Plato said that one had to be dead if there was no more war. I agree, as men are always going to be self-interested, whether they recognize it or not. Even one's ideas about "God" are "self interested" claims, because this is how we define ourselves. People all define themselves by the groups that hold to their values, some knowing that this is a chosen value, while others less so.
Tonight, we watched "Black Hawk Down". Our military went into Somalia and fought against horrendous odds bravely and many were lost. One comment I will never forget was made by one of the Somalian warriors to a prisoner. He told the prisoner that irregardless of America's desire to promote democracy through gunfire, as a means to negotiation; Somalians believe that gunfire IS negotiation. Victory is only declared when their side has won against those that desire to change their culture. That was a sobering comment and made me wonder why we attempt to change these types of cultures.
The young men who represented our military were holding to their ideals of life and liberty and willing to fight to see that all people live free. This is the American ideal and they were defending not just their country's values, but protected each of their "buddies". They would not leave anyone behind, as they believed in the value of each indiviudal life! Their courage was amazing.
One wonders why we were in Somalia in the first place. Why were our men used in an environment that didn't seem to matter? Power does not seem to understand or value the costs to those that it holds under its command. It is an unusual person that understands and values the "little man" enough to not take lightly sending our men into harm's way. Our military are committed to serve any command, so it is imperative that our men in uniform be valued as to their life. They are fighting for our liberty.
When humanitarian aid is confiscated, why do Americans think that it is obligatory to follow up? Are we loyal to U.N. demands, and not our own Sovereignty? Or does American have some vested interest that the common American is unaware of?
The movie portrayed that hunger creates hostilities between rivalling groups. So, is preventing hunger a means to create peace? Then, what about the dictators or the corruption in society that makes it impossible to claim "the humane"? These cultures are not prone to change, unless they are killed or their power is taken from them.
The honor code of Westpoint claims that fighting for the "right" is not tolerating those that are corrupt or are corrupting influences in a society! One "hero" at the end said that he was asked whether he sought to be a hero and he said that one doesn't seek to be a hero, that becoming a hero happens. Becoming a hero is the result of duty! It is doing one's job in the military.
Showing posts with label humanitarian aid. Show all posts
Showing posts with label humanitarian aid. Show all posts
Saturday, May 14, 2011
Saturday, April 4, 2009
It So Bugs Me....
Yesterday I was writing about justice and how justice is equality under law. Of course law is dependent on those who rule, but in the West we have a rational base for discerning what is "right", which our nation protects with our military.
Today while scanning over some of the blogs I usually read, I found one aguing against the Pentagon's spending in reference to how many 'nets" could be bought in Africa for 5 years! This statement alone angers me. While I wholeheartedly agree that government in gerneral overspends in their budget. We will disagree as to how that budget's money should be distributed!
The statement that the Pentagon was unworthy of existing because of the "poor" is just nonsense! This is the devaluation of sovereignty as a nation and a push toward a "peace" that will not happen in this world. So, though some may value their life's calling in serving the needs of the poor, that is not the only value that is of significance and value. I really cannot stand someone, especially someone with power, like the media, brainwashing the "brain dead" with "moral evaluations" that are one-sided opinions or convictions. It just enrages me.
The Pentagon is representative of protecting the values that we hold most dear. We must not devalue their service, nor the service of the military. We cannot maintain a nation, protecting our interests without a miliatary. We are fools if we think that those who devalue and hate our culture will "go away"!
So, ar those who need nets in Africa of value? Yes, but that has nothing to do with our nation's interest and we cannot be just a nation of "humanitarian aid"!
Today while scanning over some of the blogs I usually read, I found one aguing against the Pentagon's spending in reference to how many 'nets" could be bought in Africa for 5 years! This statement alone angers me. While I wholeheartedly agree that government in gerneral overspends in their budget. We will disagree as to how that budget's money should be distributed!
The statement that the Pentagon was unworthy of existing because of the "poor" is just nonsense! This is the devaluation of sovereignty as a nation and a push toward a "peace" that will not happen in this world. So, though some may value their life's calling in serving the needs of the poor, that is not the only value that is of significance and value. I really cannot stand someone, especially someone with power, like the media, brainwashing the "brain dead" with "moral evaluations" that are one-sided opinions or convictions. It just enrages me.
