What If Your Country Becomes Islamic

[Bunyip]

You presume to speak for the entire world? Really? Also, do you honestly think that the U.S. has committed anything comparable in scope and scale to the holocaust?

I'm speaking for myself - please don't get all paranoid on me.
I think that the US played a part in the holocaust by funding and arming the NAZI. So yes. And yes, the US invasion of the Philippines was one of the most brutal and violent in history.

I suspect that this condemnation of the U.S. has more to do with what kids these days refer to as "butthurt" rather than with any objective examination of history.

I'm not condemning the US - 'butthurt' by what? I don't get it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Same goes if you ever visit Germany I guess, do you think the Germans would be more or less tolerant of such views?
Perhaps ask the Filipinos?

I worked with an engineer who lived in the area during WW2. He saw what the Japanese did, eg, put a pencil in each ear of a guy who was found with a radio. Oh, & then they made the points touch. He was happy to move to the US.
Americastan was brutal there, but the Japanese just had to show oneupmanship.

I've been avoiding it, but it seems a fun time to ask what the original Aussies might think of your country arriving there. I understand a lot of them were murdered in taking their land from them. Now, my point is that ain't nobody perfect, but this doesn't make everyone morally equal. Whatever set of morals one applies, there will be a ranking. My value system puts the allies (including Oz) as better than the Axis powers. You appear to disagree, & that's OK. I take no offense, but I do find it strange.

 

[Bunyip]

I worked with an engineer who lived in the area during WW2. He saw what the Japanese did, eg, put a pencil in each ear of a guy who was found with a radio. Oh, they made the points touch. He was happy to move to the US. Americastan was brutal there, but the Japanese just had to show oneupmanship.

Do you want some similar stories from the Philipines, Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay? They are just as awful. Or what about the CIA School of the Americas and what immense suffering it inflicted on much of South America for a generation?

Did you know that Laos had more bombs dropped on them than were used by both sides during the entirety of WWII? And they were not even at war with the US.

 

[Bunyip]

Revoltingeist

I've been avoiding it, but it seems a fun time to ask what the original Aussies might think of your country arriving there.

What do you mean by 'my country arriving'? I am an Australian, my country is Australia.

I understand a lot of them were murdered in taking their land from them. Now, my point is that ain't nobody perfect, but this doesn't make everyone morally equal.

Sure, bad stuff happened. There was never a government bounty offered for slaughtering natives in Australia though, it was always illegal. unlike in the US where a bounty was paid per individual killed, man, woman or child.

Whatever set of morals one applies, there will be a ranking. My value system puts the allies (including Oz) as better than the Axis powers. You appear to disagree, & that's OK. I take no offense, but I do find it strange.

Sure, I get that you find it strange. It is a question of perspective. I am not applying any such set of morals, just trying to say that it is not so easy to select the lesser of two evils.

Laos received 580,000 bombing missions, 270 million cluster bombs and a total of 2 million tons of ordinance. Mostly targeting civilians, with 40% of fatalities children. That equates to one planeload every 8 minutes, 24 hours a day for 9 years and they were not even at war.

Half the cluster bomb deaths on earth occurred in Laos. A small peaceful country with barely any military.

 

[turk179]

Somehow your government declares islam as your new national religion.You are expected to comply with rules like:

-All kinds of alcohol use is forbidden

-Premarital sex is forbidden

-Women should cover themselves from head to toe

-You cannot talk about and practice anthing not compatible with islam such as athesim , evolution

Unfortunately I have become way too fond of things like porn, hard apple cider, and my disbelief of all religion. My chances of survival in an islamic country would be very low

 

[Revoltingest]

Do you want some similar stories from the Philipines, Korea, Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos, Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo Bay? They are just as awful. Or what about the CIA School of the Americas and what immense suffering it inflicted on much of South America for a generation?
Did you know that Laos had more bombs dropped on them than were used by both sides during the entirety of WWII? And they were not even at war with the US.

No doubt you can find many horror stories about US military behavior. We each look at the larger picture, & you find US morally no different from Nazi Germany. By this reasoning, Australiastan is as bad as Nazi Germany. But I disagree, & I don't expect to convince you otherwise. What it boils down to is that according to my values, it was good that the US used its weapons to defeat Japan & Nazi Germany. I believe it was the best outcome, & that it illustrates the value of self defense.

 

[Bunyip]

No doubt you can find many horror stories about US military behavior. We each look at the larger picture, & you find US morally no different from Nazi Germany.

Correct.

By this reasoning, Australiastan is as bad as Nazi Germany.

How so?

But I disagree, & I don't expect to convince you otherwise. What it boils down to is that according to my values, it was good that the US used its weapons to defeat Japan & Nazi Germany. I believe it was the best outcome, & that it illustrates the value of self defense.

Sure, I can see that. And from my perspective it is not so obvious who has the moral high ground if anyone. I suspect neither.

