Morality in Foreign Policy?

[TheBigDog]

Originally Posted by Shekhar

First do you consider terrorism only under immorality ?

Everyone has his own philosophy and definition of morality.
For intstance take the dress code: I have an friend following Islamic culture who says that he lives in a society where women wear "Burqa" you can only see their eyes.

For him wearing jeans is awkward .........For someone jeans is casual but sleeveless is objectionable..........for another guy it's ok but shorts are immoral.............So it just depends on our mind setup (society is a dominant factor in it)or rather our frame of reference.

Say WHAT?!?!?

You are so cold to right and wrong that you compare terrorism to choices of clothing? Yes, people have different moralities. No, I do not have to accept terrorism as a valid moral choice from a different perspective.

Bill

[TheFaithfulStone]

I cannot imagine any society that accepts terrorism as a moral action (that is attaching civilian targets solely because of their status as civilian targets) not quickly degenerating into either despotism or anarchy.

I think it can be shown scientifically that neither of those systems leads to big advances in human cultural evolution.

Even if you don't take that as a value in of itself, I think it could be shown that more people are harmed under despotism and anarchy than under other social forms.

Ergo, terrorism is immoral.

TFS

[Southtown]

Steps to a moral world are two.

1. Define both right and wrong (I think paige did fine =P)
2. Get everyone to behave

The second one is a bit tricky.

1. Ask people to behave and cross your fingers
2. Trick everyone into behaving through propaganda
3. Force everyone to behave with threats and brutality

The only option here that is compatible with a free humanity is of course a. But then we would be confronted with the chore of dividing the willing from the non-willing, fortifying the city of the righteous, and then exiling or stoning the unbelievers.

But at least that way, everyone got to make their own choice.

[Sebastianlobo]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

Wars have have two types of warriors, the men in the field up to their eyeballs in blood and guts and the knurds with words. I think the diplomatic knurds should be required to spend a few days at the front lines before being able to state a position. This way they would find solutions that would work once and for all.

You seem to be suggesting that one has to be a chicken to recognize an egg...

[Southtown]

Originally Posted by Sebastianlobo

You seem to be suggesting that one has to be a chicken to recognize an egg...

No. He's saying the people in control are largely unaware of the consequences of their decisions. And I say that applies to many levels of authority, whether in bureaus or business.

[Sebastianlobo]

Originally Posted by Southtown

No. He's saying the people in control are largely unaware of the consequences of their decisions. And I say that applies to many levels of authority, whether in bureaus or business.

Well, if that is your understanding of " I think the diplomatic knurds should be required to spend a few days at the front lines before being able to state a position. This way they would find solutions that would work once and for all." , I have no further comments.SL -

[jamongo]

Instead, however, you choose to bomb the living daylights out of your neighbour in a hard-assed stance that does not include discussion, debate and/or concensus. You sit with the blood of civilians on your hands because of either bad intel or bad aim. You still don't engage in communication with your enemy.

Morality - Concern with the distinction between good and evil or right and wrong; right or good conduct.

There is no denying the fact that Israel has indeed bombed and killed civilians.
There is also, no denying that Israel has tried to prevent these actions, by dropping leaflets telling the civilians, (as well as the enemy) that the area will come under attack.

There is no denying that The Hizbollah purposely aims and fires its weapons at civilian populations, missiles loaded with buckshot to maim and kill as many as possible.

Looking at the definition of morality again, what say ye?

[paigetheoracle]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

Wars have have two types of warriors, the men in the field up to their eyeballs in blood and guts and the knurds with words. I think the diplomatic knurds should be required to spend a few days at the front lines before being able to state a position. This way they would find solutions that would work once and for all.

Very true! I'm always on about the difference between idealists and realists. Idealists want to change what 'is', realists just want to deal with it (cosmetic treatment versus facing the truth and dealing with the key issues).

[Boerseun]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

Wars have have two types of warriors, the men in the field up to their eyeballs in blood and guts and the knurds with words.

The irony here, of coure, is that the guys in the trenches, the guys in the fields up to their eyeballs in blood and guts, are rarely the guys who've actually started the damn war to begin with. To find out who those bastards are, you're gonna have to speak to the 'knurds with words'...