Difference between revisions of "Talk:2013-08-31-New Era Conversations 7"

From Nordan Symposia
Jump to navigationJump to search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
[[File:lighterstill.jpg]]
 
[[File:lighterstill.jpg]]
  
It appears "the Triumvirate" has come down on the side of Fox News and the NeoCon agenda citing the US government as "''moral upholder''" for the world against the Syrian government described as corrupt by contrast. This suggests a moral imperative for use of unilateral military action without having presented any evidence of who the guilty party is in the recent use of chemical weapons amidst so much conflicting information. One might have hoped that a more sane position would be forthcoming such as encouraging independent investigation whose findings could be referred to the Security Council who might ask the ICC to assign a sentence upon the guilty. Disappointing to say the least.   
+
In this lesson, it appears "the Triumvirate" has come down on the side of Fox News and the NeoCon agenda citing the US government as "''moral upholder''" for the world against the Syrian government described as corrupt by contrast. This suggests a moral imperative for use of unilateral military action without having presented any evidence of who the guilty party is in the recent use of chemical weapons amidst so much conflicting information. One might have hoped that a more sane position would be forthcoming such as encouraging independent investigation whose findings could be referred to the Security Council who might ask the ICC to assign a sentence upon the guilty. Disappointing to say the least.   
  
 
Would you like to register your opinion in the discussion page?--rdavis 23:38, 3 September 2013 (UTC)
 
Would you like to register your opinion in the discussion page?--rdavis 23:38, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 19:48, 3 September 2013

Lighterstill.jpg

In this lesson, it appears "the Triumvirate" has come down on the side of Fox News and the NeoCon agenda citing the US government as "moral upholder" for the world against the Syrian government described as corrupt by contrast. This suggests a moral imperative for use of unilateral military action without having presented any evidence of who the guilty party is in the recent use of chemical weapons amidst so much conflicting information. One might have hoped that a more sane position would be forthcoming such as encouraging independent investigation whose findings could be referred to the Security Council who might ask the ICC to assign a sentence upon the guilty. Disappointing to say the least.

Would you like to register your opinion in the discussion page?--rdavis 23:38, 3 September 2013 (UTC)