Why hello I am Vid, my age is a concealment as we live in a biased abyss. My goal? It is to share my eversought opinions with the wonderful world around, and hope that some people choose to listen. After all blogging has been a great way to waste time, but also a way to get recognized. As debate is a sport in my mind, i realize that a sport of recognizing who is bias and not, is also bias proving that we lived in a biased abyss." We live in a biased abyss"- Nupur Joshi
- A topic that has provoked my interest is our laws, relating to obligation and such.
- It is also the LD debate topic
- Resolved: It is just for the United States to use military force to prevent the acquisition of nuclear weapons by nations that pose a military threat.
Let us let the definition of just be correct. Unless you have a better definition.
If i were to affirm i would say it is just because it is our obligation. And if one chooses to ask me why it our obligation, i would reply " Who do you think the world will blame if we choose to do nothing." After all by doing nothing we are causing harm, as will doing something. The only difference is by doing something we have good intentions. And by the doctrine of double effect, and util. means it is indeed just
So now i ask of you.
- Your standpoints to this situation and why...
- Why is it correct for us to be the superpowers and have nuclear weapons, while other countries cannot.
- Why is it our obligation?
- How was what we did in WWII just?
- And other opinions.
REPLIES/DISCUSSIONS ARE in the comment section :]
13 comments:
Nukes are capable of devastating damage so since we are the most multicultural area we reduce the chance of us being bias compared to anyone else, and we are the most strong military wise so it is our obligation, i agree with your quote!
Thats a tough quote there
The world hates Americans, and this is coming from a brooklyner
Such an evocative philosophical question! Would you call one man to save the lives of thousands? Would you kill 10? How about 100? Would you kill 999 people to save 1000? Personally I just hope that I never have to make such a choice.
MY REPLY TO SuperSkyRockets
"SuperSkyRockets said...
Such an evocative philosophical question! Would you call one man to save the lives of thousands? Would you kill 10? How about 100? Would you kill 999 people to save 1000? Personally I just hope that I never have to make such a choice."
It is only if those 10 posess a threat, 100, 999 , if it is to save more people then yes ? Wouldnt you? After all if you dont do anything sure these 999 would live, but the 1000 innocent would die.
We saved more people, instead of invading we bombed!
I agree with you that every person is entitled a world view! The question you pose is a very difficult one.... I don't beleive I know enough about this certain political genre to give my opinion I could really embarass myslef if I don't have info to back up my thoughts. Would you do me the honor of checking out my blog and let me know what you think about my world view? journey4answers.blogspot.com
REPLY TO UNLIKELY HERO
You dont need to have much information at all, just an opinion, and a simple fact of why you think that.
Its my job being a highschool debator to think of possible arguments to that for my cases and rebutals .. =D
Reply to Vid:
Yes I'm Christian. I found your blog browsing, I think from the Santa Claus one.... I can't be for sure. If you read my other posts I believe they may answer your questions about my beliefs!! :D :D If you still have questions please ask!
I saw your blog on facebook, im also a highschool debator, and im wondering too,
Why are we allowed to have nukes and not other countries? What makes us better?
And what does all of this have to do with Santa and his blog to children???
Nothing. this is about government views.
and so why would you link yourself to the santa site which is visited by so many smaller children who aren't in a place to view or contemplate your issues?
Post a Comment