Syrian Civil War Developments

[bigross86]

Perfect. And hence the ownership of the deeds of your father, as moral rectitude. Without that, there would be none of the strife we see in the world today. Its extremely one sided to see the son as different from his father, yet recognize that hatred and bloodshed and feuds and clashes of religions and civilizations are what we inherit from them.

We're now getting extremely semantic and philosophical, but one needs to make the distinction: Yes, children receive their father's prejudices and views, the good as well as the bad. On a very macro scale, a society of children should feel some remorse over the sins of the fathers, but on the micro individual level there really is no need to punish the son of a thief or murderer, is there?

[vsdoc]

So,should I take you still sacrifice humans on the altar of Kali?

Absolutely. As much as you have a horse attached to each of your enemy's legs as a sharpened stake is gradually forced into and up his/her body, after which it is hoisted as a mast on your front lawn, where you enjoy a quiet breakfast.

[vsdoc]

We're now getting extremely semantic and philosophical, but one needs to make the distinction: Yes, children receive their father's prejudices and views, the good as well as the bad. On a very macro scale, a society of children should feel some remorse over the sins of the fathers, but on the micro individual level there really is no need to punish the son of a thief or murderer, is there?

Who's speaking of punishment here? I was referring to the collective ownership of moral responsibility of one generation to the next, and the symbolic act of a an apology, which I see you agree with. Hence my dig (in jest) at Dave and his flag. Hope that clears things.

[bigross86]

But again, that works on a Macro level, but not on the individual micro level. Why should a son apologize if his father is a rapist? Why should he feel remorse?

[Doktor]

But again, that works on a Macro level, but not on the individual micro level. Why should a son apologize if his father is a rapist? Why should he feel remorse?

Why should (s)he be respected member of the society if her/his father/mother were respected members?

[vsdoc]

But again, that works on a Macro level, but not on the individual micro level. Why should a son apologize if his father is a rapist? Why should he feel remorse?

Of course at a macro level. The collective unconscious is like herd immunity. It affects the individual at the level of herd dynamics. So if you agree at a macro level, but yet say none of the micro-organisms that make up the macro-organism should carry the burden, who then is left holding the baby? Hope that clears the concept.

[bigross86]

So now what follows is what version of a community do you believe exists? Do you believe in Mill's Individualistic community, where the whole is made up as a sum of its parts, or in a collective community, where the individual is forged by society?

[vsdoc]

So now what follows is what version of a community do you believe exists? Do you believe in Mill's Individualistic community, where the whole is made up as a sum of its parts, or in a collective community, where the individual is forged by society?

Any community is a sum of its component parts. But not only just so. A community is exponentially much more, and not just tied to a linear progression thereof where A+B+C+.....=Z Mills is highly simplistic yet blinkered in his approach in that his theory holds true for the very beginning of time when loners congregate to make a collective of mutual benefit. Robin Hood and his band of merry men. The X-men. MENSA. The early settlers who eventually made up the United States. Biker groups - till they become "channelized" institutions. These are some examples I can think of which fit his mold.

Older civilizations like India and Persia and China on the other hand have over millenia evolved to the level where while their "culture" is an amalgam and collective of the millions through the ages, that collective now is the super-individual and molds foreign entities to its own norms and particular quirks. The amalgamation and absorption of Islam into Hindu India is such an example. The Islamic state of Iran that was once Zoroastrian Persia is also such an example. Onion peels. The rings of growth of a log in cross section.

[bigross86]

So once again, when you look at society today, do you see it as individual based or as collective based?

[vsdoc]

So once again, when you look at society today, do you see it as individual based or as collective based?

I think I answered your question already. It depends on the society/community in question and where its at in its state of evolution. And that there is no clear beginning nor end where one clearly ends and the other takes over. Sort of like the ebb and flow of Yin and Yang. Look at your country for example. And infant nation of an ancient people. Collective post-traumatic stress disorder. A million stories of individual suffering and loss coming together as the one common communal thread. I'm sorry if I am confusing you before your exam. I am not trained in this sort of discussion. Just self-read. And I would probably have become a shrink if the corporate world had not gotten its talons into me when it did.

[Officer of Engineers]

Sure, but that point 3 is iffy.

And yet, we continued to target his HQ and HQ is defined as wherever he gave orders.

[bigross86]

Colonel, do you mind? We're trying to have an existential philosophy discussion here that has absolute nothing to do with the topic at hand. Honestly!

[Double Edge]

To that end should the Americans apologize to the Indians? Should the Chinese for Tibet? Why should todays people apologize for our forefathers? How far back in History do we need to go back before people stop saying sorry for others?

To be frank I found BM's rationale to be ludicrous & arbitrary, just smacks of colonial hangover syndrome. chip on your shoulder nonsense.

Britain isn't acting unilaterally today but is building a global consensus unlike the days of yore.

And yet, we continued to target his HQ and HQ is defined as wherever he gave orders.

The term they use is command & control centre. Those can be targetted.

But which ones ? is the question.

Gaddafi isn't in charge of operations so he would not normally be in a C & C centre. He would be in a bunker somewhere, does that make him fair game ?

I'm not sure, there seems to be some leeway here in how C & C is interpreted.

We keep hearing demands from MP's to place the attorney general's legal advice in the public library of the commons but to date it has yet to appear.

[Officer of Engineers]

I'm not sure, there seems to be some leeway here in how C & C is interpreted.

The decision to continue offensive combat operations remains Qaddafy and Qaddafy alone.

[Double Edge]

Certainly, if he were to stop hostilities tomorrow that would be the end of it. This i would posit is the main goal of the resolutions. The ICC would then chase after him.

But there is still enough deliberate ambiguity to say...

We are not targetting Gaddafi per se but if he happens to be in the wrong place at the wrong time don't blame us.

Is this mere political spin ? don't know.

The resolutions are silent on this point. All we have are extrapolations from the core three clauses that permit use of force.