicaragua puts us on par with Ghengis Khan and beyond Hitler, Stalin, Mao, et al? Seriously? If there was a stronger word than "absurd," I'd use it.
Last edited:
- #34
BoulderHead
Anyone who know anything about statistics knows that the data can be arranged to point at any number of conclusions. Personally, I wouldn't care if I were the only individual who opposed it.
"…in political speculations "the tyranny of the majority" is now generally included among the evils against which society requires to be on its guard. Society...practises a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression,...penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling; against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them…" - John Stuart Mill
"…in political speculations "the tyranny of the majority" is now generally included among the evils against which society requires to be on its guard. Society...practises a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression,...penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself. Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling; against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them…" - John Stuart Mill
- #35
- 23,829
- 11,305
Holy overreaction, batman. Unless you object to the single quotes around the word "friends" there is absolutely nothing insulting about that post, kerrie. As my example shows, people DO tend to hang out with people that think like they do. Thats hardly surprising.