Frazzled wrote:I didn't miss it, its just asininely stupid and borderline racist. "The little peon 3rd world country elects a man I disagree with, so they're no better than ISIL." Thats a pretty big
you to the Filipino people who are tired of poverty and druggie warlords, controlling the countryside. Now they have to deal with these wackjobs, which the majority Mindanao Muslims can't deal with-again cutting of heads and gak. But hey they're no better than ISIL.
You're attempting a sleight of hand there, in which you attempt to include all of the Filipino people as part of Duterte's side, lined up against ISIS. The Filipinos are the victims of both groups. The issue is whether Duterte or ISIS are the bigger threat to them.
There's a few thousand Filipino victims of Duterte already, through extra-judicial killings. Your claim that he was elected and therefore those killings are okay is absolutely flying rodent gak, to be frank. Becoming president doesn't give you the right to start murdering people, because holy gak of course it doesn't how is this even a thing I have to point out to you for a second time?
As such, the question becomes one of whether the ISIS threat is more concerning that Duterte. From a crude moral POV, ISIS are worse - they murder more freely and for much weaker reasons. But a real understanding of threat also needs to take in to account the power of each organisation. ISIS may be personally more murderous, but they remain a minority faction operating in one part of the country. On the other hand Duterte controls the government and has broad support, this gives him vastly greater power to murder for a much longer period of time.
Assessing which of these two is a greater threat to the Filipino people is an exercise is body count maths I didn't particularly want to enter, I can see arguments for both sides. But without entering that debate, I think it is important that arguments like the one you've attempted here, that it's okay to murder your citizens if you were elected to the presidency, and thinking it is bad when this happens in another country is 'borderline racist' is a plainly ridiculous argument.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Galas wrote:Frazzled has a point. Is all wonderfull in western land, but theres parts of the world that don't follow our rules and one can argue aren't in the same "historic period" as us.
We can't expect from them the same ethics and morals as us. Obviously, I'm not endorsing what they do. But I can understand why they do it.
I understand why they do it. When a problem lingers people become impatient for a quick solution, and confuse brutality with effectiveness. That's hardly unique to the developing world.
But just because we can understand why they do it, that doesn't mean we should pointing out that it is immoral, and destined to fail. And at no point should we ever think that Fraz's argument that Duterte was elected therefore its okay is at all sensible, because god damn.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Frazzled wrote:Evidently, nonWestern democracies have to match a certain standard for some before they are better than ISIL.
"A certain standard" being "don't murder thousands of your own people with extra-judicial killings".
I never considered it a particularly high hurdle to pass.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
No, I didn't say that. Please fething read what people actually fething say.
I said I didn't know which was scarier, because 'scarier' relates to threat, to which group has the power to hurt more people. "Worse", your word, has no meaning, and is a junk way to review the issue.
Thats directly comparing one of the worst terrorist entities in the last 100 years with an elected government. Does Dutarte suck? Potentially.
Potentially? How can you possibly be unsure about this? 6,000 dead and fraz isn't quite sure if he's a bad dude. What happens at 10,000 dead, do you go to 'probably'?
Dutarte goes away when his time expires.
The idea that a leader can murder citizens in his own country, and then leave office and everything just goes back to normal with no lingering effects on systems in the country is hopelessly naive.
After all, following this logic, the US which has turned extrajudicial killings into a high tech video game, would be no better than ISIL. Thats patently false and offensive.
Actually US strikes on terrorists follow judicial process. There's plenty of scope to improve and enhance that process, but claiming it doesn't exist is ignorant.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Galas wrote:But personally, I think that unstable countrys can't be expected to have a western peacefull society.
Sure, but there remains some basic minimums, which Duterte's govt is clearly nowhere near.
