How many does it take

[Retribution]

[quote name='Starwind']We need to come home and look after the home front here. That should be our first step to bettering ourselves is by leaving the world alone and let those morons blow themselves up and protect the home front, where they said they'd be covering us.[/quote]
[size=1]This whole "home rule first" thing really gets on my nerves for more reasons than I can reasonably articulate.

I really hate the apathy that?s behind looking after the home front. You want America ? one of, if not the most capable country in the world ? to sit around and watch the world tear itself apart? There?s too much trouble, too much injustice going on in the world for such an affluent place to close up the borders and rule the home front. We need to stop worrying about putting ourselves first in our minds, and instead try helping out the suffering nations, try reinstalling peace in the country that we wrecked with war ourselves. Don?t try to withdraw from the war on Iraq, realizing that the war is very difficult to win, and will take years. Look ? America ruined order in Iraq. Yes, we deposed a tyrant as well, but we can?t call it ?Mission Accomplished.? We can call the mission Accomplished once homes have their utilities back, once violence isn?t commonplace, once their own police force can support itself.

Home rule first just bleeds, to me, with ignorance towards the rest of the world?s suffering. Isolationist policy is what made the USA remain neutral during the beginning of both WWI and WWII. Had we entered WWII earlier, many lives would have been saved. And had Japan not bombed Pearl Harbor, Europe would be speaking German currently, and this conversation would not be taking place.

Really, what needs repairing so urgently that we must stop helping other countries? What is so important that we must entirely ignore the suffering and agony of our human brethren?

[quote name='? Nomad Tical ?']THe initial question in this topic was "can we change the world with a voice or actions and how many will it take" right? Well, I think that a voice can do nothing to change the world, you have to actually do something. A voice fallen on deaf ears merely speaks to itself, (Im coining that one) one must act on what they believe is right. Don't go asking others what you should do, just do what you think is right. You don;t need someone else's mandate to do it, it's all on you. If you wanna change the world, shut your mouth and get to work, quit tallking about it and do it.[/quote]
I?m sure you know what Starwind meant when he said ?how many voices does it take?? A voice can be an action ? not necessarily just words. In addition, there is nothing wrong with asking someone for advice as to what you should do. Acting upon what you alone believe to be right can lead to misinformation and really, really bad situations. Acting alone could lead to a totalitarian state, where the wants of the majority are completely ignored, and the will of one is law.

Certainly, what you think to be right is not always the correct way.[/size]

[Starwind]

I'm not saying we need to be isolationist, I'm saying if we want security start at home, number one. Number two, since when is it the job of this nation alone to look after the rest of the world. Mind you, the people there didn't want us there and ahve made no short point of letting us know. It's not like WWI or WWII where we werer practically begged to step in. The rest of the world pleaded with us to stay out of Iraq, and we went anyway. We went to a nation, sure in turmoil, but none the less, that didn't want us there and made no small point to let us know they wanted us the hell out.

We may be the strongest super power out there, but were not the only one. There were other nations there that could have dealt with it if they really felt like it was something that required attention. Or could have asked for our help, but none of this was the case. We stepped in agains the wills of many of our allies and with almost no support to a nation that didn't want us there, even in the face of the turmoil and torture they faced, they didn't want us there.

I say "If they don't want us there, then why go?" It's like a stuck up little kid, they don't want your help, fine, screw them. When they want help, or someone else wants us to over see this legitimate threat, then get involved. You see, as we are the geatest super power, we have another responsiblity that is not policing the world. We have the responsiblity to not just throw our weight around because we can. We shouldn't step into a situation that has yet to threaten us directly, unless we are called upon by a nation that lacks the ablity to protect itself. I these people had been rebeling or trying to over throw him, again different story. But that's not the case in this story.

Bush's favorite line "FIghting them there so we don't have to fight them here" is a load of crap to and I'll tell you why. Do you know how long those terrorists from the 9/11 tragedy had been in this country before hand? A little over a decade. If they're going to attack us, then they're already here. We need to step it up here. Since your obviously not aware of this, our security levels at our most vunerable terrorist locations (i.e. Chemical plants, Nuclear power plants and airports) are at record lows. How are doing this to ourselves again? It's not our job, or even our responsiblity to over there.

