 |
|
 |
|
| KONY 2012 |
|
Forum Index - Serious Business - Hot off the Press - KONY 2012 |
|
|
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 09:03:03 AM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by BlumiereIt isn't our fault for thinking like that, it's yours.
So it's our fault that everyone hates us. Of course. It can't ever be that people who hate us might possibly be slightly misinformed, no, it's all our fault.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 09:39:47 AM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by The Secret ExitOriginally posted by BlumiereIt isn't our fault for thinking like that, it's yours.
So it's our fault that everyone hates us. Of course. It can't ever be that people who hate us might possibly be slightly misinformed, no, it's all our fault.
Except it is our fault. The US has a history of impeding in other countries business, typically when we have something to gain, and even when it's not wanted.
I imagine other countries are not happy with that.
EDIT: I was going to list some examples from recent history to back up my point, but as is typical, I can't recall any of it when I actually need to.
I'll edit them in when I remember them, I guess. DX
----------------------------------------
EDIT AGAIN: I realized I haven't given any input on the topic in the OP.
As far as I can tell, Invisible Children might need direct outside-government intervention (not necessarily the US; don't jump to conclusions) to accomplish their goal. Their goal is to spread awareness to the people of Uganda, correct? Well, according to this web page, only ~12% of Ugandans have the internet.
That means that even if everyone in that country with internet learned about this through this campaign(?), that's less than an eighth of the population. And that's highly unlikely to happen.
Outside-government intervention might be needed because I honestly don't think this message will get out to enough Ugandans to make a difference.
|
| Last edited on 2012-03-10 10:12:19 AM by TRS. |
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 01:00:29 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
I think it's obvious at this point that none of us are really gonna get anywhere by just screaming at each other. There is no good argument for either side. On the one hand, we are all the same species and we should look out for each other and attempt to aid those of us who are in need. On the other hand, as long as we are okay, who are we to step on other people's toes. Likewise, the people who we would be helping would too have the same views, just for and against being helped.
When it comes down to the matter of helping people, I think we should honestly just shut up and do something. Those helping, and those being helped. Laziness merits no reward and pride only helps yourself. And I for once cannot stand any form of egotism or selfishness. Yes, we can sit down and get all nitpicky and say "hur hur hur, it's not egotism it's not getting in the way of people!", to which I would just roll my eyes and just tell you to shut up.
In life, there will be people for and against every single little teeny tiny insignificant thing. Many people seem to forget that, myself included. I just find it sad when people's morality only stretches as far as a 10-mile radius. If it didn't then there may be a little more good in the world.
The benefits of being a quiet person: You don't talk about doing stuff, you just do it.
Regardless, I think I'm done on this thread, as I said at the start of this post, none of us are just going to get anywhere by screaming at each other. If you wish to help - do it. If you don't - stay out of our way.
That is all.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 01:45:23 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by Sniggerb0bblenone of us are just going to get anywhere by screaming at each other.
No one is screaming, it's called "discourse". People disagree, and the only way to change anyone's mind is to say what you believe and why and hope others are receptive to it.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 02:05:37 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by Sniggerb0bble If you wish to help - do it. If you don't - stay out of our way.
Trying to decide whether this is equivalent to the "with us or against us" threat.
Helping people's good. It's awesome. I'm totally in agreement that people locked in their monkey sphere, uncaring about anyone they don't know personally, are selective sociopaths. It's quite disgusting.
HOWEVER.
We can't just charge in places with our moral indignation. Reflection is an awesome thing, necessary so we don't make hasty conclusions and do something we regret. Outside forces stopping this warlord is something that needs to be discussed as to whether it's the right thing to do or not. If Iraq's any indication, going in and killing warlords can make a situation worse than it was before. Care needs to be taken if we actually want to help, rather than harm. Running in guns blazing hardly ever helps.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 04:38:30 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
I sorta refrained from letting out my opinions on the US intervening for a reason, I know it's obvious that Kony is bad news, but I can't be objective until I know more facts about this case.
Specifically:
How much of a threat does people of Uganda see Kony?
How all the people affected feel about US intervention?
And if we losing more lives sending US troops to Uganda rather than having them fight in Iraq?
I really can't decide what side of the fence I'm on till I get some more answers. I hope my post can encourage users here to think a little more objectively too.
|
| Last edited on 2012-03-10 06:21:38 PM by Vinnyboiler. |
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 05:40:03 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/uganda/9131469/Joseph-Kony-2012-growing-outrage-in-Uganda-over-film.html
I'd suggest researching Kony by yourself and ignoring that video.
@TRS "Foreign Policy since 1990" is a pretty good list of times we've impeded on the sovereignty of another country.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 05:43:08 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
I agree Kony is bad, but I think this movement is, quite frankly, ridiculous.
