Re: The Bigger, Badder, Even More Serious Thread

by Pettytyrant101 Fri Mar 18, 2011 12:05 am

That is true Kafria, thi one is a little different becasue of the backing of the Arab League nations. But I doubt the motivations in the West are much different than they ever where, to secure oil. I doubt any rescue of the Libyan people will come without strings attached in the long term.

But it is a good question, where do we draw the line.
I think the question implies a certain way of looking at it though. Who is 'we'? For me 'we' should be the civilian population of the world, not a country. The solution lies in the UN and in a single World Government and Court.

For myself I think there needs to be a far greater use of the UN in these situations. I would have all members states provide 20% of their overall armed forces at any time to the UN's use. That way the UN would have a standing army and all that would be required for it to go into action would be the majority vote of the members.
It is necessary therefore that the membership be as large as possible and that no one country have the power of veto over a democratic majority vote by the others.
The next thing the UN needs is a proper charter agreed by the members which states what it is the UN does. A list of basic human rights should be drawn up by which a government of a country can be legally held to account in a World Court.
Use of force should be sanctioned with a vote and only in cases where a government refuses all other attempts to desist in harming its own population or failing to meet the basic human rights.

That's my ideal UN anyway!

by Pettytyrant101 Fri Mar 18, 2011 2:36 pm

I saw an interview earlier with the leader of UKIP (United Kingdom Independence Party)- they are on a bit of a poll surge in England it seems and even came second in a recent English by-elections.
The main thrust of his argument was that the UK needs to leave the EU. The reason for this is not economical or political but idealogical. He believes it is wrong that UK law should be decided in Brussels. He was particularly strident on the theme of how unfair and undemocratic it was for laws in England to be set in another country.
Now up until the limited powers granted by devolution, as a Scot I have lived most of my life in a country where the law of the land is made another country (England) from a Scottish perspective it makes little difference if that country is England or Belgium.

But it did strike me as very typically English that they would complain so vehemently about a situation they have imposed on others for several hundred years without a second thought.

by Squach Fri Mar 18, 2011 9:52 pm

Red Nose Day today!
Watching the programme (Until im sent to bed Mad

)
Hoping this will work!
Not... Mad

Technology...

by Kafria Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:46 pm

Moving my comic relief / bankers reply here from the You Tube thread!!

I do wonder how some people (like the bankers) respond to this sort of thing. I end up increadibly torn, feeling I should do more. I am also amazed at the generosity of the kids in school. As I think I have said before this coastal area is a deprived area and yet everytime we do something so many of them pitch in and help fund raise! In the constant bashing the young seem to get (nothing new I know) it is lovely to be reminded regularly how good a lot of the next generation are!

by Pettytyrant101 Fri Mar 18, 2011 10:56 pm

Hear! Hear!
My little brother is in fifth year and their school has being loads for the last months or so raising funds, but its not juts Comic Relief theyve raised money for many local charities the year through and get nothing like the praise for it they should. I'm sure its the same the country over, tales of violence and gangs make good copy but it doesn't mean its the norm. There's a hell of a lot good kids out there.

by Kafria Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:05 pm

Well it's easy to become bogged down in the negative! When you spend 70% of your time dealing with the few who are a problem you can forget that most are good. I do enjoy the times the kids remind me they are okay. Had a conversation with my form (moving onto sixth form in the summer and so wondering what to do in the future) and one in all seriousness asked why I taught as I didn't seem - to her - to enjoy it. Brought me up short I have to say! Laughing

Explained why i do enjoy the job and so reminded myself in the process!

by Kafria Fri Mar 18, 2011 11:54 pm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-12792637

Interesing analysis article to follow up from our conversation about where the US chooses to intervene Petty Very Happy

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Mar 19, 2011 1:09 am

Good article. I watched the press conference tonight given by the Libyan government spokesman. The translator was excellent. He translated various Middle-eastern languages first into English then into Libyan, and he translated all the answers into English and whatever language the questioner spoke.
Say what you like about despicable genocidal regimes, but they know how to organize a press conference!

by Pettytyrant101 Sat Mar 19, 2011 2:12 am

74 million raised on the night. Not half bad.

by Pettytyrant101 Sun Mar 20, 2011 2:11 pm

I see the Arab League is chickening out. What's the matter with them?
Now they are saying they only wanted a no fly zone to protect civilians not bombing of tanks or troops.
But correct me if I am wrong Saddams tanks bombing cities is endangering civilians surely? And therefore they have to be taken out.

by Brian Boru Sun Mar 20, 2011 3:17 pm

What I never tought I would see is d French leading d way, "French leading d way," I tink dat is a very unFrench like ting to do.

