posted on Apr, 24 2013 @ 09:58 PM
reply to post by Danbones
Your kindness is very impressive, thanks a lot. And this is a very worthwhile thread. I'm grateful to you.
I'm really torn on this issue. There's no question that immoral and illegal acts are, well, immoral and illegal. Nobody likes them (I hope).
They are also conducted by, I would expect, nearly every country. Not that that makes them right. If we have enemies, and I think we do, can we
count on them to always behave morally and legally? No. Part of the problem is that if you believe you are cornered, you'll fight dirty, do
anything, to win. If an individual is afraid that he is going to be attacked, he's going to buy a gun, legal or not.
A related consideration is that governments tend to make decisions based on a cost-benefit analysis. "What will happen if we carry this off, what is
the chance we'll get caught, and if we do get caught what will it cost us." I believe that many countries do illegal and immoral things after
figuring the odds.
So whether it's the emotional, "We have to do this to survive," or the calculated "We'll be better off if we do," it seems there is a lot of
incentive to try that kind of illegal action now and then. Does the US do it? Absolutely. Do they do it more than other countries, and place
themselves in the Hitler league? I don't see it.
There's also a PR problem involved. With the world shouting at the US for being criminals, yet ignoring other countries, it becomes easy to
disregard those who are complaining. It looks like political manuevering by American enemies. Not surprisingly, that doesn't win much support in
the US. Is there a neutral body calling for each country to be examined? No, and the UN isn't even close to neutral. Until there is, I don't see
much of a chance for trying American "war criminals."