1. Invisible children, the "charitable" group that started the movement, only spends 31% of doantions on anything "charitable"
2. Invisible children, the "charitable" group that started the movement, lacks a helpful plan. They intend on using that 31% on lobbying the US government to fight.
3. Let's say we find Kony. We're still going to have to fight the LRA, aka the army of children. I think killing children over 1 man is kind of stupid, even if it means liberating some children.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 06:54:29 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by Maxxhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/uganda/9131469/Joseph-Kony-2012-growing-outrage-in-Uganda-over-film.html
I'd suggest researching Kony by yourself and ignoring that video
Thanks for the link, I pretty much looked passed the video as I was watching it (I'm well aware of the fact that the video was basically well made propaganda).
This line strikes me out as interesting:
“There has not been a single soul from the LRA here since 2006. Now we have peace, people are back in their homes, they are planting their fields, they are starting their businesses. That is what people should help us with.”
This sort of lines up with my suspicions that Kony may not be as big as a threat as people make him out to be. He's not a fire that you need to call to put out, he's the aftermath that only the most annoying of neighbours would be bothered about helping.
I can understand everyone feeling the need to do something, but the problem is way too small that it doesn't need help. The 2011 Japan earthquake was a good example of when to help a neighbouring country, they needed and asked for help and we gave them it. Uganda is not asking for help, and as it is said in the article “What that video says is totally wrong, and it can cause us more problems than help us,”.
TL,DR: Chillax, Uganda are doing fine, no need in intervene.
|
| Last edited on 2012-03-10 06:55:37 PM by Vinnyboiler. |
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 07:54:37 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by BlumiereQuoteSure, this happens in another country, and sure, maybe that country doesn't want anyone else in there, but if they're not going to do everything in their power to stop it, then what good are they really doing?
Again you're showing me how elitist people from the United States are. You acknowledge the fact that their problems have nothing to do with you and that they didn't even want you there but still insist that it's perfectly fine to just send some soldiers over to "fix" their problems.
How is that quote relevant to elitism? Nothing I've said in this thread has been elitist. People are being tortured, and forced to kill. Someone should do something about it because those people don't deserve or need to go through this. Uganda needs to consider helping these people on all levels, and if they have to compromise with other countries to take care of it, then maybe they should consider. As long as it's actually helpful, and maybe it's not. It's something Uganda should look at cause it is their problem. But they should try. That is clearly all I meant by that. Again, you seem to be overlooking specific parts of my post. You're making it hard to take you seriously when you say I'm being elitist, when I have not once been so.
Originally posted by BlumiereQuoteIf anyone, not just the US, can do something about it then they should.
No one ever does do anything, though. Australia, for example, is not like that. Uganda isn't our country nor is it directly related to us or the Crown, so why should we even care?
You might should care because these people are in great pain. Should not matter where they come from. I care because I believe in fellow man, most certainly not the US Government. Politics are an issue, but we shouldn't just not even try to find a way. The UN is where it's at. Now, ironically, you sounds elitist.
Originally posted by BlumiereQuoteYou made it sound like the US is ignorant enough to think that.
My apologies for being blunt, but a lot of misinformed US citizens are ignorant enough to think that. We do see you, as Maxx said, as an imperialist nation who flaunts their military as a political asset, and believe me when I say it's something a lot of Australians hate you for. Sending a bunch of men in uniform holding guns to fix a country or nation doesn't solve anything, it only escalates the conflict until it reaches such a gruesome point that it falls on itself.
Just think Afghanistan. News reporters, bloggers and Youtubers are already making claims that the US is only getting involved for a return in resources. People outside the US aren't associating your interference with good intentions, they're automatically assuming you're doing it for all the wrong reasons.
It isn't our fault for thinking like that, it's yours.
Again, sorry for being blunt about it, but I find that it's better to get a point across without sugar coating a post to avoid offence. I'm observing a US as a whole and acknowledge that not everyone living within their borders have the mindset I described above.
My problem is not how you see the US Government or Military. My problem is that you think that all Americans think this way. There are a lot of Americans who think the US is the best country in the world, which is incorrect in unfathomable ways. There are also a lot of Americans, like me, who are clearly aware of the issues the US has, along with our often corrupt government. You label the US as "you" to me, and I don't know how Australian Media portrays the American everyman, but I assure you, there are lots of Americans who are aware of the US and it's flaws. Think beyond the media. Make judgements for yourself. Like I said, it's insulting you automatically label me as elitist when I have not once been so. What I am saying is that something should be done to help these innocent people. If other countries need to get involved then they should come up with a solution through the UN to take on the issue with great care if it is helpful and in the best interest of Uganda, who in turn, should do all they can to provide help to their people.
