Society/Culture Are you an ethical hypocrite?

[Sweet Jesus]

Have a read of Robert Gates' memoir. Gethelred

One of the things he writes about is Afghanistan.
He recounts a CIA meeting where they discuss whether or not to continue supporting the Mujahideen. (that was late 70's).

Are we talking about Australia?

How specifically did Australia support the mujahideen?

You can't say? Where does that leave your argument?

 

[Number37]

Are we talking about Australia?

How specifically did Australia support the mujahideen?

You can't say? Where does that leave your argument?

Clearly you don't know anything about the Afghanistan wars.
Which makes it even more bizarre how you so staunchly defend the indefensible.

The Mujahideen weren't the Afghan govt. They were the forces opposing the Russian backed Afghan govt who, eventually, with the support of the coalition of the willing (that's us) overthrew the Russian backed Afghan govt.
The Russian backed Afghan govt were supported by more than 100,000 Russian forces, on the ground, in Afghanistan.
Our mine clearing efforts were in support of paving the road to Kabul so that the Mujahideen could topple the Russian backed Afghan govt.
Gorbachov withdrew most of the Russian forces, but the Russians maintained a stranglehold on Kabul until it too fell to the Mujahideen.

 

[Number37]

Clearly you don't know anything about the Afghanistan wars.
Which makes it even more bizarre how you so staunchly defend the indefensible.

The Mujahideen weren't the Afghan govt. They were the forces opposing the Russian backed Afghan govt who, eventually, with the support of the coalition of the willing (that's us) overthrew the Russian backed Afghan govt.
The Russian backed Afghan govt were supported by more than 100,000 Russian forces, on the ground, in Afghanistan.
Our mine clearing efforts were in support of paving the road to Kabul so that the Mujahideen could topple the Russian backed Afghan govt.
Gorbachov withdrew most of the Russian forces, but the Russians maintained a stranglehold on Kabul until it too fell to the Mujahideen.

When Kabul fell there was an internal power struggle amongst Afghan warlords for control of the country.
In that struggle we backed the group that came to be known as the Taliban, who aren't really Afghanis, but they suited our interests, so we helped them take full control.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Clearly you don't know anything about the Afghanistan wars.
Which makes it even more bizarre how you so staunchly defend the indefensible.

The Mujahideen weren't the Afghan govt. They were the forces opposing the Russian backed Afghan govt who, eventually, with the support of the coalition of the willing (that's us) overthrew the Russian backed Afghan govt.
The Russian backed Afghan govt were supported by more than 100,000 Russian forces, on the ground, in Afghanistan.
Our mine clearing efforts were in support of paving the road to Kabul so that the Mujahideen could topple the Russian backed Afghan govt.
Gorbachov withdrew most of the Russian forces, but the Russians maintained a stranglehold on Kabul until it too fell to the Mujahideen.

So what specifically did Australia do to support the mujahideen? Did Australia fund or arm them? Was there a combat role?

How come you can't/won't answer this question directly? It's central to your argument.

Australia is worse than the Taliban because we removed land mines? That's your argument?

I'm quite happy for land mines to be removed from conflict zones. Would you prefer they're left in place?

 

[Number37]

So what specifically did Australia do to support the mujahideen? Did Australia fund or arm them? Was there a combat role?

How come you can't/won't answer this question directly? It's central to your argument.

Australia is worse than the Taliban because we removed land mines? That's your argument?

I'm quite happy for land mines to be removed from conflict zones. Would you prefer they're left in place?

Yes we did fund & arm them.
Like all the other countries we provided "aid" $$$ to Pakistan, with the expectation that Pakistan would arm them.


If you can get access to this article, read it for a full rundown of how the US & its allies funded the Mujahideen:
Afghanistan's Slide toward Civil War James Rupert World Policy Journal Vol. 6, No. 4 (Fall, 1989), pp. 759-785

If you want to learn more about Pakistan's role, here's Human Rights Watch article that will open your eyes.

https://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/afghan2/Afghan0701-02.htm


If you need to tie in Australia to Pakistan to the whole proxy US/Soviet war bullsh*t, here's us spruiking our "humanitarian" aid to Pakistan

https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id:"library/prspub/WMH10"

Australia and Afghanistan

Australia broke off diplomatic ties with Afghanistan after the Soviet intervention in 1979 and suspended its aid program. However, it has made substantial contributions to relief programs for Afghan refugees in Pakistan. Since 1980, over $70 million has been provided, mostly in food aid. In 1992-93, Australia provided $3.8 million to the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Assistance to Afghanistan.

Apart from humanitarian assistance, perhaps the most important contribution Australia has made has been the provision of mine clearing experts to the UN Mine Clearance Training Team (UNMCTT). It has participated in the program since its inception in July 1989 along with several other countries including the US, New Zealand, France, Pakistan, Norway, UK, and Turkey. In 1993, 12 Australian army officers were left to train, supervise and monitor the progress of Afghans in mine clearing techniques, the other countries having withdrawn. On 8 June the Australian Government announced the provision of another $200,000 to assist the UNMCTT. The Australian team returned in mid-July 1993.