 

[Revoltingest]

Revoltingeist

What do you mean by 'my country arriving'? I am an Australian, my country is Australia.

Before it was your country, it was someone else's. The land of what is now called "Australiastan" once had many very different names. Many of the people who used those names were murdered in the process of taking this land, which now run by the descendents of the murderers. At some point, it "arrived" there. If you prefer, I could say it "arose".

Sure, bad stuff happened. There was never a government bounty offered for slaughtering natives in Australia though, it was always illegal. unlike in the US where a bounty was paid per individual killed, man, woman or child.

I'm sure there were some crimes which weren't committed. There were most likely some crimes that the US didn't commit in the Philippines too. But neither fact exculpates the country inflicting the harm.

Sure, I get that you find it strange. It is a question of perspective. I am not applying any such set of morals, just trying to say that it is not so easy to select the lesser of two evils.

You have been making moral judgments. And from them, we're discovering differences (& perhaps some similarities) in our values.

Laos received 580,000 bombing missions, 270 million cluster bombs and a total of 2 million tons of ordinance. Mostly targeting civilians, with 40% of fatalities children. That equates to one planeload every 8 minutes, 24 hours a day for 9 years and they were not even at war.

That sounds awful. We should've never defeated Japan. Instead of dropping the bombs, we should've offered this deal: Stop fighting with us, & we'll give you Australiastan. I bet they would've leaped at the deal, & you wouldn't be any worse off compared to Americastan winning (both sides being equally evil, you know).

 

[Smart_Guy]

I personally think it won't be that much of trouble if a country turned Islamic, if the government of that country and its people are sophisticated and thoughtful. What I think is the possible unwanted side effect is that it might get boring. I mean, here in Saudi Arabia the internet is censored when it come to you know what, and I'm a 32 year old single guy full of energy. Some games and specific objects are not allowed here as well. (ehm)

Revoltingest

More seriously....

Without being so specifically clear, you might not get anything that makes sense from Revolt

 

[Bunyip]

Before it was your country, it was someone else's. The land of what is now called "Australiastan" once had many very different names. Many of the people who used those names were murdered in the process of taking this land, which now run by the descendents of the murderers. At some point, it "arrived" there. If you prefer, I could say it "arose".

Not sure what point you are trying to make, I do not own any land.

I'm sure there were some crimes which weren't committed. There were most likely some crimes that the US didn't commit in the Philippines too. But neither fact exculpates the country inflicting the harm.

You have been making moral judgments. And from them, we're discovering differences (& perhaps some similarities) in our values.

That sounds awful. We should've never defeated Japan. Just before dropping the bomb, we should've offered this deal: Stop fighting with us, & we'll give you Australiastan. I bet they would've leaped at the deal, & you wouldn't be any worse off compared to Americastan winning (both sides being equally evil, you know).

That was the deal actually. All of Australia other than a small area that includes Melbourne, Sydney and Canberra was going to be just handed over. The alliance with the US only protected that little patch.

Dropping 'the bomb' by the way was a scientific experiment, it was an abomination perpetrated upon the civilian population.

 

[Revoltingest]

How so?

I applied your technique of evaluating the morality of countries, ie, find examples of massive evil deeds. (It isn't about quantifying anything.)

Sure, I can see that. And from my perspective it is not so obvious who has the moral high ground if anyone. I suspect neither.

Certainly. We have very different values regarding self defense, both by individuals & by entire countries. I favor it. You don't. I would fight oppression. You wouldn't.

 

[Bunyip]

I applied your technique of evaluating the morality of countries, ie, find examples of massive evil deeds. (It isn't about quantifying anything.)

You got that backwards again, you are the one claiming moral superiority for your country. Not me.

Certainly. We have very different values regarding self defense, both by individuals & by entire countries. I favor it. You don't. I would fight oppression. You wouldn't.

Were the Laotians oppressing you?

The best way to fight oppression is to limit the power of govt to enact it.

 

[Revoltingest]

Not sure what point you are trying to make, I do not own any land.

I referred to "you" as a country. But also: You are a citizen of your country. You vote in its government. It owns land. Your fellow citizens own land under the laws & th history of the country. This speaks to the morality of Oz to exactly the same extent as US history speaks of our morality.

That was the deal actually. All of Australia other than a small area that includes Melbourne, Sydney and Canberra was going to be just handed over. The alliance with the US only protected that little patch.

That would've been way too aggressive of us. Someone could've been hurt by our weapons. No, no...we should've given them your entire country. For your peace & freedom.

Dropping 'the bomb' by the way was a scientific experiment, it was an abomination perpetrated upon the civilian population.

The intent was far from experimental. Where on Earth did you find that claim?

 

[Revoltingest]

You got that backwards again, you are the one claiming moral superiority for your country. Not me.