The Pentagon is representative of protecting the values that we hold most dear. We must not devalue their service, nor the service of the military. We cannot maintain a nation, protecting our interests without a miliatary. We are fools if we think that those who devalue and hate our culture will "go away"!
So, ar those who need nets in Africa of value? Yes, but that has nothing to do with our nation's interest and we cannot be just a nation of "humanitarian aid"!
Sunday, February 22, 2009
The Economic and Global Dilemma for America
Globalization is about economic interests first and foremost and many corporations have benefitted from the labor of the marginalized. While corporations have benefitted financially, it has hindered the growth of our own workforce at home, as well as trampled over the issue of human rights abroad.
While corporations have benefited at the costs of American worker's rights and human rights, in general, humanitarian organizations have pushed for charitable service and giving. Some of these organizations are unaccountable and unregulated. Unaccountability is dangerous in international beareaucracies that have no other interests than attaining their own goals.
Danger lurks within the IO (international organizations) where "good intentions" are wrought with complex ethical dilemmas for free societies. There is nothing more complex than national versus international interests. These conflicts should be a major cause of concern in a world of terrorism.
Some believe such as the U.N. and the organizations surrounding (NGOs, NPOs, etc.) that education is the answer to "world affairs". These organizations are bent on education, healthcare, women's rights, children's rights, etc. There is nothing wrong with these endeavors, but my question is one of ethical dilemma and moral imperative.
Just in the past few days, Hillary Clinton met with China's leader to discuss co-operation in discussing the threat of the Middle Eastern nuclear powers, where terrorism is a threat to freedom and free enterprise. Hillary wanted to "table" human rights abuses in China for the cause of our country's need for "allies" for the "war on terror".
I believe, as I have said many times before, that without freedom, we have no justice, nor any means to pursue justice for anyone else. So, the value of our freedom is first and foremost, otherwise, human rights will die with the Taliban's insistence on conformity to Shairia law for God's will and glory.
Naivete' towards the "world situation of rogue governments" is not courageous or valiant, but ignorance of what prejuidice and intolerance will demand upon the individuals and societies that ignore the dangers. Good government must be protected, valued, sought and fought for, if we are to survive the constant onslaughts against our boundaries, freedoms and way of life.
Human rights, humanitarian aid, and charitble service cannot come before the primary duty to subvert evil governments and protect our own. We are a people because we have a duty to defend and protect our national interests first and foremost, otherwise, we will not be able to defend human rights in the future!
While corporations have benefited at the costs of American worker's rights and human rights, in general, humanitarian organizations have pushed for charitable service and giving. Some of these organizations are unaccountable and unregulated. Unaccountability is dangerous in international beareaucracies that have no other interests than attaining their own goals.
Danger lurks within the IO (international organizations) where "good intentions" are wrought with complex ethical dilemmas for free societies. There is nothing more complex than national versus international interests. These conflicts should be a major cause of concern in a world of terrorism.
Some believe such as the U.N. and the organizations surrounding (NGOs, NPOs, etc.) that education is the answer to "world affairs". These organizations are bent on education, healthcare, women's rights, children's rights, etc. There is nothing wrong with these endeavors, but my question is one of ethical dilemma and moral imperative.
Just in the past few days, Hillary Clinton met with China's leader to discuss co-operation in discussing the threat of the Middle Eastern nuclear powers, where terrorism is a threat to freedom and free enterprise. Hillary wanted to "table" human rights abuses in China for the cause of our country's need for "allies" for the "war on terror".
I believe, as I have said many times before, that without freedom, we have no justice, nor any means to pursue justice for anyone else. So, the value of our freedom is first and foremost, otherwise, human rights will die with the Taliban's insistence on conformity to Shairia law for God's will and glory.
Naivete' towards the "world situation of rogue governments" is not courageous or valiant, but ignorance of what prejuidice and intolerance will demand upon the individuals and societies that ignore the dangers. Good government must be protected, valued, sought and fought for, if we are to survive the constant onslaughts against our boundaries, freedoms and way of life.
Human rights, humanitarian aid, and charitble service cannot come before the primary duty to subvert evil governments and protect our own. We are a people because we have a duty to defend and protect our national interests first and foremost, otherwise, we will not be able to defend human rights in the future!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