You can also google
Operation MIAS
Felix Sater Leslie (who gave the CIA the serial number and location of 10 of the Stinger Missiles they were trying to buy back through Operation MIAS)
...tonnes and tonnes of other resources. Open your eyes.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

Yes we did fund & arm them.

Show me specific evidence for this claim.

So far, we've established only that Australia cleared land mines and gave humanitarian aid to refugees.

How come you don't have straightforward evidence for your claim?

 

[sherb]

For me, I cannot avoid my own ethical hypocrisy when it comes to animal welfare and my own habit of eating them.

Same.

 

[The Passenger]

Re: meat consumption - I eat a less than I used to, and avoid pork & octopus completely based on an arbitrary 'intelligence ranking' which I'm sure would struggle to stand up to intense scrutiny.

Studies show octopus' intelligence lowers when marinaded in garlic and butter then thrown on a BBQ.

 

[Number37]

Show me specific evidence for this claim.

So far, we've established only that Australia cleared land mines and gave humanitarian aid to refugees.

How come you don't have straightforward evidence for your claim?

There's no evidence that anyone gave anything to the Mujahideen.
Nobody ever gave them nothing.
We just gave them some rice and flour.
Miraculously there is evidence of the US trying to buy back missiles they gave to Pakistan that an arms dealer located in the hands of Afghani warlords.

While we were clearing landmines we accidentally took some selfies at Mujahideen lookouts for AWM just so people wouldn't think we were helping the Mujahideen coz we would never help the Mujahideen. Rice & flour was our contribution.



Also miraculously HRW didn't find any weapons, they found toy replicas of actual US army weapons, all over Afghanistan....fell off the back of truck.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

There's no evidence that anyone gave anything to the Mujahideen.
Nobody ever gave them nothing.
We just gave them some rice and flour.
Miraculously there is evidence of the US trying to buy back missiles they gave to Pakistan that an arms dealer located in the hands of Afghani warlords.

While we were clearing landmines we accidentally took some selfies at Mujahideen lookouts for AWM just so people wouldn't think we were helping the Mujahideen coz we would never help the Mujahideen. Rice & flour was our contribution.
View attachment 1274744


Also miraculously HRW didn't find any weapons, they found toy replicas of actual US army weapons, all over Afghanistan....fell off the back of truck.

It's the central premise of your argument but you can't substantiate it.

Am I wrong?

 

[Number37]

It's the central premise of your argument but you can't substantiate it.

Am I wrong?

We were only clearing mines for them because it was our civic duty. We had nuffin to do with any of that overthrowing govts and taking over the the whole country. Nuffin to do with that at all. Rice and flour and clearing mines. Nothing to see here.

And
Not just a premise but a 'central' premise.

As you say that they are soooooooooooooooooo bad why are we clearing mines for them?
Also...clearing mines isn't helping them, or is it?
It's a bit of grey area when you go out of your way to not help someone and they win a war or overthrow a govt that is backed by the Russians.
No connection between them coincidentally defeating our idealogical enemies and us definitely not helping them. No link between the 2 at all.
We had no interest in the Russians being defeated, or them defeating the Russians, so we definitely weren't helping them. We were just there because we are s f'n awesome. Right?

F we are amazeballs.

So f'n amazeballs that we went on to help East Timor out of the goodness of our heart, because that's just what we do. Only have to look at our awesome record of helping the First Nations people of our country. White Australia was us helping Indigenous folk, we never stood to gain any benefit, it was all for them. Because we so f'n awesome. Stolen Generation was a favour in the true Australian way.


Or maybe it's just my ethical hypocrisy because I don't contort myself into all kinds of knots to excuse what I would otherwise consider to be sh*tty behaviour.

And I have to confront even more of my ethical hypocrisy because I am living here and not there when I am criticizing the govt here.

Coz that's how ethical hypocrisy works, other people can pick and choose your ethics for you. They also get to pick when and how they apply those ethics and ethical hypocrisy allows them to dismiss what would otherwise be their own ethical hypocrisy, which they may or may not have.

Amiright?

 

[Sweet Jesus]

We were only clearing mines for them because it was our civic duty. We had nuffin to do with any of that overthrowing govts and taking over the the whole country. Nuffin to do with that at all. Rice and flour and clearing mines. Nothing to see here.

And
Not just a premise but a 'central' premise.

As you say that they are soooooooooooooooooo bad why are we clearing mines for them?
Also...clearing mines isn't helping them, or is it?
It's a bit of grey area when you go out of your way to not help someone and they win a war or overthrow a govt that is backed by the Russians.
No connection between them coincidentally defeating our idealogical enemies and us definitely not helping them. No link between the 2 at all.
We had no interest in the Russians being defeated, or them defeating the Russians, so we definitely weren't helping them. We were just there because we are s f'n awesome. Right?

F we are amazeballs.

So f'n amazeballs that we went on to help East Timor out of the goodness of our heart, because that's just what we do. Only have to look at our awesome record of helping the First Nations people of our country. White Australia was us helping Indigenous folk, we never stood to gain any benefit, it was all for them. Because we so f'n awesome. Stolen Generation was a favour in the true Australian way.


