Anyone want to take a stab at why the West does business with or otherwise supports these countries?
Because people are being overly polite and think that any culture should be protected, no matter how batshit crazy it is. Wouldn’t it be nice if the US and other western nations simply said, “We’d like to buy your [insert product here], but you [treat women terribly/kill people for thought crimes/make homosexuality illegal] so we’re not going to.” I know that we have sanctions against countries like North Korea and Syria but those sanctions have too many loopholes in them and usually just wind up hurting the general population instead of those in power. Not only that, but sanctions are usually done in response to crimes committed by a nation’s military, not cultural or religious barbarism.
We probably have to.
We probably have to."Have to" is a relative and arguable term. Lois
We probably have to."Have to" is a relative and arguable term. LoisIn the case of the mideast nations we do business with, thats bullsh&t. Oil is necessary for our society to exist. They have it, we need it, so we have to deal with them.
Unless your Jacob Marley, mankind is not the business of business. As for “support”, what do you mean? We gave chemical weapons to Iraq because they were at war with our enemy Iran, later we “liberated” them from that same government, meaning we recognized a difference between Saddam’s regime and Iraqi citizens. Now it’s just a mess.
We probably have to."Have to" is a relative and arguable term. LoisIn the case of the mideast nations we do business with, thats bullsh&t. Oil is necessary for our society to exist. They have it, we need it, so we have to deal with them. Actually, we have it, it just costs us more to get ours. So really there could be other alternatives for us, they're just not politically viable. e.g., Instead of spending so many billions on programs like developing F-35's (which don't work properly and aren't really needed) we could subsidize our oil and fracking industries. -- It's just not politically viable.
We probably have to."Have to" is a relative and arguable term. LoisIn the case of the mideast nations we do business with, thats bullsh&t. Oil is necessary for our society to exist. They have it, we need it, so we have to deal with them. Why are we dealing with countries with blasphemy laws that have no oil? Lois
We probably have to."Have to" is a relative and arguable term. LoisIn the case of the mideast nations we do business with, thats bullsh&t. Oil is necessary for our society to exist. They have it, we need it, so we have to deal with them. Actually, we have it, it just costs us more to get ours. So really there could be other alternatives for us, they're just not politically viable. e.g., Instead of spending so many billions on programs like developing F-35's (which don't work properly and aren't really needed) we could subsidize our oil and fracking industries. -- It's just not politically viable.True enough.
We probably have to."Have to" is a relative and arguable term. LoisIn the case of the mideast nations we do business with, thats bullsh&t. Oil is necessary for our society to exist. They have it, we need it, so we have to deal with them. Why are we dealing with countries with blasphemy laws that have no oil? LoisIDK, analyze those countries. The first possibility that comes to mind is that we can't cut ties with them for geopolitical reasons.
Anyone want to take a stab at why the West does business with or otherwise supports these countries? http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/05/28/which-countries-still-outlaw-apostasy-and-blasphemy/Seriously? Do you honestly believe morality (in which the West btw is sorely lacking) trumps economic or geopolitical necessity? And setting aside the recent CIA Torture report, do you honestly think the US has a moral foot to stand on? It's a wonder anyone does business with the US. If all the US government did was behead a few people its moral standing would go way up. Instead it has, through the CIA and other covert means, devastated entire countries, and as someone mentioned, usually the innocent population, not "the bad guys". And think of how many dictators it has supported or outright installed, and the effect on the respective country. Geesh.
Anyone want to take a stab at why the West does business with or otherwise supports these countries? http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/05/28/which-countries-still-outlaw-apostasy-and-blasphemy/Seriously? Do you honestly believe morality (in which the West btw is sorely lacking) trumps economic or geopolitical necessity? And setting aside the recent CIA Torture report, do you honestly think the US has a moral foot to stand on? It's a wonder anyone does business with the US. If all the US government did was behead a few people its moral standing would go way up. Instead it has, through the CIA and other covert means, devastated entire countries, and as someone mentioned, usually the innocent population, not "the bad guys". And think of how many dictators it has supported or outright installed, and the effect on the respective country. Geesh. I know. i was inviting others to say it. That's why I put it in the form of a question. Why would you think the question showed that I "believe morality (in which the West btw is sorely lacking) trumps economic or geopolitical necessity"? Lois
Your question implies they shouldn’t and that you agree. Now if you’d said, Anyone want to take a stab at how the Western pot gets off calling these kettles black? then it’d be a different matter. 