by Ringdrotten Sun Mar 20, 2011 3:22 pm

by Pettytyrant101 Sun Mar 20, 2011 3:45 pm

They actually used the phrase "The French are gung-ho" on the news earlier!! Not something you hear every day (or ever).
But then have France not invested a lot in Libya over the years and in Gadaffi for that matter?
I wonder how much of the willingness of the West to act is an attempt to get back some of the vast moral ground they have lost by supporting such regimes for decades.

by Brian Boru Sun Mar 20, 2011 5:16 pm

Its much simpler dan dat, its d teritorial imperative and mans need for fences, boundaries and border lines. Its all you boys seeinn who can piss d farthest up d pole, just like dags. I tink you evolved from dags not monkeys.

by Pettytyrant101 Sun Mar 20, 2011 6:18 pm

Dunno about that. When Thatcher was in power it wasn't exactly nice and gentle. Falklands, the Miners, Poll Tax riots, Guildford Six and plenty more.
She seemed keener than most to piss highest.

by Brian Boru Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:24 pm

Probably peanis envy or shes one of dos hermaphrodites.

by Biffo Banks Sun Mar 20, 2011 7:56 pm

Ooo Muggie Futchar! Suxxy! Embarassed

by Pettytyrant101 Sun Mar 20, 2011 8:06 pm

I dare say Biffo, given your, um, handsome features, that from your perspective that is probably true.

by Kafria Sun Mar 20, 2011 9:44 pm

Hmmmmm.... this is the bigger badder and more serious thread isn't it?

Yes right place..... for a minute I thought I must be in Needlehole or Girlie gossip!

(and for your info, women have always been capable of being harder hearted and more pragmatic when something really needs doing and the men around are not up to the task!)

by Pettytyrant101 Sun Mar 20, 2011 11:17 pm

I quite agree. Women are far more ruthless than men, far less likely to cling to notions of honour, loyalty or anything else if something has to be done. And I say this from observation of working in a female dominated industry. Women can be merciless with one another in a way men generally are not, if only because men would have resorted to open displays and therefore more likelihood of violence settling the matter. Women's ways are far worse!
I'm not sure how deep the instinct runs still in the human female animal but in many other female mammals, faced with starvation a mother will often eat her own offspring in order to increase her chances of serving and being able to breed again in the future. Would a modern women put in the same situation be that practical? From a purely numbers perspective it is the best solution.
Big, bad and serious enough?

by Kafria Sun Mar 20, 2011 11:22 pm

okay! now i'm a bi scared!!

Yes women can be b*****s, and once they have made up their mind about something or someone can be increadibly ruthless

On your other point I don't think Squach would provide much decent nutrition to be honest, so I don't think it would be worth the energy of catching her first!! Laughing

by Pettytyrant101 Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:17 pm

Scottish rape law is under criticism right now. Basically the police are putting a lot of charges of rape in and very few convictions are happening. Now rape is notoriously difficult to get convictions but in Scotland there is a law which is making it much worse.
The thing is the law in question was designed to prevent miscarriages. It comes down to no single piece of evidence can be submitted unless it has corroborating evidence. So you can't say "this was the gun he used I saw it" but you can say "This was the gun he used I saw it and his fingerprints were found on it", but there has to be something else.
Applied to rape cases however all it means is its almost impossible for the Court to have any evidence because there is rarely any corroboration for it. So the cases never get to court.
But how do you solve it? Without corroborating evidence how can a jury and a judge know months later which of two people is telling the truth?
Is it not just the nature of the crime that makes it hard to prosecute people for committing it?

by Brian Boru Tue Mar 22, 2011 12:28 am

Its a horrible situation: do ya convict a potentially innocent fella/girl or do ye let a possible victim go witout justice. There was virtually no rape in d north of Ireland as d Paramilitaries just kneecap the accused. My bruders wont let a fella near me, so I can't wait to get to uni next year to get a bit o freedom.

In case anyone is confused wit d name, Brian Boru is a hero of mine, I am a girl cat

.

by odo banks Tue Mar 22, 2011 1:13 am

Mmm.... does anyone recall "Bob" from The Black Adder, perchance?

by Pettytyrant101 Tue Mar 22, 2011 6:09 pm

To get back the very much more serious matter of the rape laws. Another oddity, and one I have always thought profoundly unfair, is that the accuser in rape (most commonly a man) has no anonymity, the women is protected but the accused has their name in the public domain.
Mud sticks, no smoke without fire etc. If you are wrongly accused surely it cannot be fair that your name can be associated with rape before you have been tried in Court?
By all means release the name after a person is found guilty but not before.
How does it work in other countries? It seems much the same is some given the Wiki leaks founder is accused publicly of rape and he hasn't been given a fair haring yet either.