Quote:
Originally Posted by MH
That's cheap objectivism that avoids the issue of political and ideological motivations.
|
At least it is objective.
Look, I don't particularly trust my own UK government with their nukes, I am similarly unsure about the USA government. On the other hand, the Israeli government seems IMO to be every bit as dangerous as the Iranian government, and just as ideologically motivated. Neither can I forget that USA is the only government with a demonstrated will to actually use such weapons.
The double standards that are being sold under the white sheet of 'world security' betray the malevolent intentions of the governments that propose it. My point is, if they are so serious that Iran cannot have nuclear weapons, they cannot argue that they should not have theirs for all the same reasons. But y'know I have said all this before, and the arguments against it basically revolve around me being naive, well whatever. The irony with that is I am clearly being more cynical than anyone who believes their own government is correct in this matter. Of course the ironies here just keep coming don't they?
Regards, Sam.
P.S. By the way, I had never heard of objectivism as in philosophy before, thank you for giving me the impetus to read upon it. I myself am a little further to the left, but the basis in reality is quite err... realistic?
Cheers!