I know this has probably got you fumming right now, but you know what, I DON'T CARE RIGHT NOW! You see, it's easy for you to say what we should be doing, but the bottom line is, you'll never have to pay the price. If we distract all our resources to the war and end up getting attacked again, it's use who will suffer, not you. If our economic spending on this war drives us deeper and deeper into this alread 7 trillion dollar deficeit, you don't have to worry about that. If the father of two kids and a providing husband is gunned down over seas in this war, for some good none of us understands anymore, you won't have to worry because you don't know him.

I guess what I'm trying to tell you is, if you don't live here, don't tell us what our responsiblity is. I'm in the army and I have friends who had to go there and deal with the idea of having to shoot four year olds if they come over to you. Do you know why? Because these sick bastards strap bombs to the little kids and send them to soilders and have them give them a hug, then BOOM. You don't have to deal with that so don't say anything about it.

Secondly, this has nothing to do with my question, I just want people to better themselves, because a better society is the starting point for a positive changes, but I am sick and damn tired of people who live in this country of ours telling us what we have to do. When you move here and join our armed forces and serve your term in Iraq just like the rest of us, then you can tell me what you think of being there. Til then, keep it to yourself.

Sorry about the rant, but people who talk about us like that and don't have to face the reality of it just bother me.

[Retribution]

[size=1][quote name='Starwind']I'm not saying we need to be isolationist, I'm saying if we want security start at home, number one. Number two, since when is it the job of this nation alone to look after the rest of the world. Mind you, the people there didn't want us there and ahve made no short point of letting us know. It's not like WWI or WWII where we werer practically begged to step in. The rest of the world pleaded with us to stay out of Iraq, and we went anyway. We went to a nation, sure in turmoil, but none the less, that didn't want us there and made no small point to let us know they wanted us the hell out.[/quote]
No, it?s not the job of this nation [I]alone[/I] to ?look after the world,? but I could certainly argue that America has the obligation to help countries that are less fortunate than we. That doesn?t mean militarily ? I was mostly talking about economically ruined places, like most of Africa, and much of South America. Places where people are forced into conditions akin to slavery, where a poor mother has no choice but to work for Nike and feed her children with the one dollar she?d earn that day. Or the cocoa bean-pickers that get ripped off due to the Free Trade market, and let us drink our coffee in Starbucks, completely unaware of the human suffering that went into that cup of coffee.

I?m not talking about military action, here. I?m talking about justice.

[quote]We may be the strongest super power out there, but were not the only one. There were other nations there that could have dealt with it if they really felt like it was something that required attention. Or could have asked for our help, but none of this was the case. We stepped in agains the wills of many of our allies and with almost no support to a nation that didn't want us there, even in the face of the turmoil and torture they faced, they didn't want us there.[/quote]
Again, the war in Iraq was a brief example that I employed. I really don?t support the war, but I think we should finish what we started, rather than run like cowards once we see the long road ahead.

[quote]I You see, as we are the geatest super power, we have another responsiblity that is not policing the world. We have the responsiblity to not just throw our weight around because we can. We shouldn't step into a situation that has yet to threaten us directly, unless we are called upon by a nation that lacks the ablity to protect itself. I these people had been rebeling or trying to over throw him, again different story. But that's not the case in this story.[/quote]
We do have the responsibility to step into a situation that has yet to affect us directly. What if this situation was greater than self-interest, but rather, helping out the poor, the needy, those less fortunate, the exploited?

For example, in San Salvador back in the late 70s, the 2% of the people owned 95% of the country?s wealth, and the other 98% of people had 5% of the country?s wealth scattered amongst them. The government was oppressive and killed those who rose up against the aristocracy in a plea for equality. The American government funded the Salvadoran government, thinking that the country would remain democratic if the aristocrats controlled it, rather than let it turn communist (due to the Cold War). While this situation had yet to actually impact America, the government did and should have intervened ? but the government sided with the oppressors. Letting this struggle slide under the carpet would be entirely unacceptable ? and it?s happening every day. Poorer nations are being kicked to the curb and out of the world?s sight solely because we don?t actually want to help them.