Hopefully you finally understand what I'm saying. In fear you haven't though, I am done here. This political talk just stresses me out. I'll just stick to SMW Hacking.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-10 09:20:18 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by Yoshi MasterHow is that quote relevant to elitism?
Because to be an elitist is to classify your country as a ruler among everybody. You're trying to rule what happens in Uganda even though they don't want your help. You're an elitist.
QuoteNow, ironically, you sounds elitist.
I just said that Australia doesn't get into situations where they try to take over another country with military to fix their problems, and now I'm ironically an elitist? You're not a good debater, are you?
QuoteMy problem is not how you see the US Government or Military. My problem is that you think that all Americans think this way.
"I'm observing the US as a whole and acknowledge that not everyone living within their borders have the mindset I described above."
QuoteYou label the US as "you" to me, and I don't know how Australian Media portrays the American everyman, but I assure you, there are lots of Americans who are aware of the US and it's flaws.
"I'm observing the US as a whole and acknowledge that not everyone living within their borders have the mindset I described above."
QuoteIf other countries need to get involved then they should come up with a solution through the UN to take on the issue with great care if it is helpful and in the best interest of Uganda, who in turn, should do all they can to provide help to their people.
See, now you're being an elitist and contradictory. You're telling me that the US had every right to just storm into Uganda with their 100 soldiers and bypass the UN whereas if another country wants to get involved they have to hold a meeting with each other at a summit? Why can't we just, say, chuck in a couple of hundred soldiers like the US did?
Throughout this whole thread you've backed up your argument that the US has every right to help a country in need even if they don't need help, but now you're saying countries should go through the UN and use a method in the best interest in the UN to help. I'll assume you haven't even read this entire thread properly, because that was exactly what I said to do a few of my posts ago. In fact, most of your arguments were settled already throughout the course of this thread.
To reiterate, what you are doing is not in the best interest of Uganda and Maxx's article:
Makes it very clear that the US involvement is only aggrivating the Ugandan people rather than giving them peace, exactly as I described would happen.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-11 07:21:36 AM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by Maxx
Oh hey doesn't that almost make the whole movement moot.
Also the video was made by Americans. I didn't know this, but had a very strong suspicion.
|
| Last edited on 2012-03-11 07:21:55 AM by TRS. |
|
| Posted on 2012-03-15 08:53:06 AM |
Link | Quote |
|
|
First I thought "KONY 2012" was a Brony Con at 2012. But after I watched the video I realized how serious it was.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-15 12:25:40 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
^lol
Anyways, everyone is making fun of this. It is serious. I think that basically all of middle africa is corrupt crap.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-17 03:08:54 AM |
Link | Quote |
|
So I was going to watch this video over spring break, but we watched it in social studies today and stuff.
Our teacher did a bit of research and stuff and found that only around 37 or so % of the profits from the "action kits" go to Africa.
Also someone during study hall was just googling randomly and found that the guy who made this video was arrested for public masturbation. Apparently he was drunk.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-03-20 12:29:42 AM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by mockingodAlso someone during study hall was just googling randomly and found that the guy who made this video was arrested for public masturbation. Apparently he was drunk.
From what I've heard, there were no drugs of any sort in his system. He just spontaneously went nutty.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-05-08 04:50:30 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
|
I think Kony's dead, from what my dad told me...
|
|
| Posted on 2012-05-15 01:06:34 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Nice bump there.
Anyways, yeah, I think that little "public masturbation" incident tells us something about this whole thing...
|
|
| Posted on 2012-05-16 05:20:19 AM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by Blittle McNilsenAnyways, yeah, I think that little "public masturbation" incident tells us something about this whole thing...
The logical fallacy of ad hominem is strong in this one.
|
|
| Posted on 2012-05-16 05:06:26 PM |
Link | Quote |
|
Originally posted by BlumiereOriginally posted by Blittle McNilsenAnyways, yeah, I think that little "public masturbation" incident tells us something about this whole thing...
The logical fallacy of ad hominem is strong in this one.
Identifying a personal trait negatively is not always ad homineim/ a fallacy. His misconduct may be indicative of behaviors or traits that would make him attention-mongering or psychologically unbalanced. Thus, when analyzing the validity of his statements, you can account for bias/etc.
If John is on trial for killing a black man, saying "John did it because he wets his bed" is a logical fallacy. Saying "John did it because he hates black people" is not.
|
| Last edited on 2012-05-16 05:07:29 PM by Maxx. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Index - Serious Business - Hot off the Press - KONY 2012 |
|
|
 |
|
 |
The purpose of this site is not to distribute copyrighted material, but to honor one of our favourite games.
Copyright © 2005 - 2013 - SMW Central
Legal Information - Link To UsTotal queries: 29
|
|
|
|
