|
|
COMMENTS:
The top picture is a map of the Darfur region. About 90% of the red and orange spots are villages that are either confirmed to destroyed or heavily damaged.
The bottom picture is irregular combatants. The sign of the car says Sudanese "Liberation" army. The ones involved in murder.
I'm interested in seeing the "justifications" for those voting no.
As a country, no. As a member of the U.N. absolutely...but we all know how good their record is regarding "inervention" and "peacekeeping".
Unfortunately, you are right um_yeah.
Sorry I biased my earlier comment about justification by adding apostrophes.
Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
Although the fact that we are morally obligated doesn't mean that as soon as we learn of the genocide we should go charging in, regardless of the consequences. Invasions, even morally correct invasions (if there are such things), take time to plan, and patience to execute. I would think the medical mantra "Do no further harm." fits well in this case.
We should have an obligation to each other as human beings over and above commond bonds of nationality, ideally. What significance is there in a coincidence of geography/demography, after all?
Far too much importance is placed on nationality IMO.
Yes. I agree sort of whith what um_yeah said.
Although, acting as a country might not be legally 'right', what's legally right and what's moral isn't always the same.
Like himself said, it should be done with careful considerations.
Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
^What Grumpy said.
Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
If we can do something then yes.
The UN is obligated by its own laws to do something, but once they have proven that they have no intention of going in it should be up to individual nations to do something.
Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
Although w ehave to be careful not to be "used" by lying government or other interests who just want to position a situation in such a way so as to get people to oppose some rival.
Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
No excuse for not acting.
What, Cathexis? Are you saying Bush-bad if he were to act? Or Bush-bad if not to act? In plain English, please.
Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
I'd certainly like to believe that we are. Whether we do or not, unfortunately, fall into the realm of political expediency.
Good question.
Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
I suppose we are just as obligated to act as we have felt we were in stopping the spread of Communism. Its even a better cause!
Voted : Yes, we are morally obligated to act
Tough question but leaning to a yes. If it is so obiously a massicre.
|
|
user created polls & quizzes 