[quote]Bush's favorite line "FIghting them there so we don't have to fight them here" is a load of crap to and I'll tell you why. Do you know how long those terrorists from the 9/11 tragedy had been in this country before hand? A little over a decade. If they're going to attack us, then they're already here. We need to step it up here. Since your obviously not aware of this, our security levels at our most vunerable terrorist locations (i.e. Chemical plants, Nuclear power plants and airports) are at record lows. How are doing this to ourselves again? It's not our job, or even our responsiblity to over there.[/quote]
I get the funny feeling you think I?m a pro-Bush guy. Hehe. Don?t worry ? I?m onboard with you on this one, for the most part.

However, I do think that we need to install a stable government and police force before we can get on our merry way. We came in without their consent, destroyed their government, took civilian casualities, and as a result, the country is extremely unstable. It'd be completely unfair to say they're on their own now, at this stage of the game.

[quote=]I guess what I'm trying to tell you is, if you don't live here, don't tell us what our responsiblity is. I'm in the army and I have friends who had to go there and deal with the idea of having to shoot four year olds if they come over to you. Do you know why? Because these sick bastards strap bombs to the little kids and send them to soilders and have them give them a hug, then BOOM. You don't have to deal with that so don't say anything about it.[/quote]
For the record, I live in Washington, D.C. I also find it intriguing you?re so anti-war (it?s not a bad thing, though! ^_^) but in the military. My uncle is the military ? he recently returned to Iraq. My grandfather served for 20 years in the military.

But even if I didn?t live in America, I would have the right to tell you what her responsibilities are.

Take this hypothetical example: You?re on a basketball team, and I?m your coach. I tell you that you?re not doing so well on free-throws, and that you must improve. You tell me that since I don?t play, I have no room to talk. Granted, this example wasn?t even close to perfect, but you get my point, right? I don?t need to ?play in the game with you? to tell you what you should be doing.

[quote]Secondly, this has nothing to do with my question, I just want people to better themselves, because a better society is the starting point for a positive changes, but I am sick and damn tired of people who live in this country of ours telling us what we have to do. When you move here and join our armed forces and serve your term in Iraq just like the rest of us, then you can tell me what you think of being there. Til then, keep it to yourself.[/quote]
See above.

Once again, I?d like to reiterate that I?m not talking about military action necessarily. I?m talking about justice in the world, and that certainly can be done without arms.[/size]

[Starwind]

Let me make something clear here, dealing with global poverty and oppresion is the job of the United Nations, not the US alone. The mission guide line for the UN is to relieve poverty and promote human rights, and achieve non-violent solutions to global problems. This is not Americas job, it's the UN's job. Go whine about them, they're the ones who took it upon themselves as a whole to help govern and aid the world in human rights and economical supprot.

Another note, how does this country help out the poor of the rest of the world when we can't help the homeless living here. Our nation (as I stated above) in 7 trillion dolloars in debt. You do realize this right? We can't help people right now because as it is in some towns they're already laying off essential services like fire fighters and policemen. I know we are this great super power, but that doesn't mean we are the solution to the problem of every other nation. This all comes back to helping the home fromt first. IF we can't get the homeless taken care of here, how are suppose to help the impoverished people of South America and Africa, which again is the job of the UN, not us.

[luzkage]

...you sound like a Transcendentalist. Too bad the fad's out- archaic but quaint.

I'd figure what the heck I'd want from life first. What do you want to change? And are all things changeABLE? I'm a realist and have to say that as a single being it's difficult to change something in the world on a scale that affects everyone. Here's the contradiction, I believe it can be done depending on what you plan to change. World hunger? I doubt it...but I always had that hope. Hope that children in Africa would not die of Hunger and parasites feeding off them. But I've decided that change starts off at a small scale. You want change? Change your life according to your desires first. I wouldn't worry to much about the world yet if I couldn't take care of myself, as selfish as it sounds- if you can't help yourself, you can't help others.One will become a burden perhaps. Do what you can, I guess is what I'm trying to say lolz. :animesigh

[Retribution]

[size=1]It's also the WTO and IMF's jobs to loan money to countries to help them get back on their feet, but quite obviously it's not enough. I'm going to assume that you're nearly entirely ignorant to the rest of the world's suffering, that you have no idea the magnitude or scale of the injustice.

