Baalzamon said:
I hate responses like this. Blanket statements that somebody is one thing solely because they do or don't agree with ONE thing. It's similar to those who say anybody who voted for Trump is a racist POS. I didn't vote for the dude, but it irritates me to no end when people apply this statement to everybody who did. I'm not saying I have an answer about what is right or wrong. I'm not even saying I know whether we should specifically be involved in this situation. But if it comes down to "ignoring a situation like this means you have no humanity"...then I must ask. What is the limit? If there are 3 people tortured in Guatemala, do we as a country have a moral obligation to get involved? What about if 13 people die of a rare disease in Africa? Do we have an obligation to get involved in that? I have no idea what the limit is, because I don't necessarily have any issue with us helping others out, but I'm asking this simply because of your response. At what point, per your guidelines, does a country who won't help in a situation outside of their country have no humanity? There absolutely MUST be a limit. As much as some people may want to think we can, we absolutely cannot get involved in every other foreign issue there is. So what is the stopping point? 1 death...5 deaths, 100 deaths? What about if the people we help wind up forming an organization that winds up murdering 1000s of people in 10 years. Does that mean that retroactively the people that helped them are actually inhumane? Is that simply not our problem until 10 years from now and we are just obligated to help whoever appears to be most innocent at any point in time? |
If you hate it so much you should probably stop doing it then as your initial statement was an "only this or the other" type of an attack against people who complain about military spending but also don't like how we pulled out our troops in this situation.