You misread that post. I was showing moral equivalency (by your reasoning) of US & Oz. It wasn't about superiority at all.....it was about the utter absence of it.
Of course, in other posts I was speaking of my preference for the US beating Nazi Germany & Imperial Japan. "Moral superiority" just sounds too lofty for me to use. How about "morally based preference"? Yes...that's more accurate.

I'm sure you see what I'm doing. You're comfortable equating US with Nazis, but not so ready to have Oz hoist by your own petard. This points towards trouble in the line of reasoning.

Were the Laotians oppressing you?

Not that I know of. That's why I refused to be drafted into that war.

The best way to fight oppression is to limit the power of govt to enact it.

Yeah....that isn't working so well here. Democrats & Republicans keep winning all the elections.

 

[Bunyip]

I referred to "you" as a country. But also: You are a citizen of your country. You vote in its government. It owns land. Your fellow citizens own land under the laws & th history of the country. This speaks to the morality of Oz to exactly the same extent as US history speaks of our morality.

Not sure what you are getting at I'm afraid. Nor how it is relevant.

That would've been way too aggressive of us. Someone could've been hurt by our weapons. No, no...we should've given them your entire country. For your peace & freedom.

It wasn't up to you guys. We don't need your help. So again, not sure what you mean.

The intent was far from experimental. Where on Earth did you find that claim?

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen specifically because they were undamaged. they were also deemed to be unlikely to receive any damage before the test. The criteria for selection was that 1. They needed to be a large urban area. 2. They needed to be likely to sustain significant damage and 3. They needed to be untouched and to remain untouched until the detonation.
The US armed forces agreed to leave both sites untouched so that the results of the atomic explosions would be clearly observable. The added bonus being that the surrounding hills would reflect and concentrate the blast increasing the destruction.

 

[Bunyip]

7

You misread that post. I was showing moral equivalency (by your reasoning) of US & Oz. It wasn't about superiority at all.....it was about the utter absence of it.
Of course, in other posts I was speaking of my preference for the US beating Nazi Germany & Imperial Japan. "Moral superiority" just sounds too lofty for me to use. How about "morally based preference"? Yes...that's more accurate.

I'm sure you see what I'm doing. You're comfortable equating US with Nazis, but not so ready to have Oz hoist by your own petard. This points towards trouble in the line of reasoning.

Not at all. I have no such petard to be hoisted upon. Nor am I making a moral evaluation. Australia has made many morally revolting choices. You are the one making moral value judgements.

Not that I know of. That's why I refused to be drafted into that war.
Yeah....that isn't working so well here. Democrats & Republicans keep winning all the elections.

 

[Revoltingest]

It wasn't up to you guys. We don't need your help. So again, not sure what you mean.

A change in tense, eh? I spoke of a past situation, not the present, ie, Oz benefited from US defeating Japan IMO. You disagree.

Hiroshima and Nagasaki were chosen specifically because they were undamaged. they were also deemed to be unlikely to receive any damage before the test. The criteria for selection was that 1. They needed to be a large urban area. 2. They needed to be likely to sustain significant damage and 3. They needed to be untouched and to remain untouched until the detonation.
The US armed forces agreed to leave both sites untouched so that the results of the atomic explosions would be clearly observable. The added bonus being that the surrounding hills would reflect and concentrate the blast increasing the destruction.

Things were intended to be studied. This is old news. But to label the bombings as simply a "scientific experiment" is to ignore their role in the strategy to end the war sooner.

 

[Revoltingest]

7
Not at all. I have no such petard to be hoisted upon. Nor am I making a moral evaluation. Australia has made many morally revolting choices. You are the one making moral value judgements.

You did make moral jugements, & you gave your reasonsing. I'm simply applying your approach to see where it leads. US = Oz = Nazi Germany = Japan
It strikes me as ludicrous, so I don't buy it. But hey, I was just trying your reasoning on for size.

 

[Bunyip]

You did make moral jugements, & you gave your reasonsing. I'm simply applying your approach to see where it leads. US = Oz = Nazi Germany = Japan
It strikes me as ludicrous, so I don't buy it. But hey, I was just trying your reasoning on for size.

But I am making no such moral judgement.

But if I were, then yes Oz=US=Japan etc in terms of their right to a moral high ground.

Governemts all do crappy things, none havr the moral highground. That is why we must limit their power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely as they say - a lesson the US is yet to learn.

 

[LuisDantas]

Yes, of course the U.S. is imperfect and guilty of many things, and we should acknowledge this and strive to correct it, but it takes a sore lack of credibility and integrity to suggest that the U.S. is or was comparable to brutal dictatorships such as Nazi Germany and its allies.

It used to take. But we went through Reagan, the two Bushes, Guantanamo, and quite a lot of incredibly destructive military meddling.

The current USA values universal weapon access more than it does universal health care - and makes a point of saying so aloud.