First of all, we can help the homeless once Bush gets his mind together. Cutting food stamps and welfare certainly aren't helping the situation, and yes, our debt is collosal. We can get the homeless taken care of in America, we just aren't doing it. With all this national security talk, that's where all our money is going. The multi-million dollar fighter jets. The million dollar bombs. On top of this, the tax cuts aren't helping the economy out much. Trickle-down economics haven't worked for a long, long time.

And despite the adversity, I still believe we are called to aid others. Currently, we give one tenth of one percent of our annual budget to foreign aid. I am entirely certain we can give others a larger slice of what we have than that. Also, other developed nations should help the USA. The US currently gives the most money to developing nations -- and other nations should increase their donations. This has to be a united effort.[/size]

[Starwind]

I'm going to say this as simply as I can. These nation aren't poor because they're a nation of dead beats, or they're just having an economic slum. These nations in Africa and South America are poor for other reasons, reasons we can't really help.

1. Over population. The most prevelant is in Africa and the middle east. Over there you have families that can consist of as many as twenty children. A good example for middle eastern over population; Di you know that Osama Bin Laden was one of fifty five children. Now we can send all the money we want to these places, but it will never be enough. No matter how hard you try at that, there are too many people to help and we simply don't have the money.

2. Lack of resources. Some places, like in South and centeral America, have poor soil and little to no natural resources. That's why the rain forests are disappearing, the farmers there have to keep cutting down the trees because the soil can't supposrt crops for very long. because of these things they have a hard time even subsistence farming. They have little or no major exports and as such have very little money.

3. Tyrannical, corrupt or even inadequate government. We mentioned Iraq before and everyone talked about how we did the right thing in de seating a tyrant, but why the favoritism I ask. People don't realize he is not the only one of his kind. We didn't go there to just de seat a tyrant, because their are hundreds more where he came from and they're all over the world. Or even like I said, inadequate government can be the problem. Some countries have so little government comtrol you have militia groups and drug cartels running loose unopposed.

You think I don't know or am simply ignorant of what goes on, but you want to know something, I am very aware. I've seen a little boy crawl across the ground, wounded without medical treatment, as a vulture followed him waiting for him to die. I've seen the starved corpses so witherd away they looked like wooden husks. But this not an injustice we brought on them. We can't help all these people unless you can treat the under lying problem.

I am an idealist, but even I have limits. Over population is beyond what could be asked of us to help with. We can't help these people with little or no resources. And unless you want to repeat Iraq, we can't relieve these people of there tyranical or incompetent rulers.

I know you want to see people helped right, then go into things that could be helped. Right now the biggest killers in Africa are starvation and AIDS. We can't feed all these people, but you can help get cheaper and more effective treatment for AIDS, or even TB. This is a worth while cause adn a true source of injustice. Did you know that to treat the resistant strain of TB it could cost as much as $10,000. Because of this, people die of this very cureable disease every 30 seconds.

As horrible as it is that happens to them, we can't feed the world, not matter what the people on TV tell you. You want the real injustice is that those shows I'm sure you either have or have at least considerd donating to spend 90% of your money on the show or themselves. If they raise a million dollars, the starving people of the owrld will only ever get ten thousand of that. And I know your thinking every little bit counts, but that doesn't help. That's like a man dieing of thirst and you throw him a damp sponge.

You want to help, go after those bastards in who charge these ungodly prices for medicine and expect these people, who can't even afford bread, to pay these prices. I know you want to see the people of America and the free nations of the world stand up and give money and strength to these people, and that would be wonderful. But the bottom line is, at the end of the day you can't help them all, no matter how much money and effort you put into it. Neither this or any country has the power to make this better. The problem that is causing there poverty can only be helped by them, and sometimes not even that.

In the time it takes you to read this, numerous people across the globe will have died of TB, again a very cureable disease. If you want a cause that we can help and is worht the fight, duke it out with them. Global hunger is an issue that we don't have the money or ability to make go away, I know you believe we can, but we already live ina time where som places have to lay off fire men and police officers because we don't have the money to pay them all. There are a lot of battles that should be fought that are largly ignored, but this really is one we can't win. Hunger isn't going to ever go away, as long as this world is subject to the corrupt and over population.

Unless you want to talk genocide, we can't make this better. And unless you want another war, we can't get rid of these tyrant leaders.

[dot]

Protest! Petition! Protest some more! = A LOT OF PEOPLE