halfstepdown88 said:
Negative Case
INTRO[/B][/CENTER]
Say, that one of you go out at night and take your parent’s car. When you come home your parents find out that you took their car. Would your parents call all the neighbors and ask them what your punishment should be?
I think a more appropriate analogy might be the Deep South after reconstruction as compared to the interests of Nations for cheap oil. Your neighbor is black and the Klu Klux Klan is terrorizing them because they do not want blacks living free in their neighborhood, and they want to keep them in a state of subjection:
“[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.”
http://www.hti.umich.edu/cgi/k/koran/koran-idx?type=DIV0&byte=282392 {the “book” referred to is the Bible and the Torah}
Just as the terrorist Klan was created after a defeat in a war, the PLO and other terrorist groups like Hamas are similar in that they can not defeat Israel in honorable warfare.
The reason why the federal government did not do anything in the Deep South to protect the blacks from oppression, and terrorism, is because the government was made up of States that had their own interests. There is a really cute picture of the KKK marching on Washington.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan
The South was agricultural (an analogy to oil) and food was needed by the States more than security and freedom for the blacks, that was one reason for the end to reconstruction (as the blacks were charged with subsistence farming). The last time Georgia had a Republican Governor prior to this one, was during reconstruction. Just as the UN can not destroy Israel, which is the goal of the terrorists like Hamas, the United States could not stomach expelling the blacks back to Africa or to slave states in South America (as per a draft of an Emancipation Proclamation for the State of Delaware). {Do not expect to find the draft of that proclamation on the Internet, or any politically correct history book, you must search the actual writings of Abraham Lincoln, as in “Lincoln: Speeches and Writings : Volume 2: 1859-1865,” so do not use it unless you do find it and have a copy; your teacher will not believe it even exists unless you prove it.}
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0940450631/002-6179767-1688810?v=glance
The United Nations admitted Israel as a Member State and can not stomach destroying it, but oil interests of the various nations prevents a Security Council resolution condemning State Sponsors of Terrorism like Syria and Iran that are violating UN resolution 242; the condition that Iraq not support terrorism as per H32 of UN cease-fire resolution 687 is the only exception, and the UN clearly had no intention of enforcing it:
“H
32. Requires Iraq to inform the Security Council that it will not commit or support any act of international terrorism or allow any organization directed towards commission of such acts to operate within its territory and to condemn unequivocally and renounce all acts, methods and practices of terrorism;”
http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm
Free elected Governments (of the people) among oil producing states in the Middle East will only cause gas prices to rise as their enfranchised people demand more in the way of social programs and infrastructure for their resources (oil), but it is the right thing to do. Communists and Socialists would not think it is right for the people of a nation to have such a resource for their own benefit, they want cheap oil too: remember what Communists believe, it is “from each according to their ability to each according to their need.”
The interests of nations during the cold war prevented many from doing the right thing, including the United States, and the interests of nations with regard to strategic resources continues to prevent the support for an enfranchisement of any people that have a strategic resource that the world wants cheaply; remember the analogy of the agricultural South‘s resource of food, where to keep cheap food you had to turn over the former slaves to the their former masters and end reconstruction, and compare it to the desire for cheap oil where Oil for Food and containment was Peace for Greed: Oil for Food and containment was in essence Cheap Oil produced by slaves for the masters. Sorry for the long sentence.
When you mix in a xenophobic religion you have the perfect excuse to keep peace from enfranchising a people to use their own wealth. It is easier to sell to one dictator, who you can more easily control, than to convince the august councils of government to buy poorly built Soviet Tanks, especially when the people want a good life and the dictator or tyrant just wants to maintain his job description. The tyrant that supports terrorists is morally only maintaining his belief in the principle of survival of the fittest or own ideas of justice, and the support for terrorism can only work to give reason to maintain the tyrant’s job description:
“I think, that you, often criticize those whom you criticize in order to weaken them, by saying that they use emergency laws, and what emergency laws, by western standards, cannot be a general rule. But now, unlike what you used to say about those whom you accuse of being dictators and despots, we see dozens of emergency laws and measures adopted by the governments of the West, with the US in the forefront, after facing one painful event.” (Saddam Hussein Shabban 13, 1422 H. October 29, 2001.)
Peace can only come when the people of all Nations are enfranchised to police their territory or pay the price for their choices. Those that signed the Declaration of Independence did so as representatives of their states, and they fought as a Nation and not as various unconnected groups of so-called “freedom fighters” serving their own tyrannical interests. The United Nations (of tyrants too) can not accurately define what a “terrorist” is, while various interests of so-called “nations” support so-called “freedom fighters” whose desire is not really the enfranchisement of the people; the hypocrisy is that the interests of some nations makes for a Machiavellian desire for profit in confusion (the word “confusion” in this instance could be defined as the tyranny of mini-tyrants of terror whose idea of justice is based upon their own ideas).