Or maybe it's just my ethical hypocrisy because I don't contort myself into all kinds of knots to excuse what I would otherwise consider to be sh*tty behaviour.

And I have to confront even more of my ethical hypocrisy because I am living here and not there when I am criticizing the govt here.

Coz that's how ethical hypocrisy works, other people can pick and choose your ethics for you. They also get to pick when and how they apply those ethics and ethical hypocrisy allows them to dismiss what would otherwise be their own ethical hypocrisy, which they may or may not have.

Amiright?

Longer posts don't conceal the fact you can't substantiate the central claim of your argument.

You've had ample opportunity to do that, but you can't.

 

[sdfc]

37 put a vest on and blew up the thread.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

37 put a vest on and blew up the thread.

I don't mind the debate but he simply can't support his most important claim.

I'm not sure anything more needs to be said.

 

[sdfc]

I don't mind the debate but he simply can't support his most important claim.

I'm not sure anything more needs to be said.

Good luck with the west is always worserer debate.

 

[Number37]

Longer posts don't conceal the fact you can't substantiate the central claim of your argument.

You've had ample opportunity to do that, but you can't.

You haven't even read any of the links that I provided.
I don't need to present an argument that satisfies you.


But let's stay on topic.

I used to think you were just unwilling to think critically, because it didn't suit your argument at the time. That's not the case at all. You are simply incapable of thinking critically. This thread is another example of it.

You claimed that you are anti animal cruelty and yet the ONLY thing that you presented in support of that position is that you don't like people eating dogs. Everything else you said is the opposite of anti-animal cruelty.
Until the mental gymnastics you are notorious for kicked in and hey presto I'm gunna call it "ethical hypocrisy".

 

[Sweet Jesus]

You haven't even read any of the links that I provided.
I don't need to present an argument that satisfies you.


But let's stay on topic.

I used to think you were just unwilling to think critically, because it didn't suit your argument at the time. That's not the case at all. You are simply incapable of thinking critically. This thread is another example of it.

You claimed that you are anti animal cruelty and yet the ONLY thing that you presented in support of that position is that you don't like people eating dogs. Everything else you said is the opposite of anti-animal cruelty.
Until the mental gymnastics you are notorious for kicked in and hey presto I'm gunna call it "ethical hypocrisy".

Substantiate your argument or suck it up.

Who do you think you're kidding here? Stop bluffing.

I know you're full of hot air. Everyone can see that. You can't just pretend.

You're a tryhard who doesn't know anything.

Sit down, you pretentious imbecile.

 

[Number37]

Substantiate your argument or suck it up.

Who do you think you're kidding here? Stop bluffing.

I know you're full of hot air. Everyone can see that. You can't just pretend.

You're a tryhard who doesn't know anything.

Sit down, you pretentious imbecile.

LOL

I presented an argument.
It doesn't satisfy you.
You're here demanding that I give you something that satisfies you and I'm the pretentious imbecile.

It's hot air that you don't have any ethics except when the time comes to condemn other people?
Your own words mean something else. What a surprise.

I am the tryhard trying to convince people that I am ethical hypocrite when reality is that I don't have ethics.

Sounds a lot like that time Bruce said Rioli "elevated himself between 2 players" when he could have just said he jumped.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

LOL

I presented an argument.
It doesn't satisfy you.

You've been unwilling to substantiate your central claim.

You don't have a leg to stand on.

 

[Number37]

You've been unwilling to substantiate your central claim.

You don't have a leg to stand on.

According to you.

Also according to you...you have animal cruelty ethics that don't apply to you & apparently means you're an ethical hypocrite not just someone without ethics.
The monkeys playing tambourines in your head must have worked overtime on that one.

 

[Seeds]

I thought you'd welcome a thread on ethical hypocrisy.

It's a perfect platform for you to tell everyone how the Australian government is worse than the Taliban.

As proof, racism is bad.

Case closed.

So since you started this thread are you actually going to give us an example of where you were an ethical hypocrite?

the not eating meat one is bullsh*t. Its like saying my greatest weakness is that Im a perfectionist.

 

[Sweet Jesus]

So since you started this thread are you actually going to give us an example of where you were an ethical hypocrite?

the not eating meat one is bullsh*t. Its like saying my greatest weakness is that Im a perfectionist.

Do you think I care about your criteria?

 

[Number37]

If you have to front up to the ethics committee for any professional organisations, anywhere in the world, if they find you haven't met your ethical obligations do they say;
(A) No wukkas sister, we'll put it down as "ethical hypocrisy", off you toddle. Or
(B) You gave such a good speech about your ethics and that is the important thing. Verba non acta. Or
(C) You unethical mo-fo, pull your head in.

 

[Frank Bunn]

So since you started this thread are you actually going to give us an example of where you were an ethical hypocrite?

the not eating meat one is bullsh*t. Its like saying my greatest weakness is that Im a perfectionist.

The thread had potential as a discussion of moral hypotheticals. It seems the OP had no interest in that.

 

[Seeds]

The thread had potential as a discussion of moral hypotheticals. It seems the OP had no interest in that.

Agree. Need the op to kick start this but its not really happening.