Peace, Granny. Every movement winds up with some extremist wankers that drown out the more sensible arguments of the majority. I'd be happy to discuss it with you sometime, although I'm probably not "up to date" on the state of feminist thought, at this point.
I'm sure we've said tsk tsk about that somewhere. Probably in the UN Human Rights Commission.And my point was, in 1916 would we have wanted a foreign country telling us that we were living in the dark ages and to get with the program, act more like them? That was my point.Marty, when one side doesn't follow the rules, they get lectured; the UN doesn't have real teeth, but it's a start. . It is not our place, as much as we may want to, tell other countries what their culture must be. 100 years ago we didn't allow women to vote and very few women were considered fit to drive, it was still perfectly
acceptable for a husband to beat the shit out of his spouse and a woman's swim suit still included stockings.
I somehow doubt if we would have appreciated Sweden or China coming in and telling us to get with the program. Sometimes being exposed to new ideas through diplomacy or the cocktail hour afterward does more good than finger wagging and criticism.
Sinking to the level of a member nation that is not following the rules does NOT actually solve the problem.
The whole idea of the Geneva conventions was to make a level battle condition, similar to the past systems of organized combat. Examples are the greek method of phalanx on phalanx at an agreed upon battlefield, or the set rules of Napoleonic warfare between masses of musketmen.
When one side decides to not follow the rules, only an idiot would keep to them without question or debate.
and while some men did indeed swim naked, the more dignified suit wasn't too far off a woman's suit.
Tell that to the gay people being hung on a monthly basis in countries like Iran.
Rather, it is a joke to have the United States which invaded Iraq and Afghanistan and Russia which is bombing civilians in East Aleppo to be on the so-called UN Security Council.
I'm sure we've said tsk tsk about that somewhere. Probably in the UN Human Rights Commission.And my point was, in 1916 would we have wanted a foreign country telling us that we were living in the dark ages and to get with the program, act more like them? That was my point.Marty, when one side doesn't follow the rules, they get lectured; the UN doesn't have real teeth, but it's a start. . It is not our place, as much as we may want to, tell other countries what their culture must be. 100 years ago we didn't allow women to vote and very few women were considered fit to drive, it was still perfectly
acceptable for a husband to beat the shit out of his spouse and a woman's swim suit still included stockings.
I somehow doubt if we would have appreciated Sweden or China coming in and telling us to get with the program. Sometimes being exposed to new ideas through diplomacy or the cocktail hour afterward does more good than finger wagging and criticism.
Sinking to the level of a member nation that is not following the rules does NOT actually solve the problem.
The whole idea of the Geneva conventions was to make a level battle condition, similar to the past systems of organized combat. Examples are the greek method of phalanx on phalanx at an agreed upon battlefield, or the set rules of Napoleonic warfare between masses of musketmen.
When one side decides to not follow the rules, only an idiot would keep to them without question or debate.
and while some men did indeed swim naked, the more dignified suit wasn't too far off a woman's suit.
Tell that to the gay people being hung on a monthly basis in countries like Iran.
Short of bombing and then occupying a foreign country because you don't like its culture, what would you do instead? It's something. That was my initial point. The UN doesn't have teeth, but at least it's a forum for countries to be made aware that their behavior isn't "universally accepted."I'm sure we've said tsk tsk about that somewhere. Probably in the UN Human Rights Commission.And my point was, in 1916 would we have wanted a foreign country telling us that we were living in the dark ages and to get with the program, act more like them? That was my point.Marty, when one side doesn't follow the rules, they get lectured; the UN doesn't have real teeth, but it's a start. . It is not our place, as much as we may want to, tell other countries what their culture must be. 100 years ago we didn't allow women to vote and very few women were considered fit to drive, it was still perfectly
acceptable for a husband to beat the shit out of his spouse and a woman's swim suit still included stockings.
I somehow doubt if we would have appreciated Sweden or China coming in and telling us to get with the program. Sometimes being exposed to new ideas through diplomacy or the cocktail hour afterward does more good than finger wagging and criticism.
Sinking to the level of a member nation that is not following the rules does NOT actually solve the problem.
The whole idea of the Geneva conventions was to make a level battle condition, similar to the past systems of organized combat. Examples are the greek method of phalanx on phalanx at an agreed upon battlefield, or the set rules of Napoleonic warfare between masses of musketmen.
When one side decides to not follow the rules, only an idiot would keep to them without question or debate.
and while some men did indeed swim naked, the more dignified suit wasn't too far off a woman's suit.
Tell that to the gay people being hung on a monthly basis in countries like Iran.
And what has that gotten? It makes people feel like they are "doing something", when they aren't doing something.
Short of bombing and then occupying a foreign country because you don't like its culture, what would you do instead? It's something. That was my initial point. The UN doesn't have teeth, but at least it's a forum for countries to be made aware that their behavior isn't "universally accepted."I'm sure we've said tsk tsk about that somewhere. Probably in the UN Human Rights Commission.And my point was, in 1916 would we have wanted a foreign country telling us that we were living in the dark ages and to get with the program, act more like them? That was my point.The whole idea of the Geneva conventions was to make a level battle condition, similar to the past systems of organized combat. Examples are the greek method of phalanx on phalanx at an agreed upon battlefield, or the set rules of Napoleonic warfare between masses of musketmen.
When one side decides to not follow the rules, only an idiot would keep to them without question or debate.
and while some men did indeed swim naked, the more dignified suit wasn't too far off a woman's suit.
Tell that to the gay people being hung on a monthly basis in countries like Iran.
And what has that gotten? It makes people feel like they are "doing something", when they aren't doing something.
When the candidate has a platform that violates existing human rights guidelines such as the Geneva Convention, the UN does indeed have the right to pipe up. They did make a big deal of apologizing for "butting in."Why the UN Rights Commission is getting involved in American elections?
Sometimes they're intrusive
