EWWWW! My state borders Saudi Dakota!

College Confidential Community
61

<p>
[quote]

Invading other nations based on false accusations is injustice.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again with a strawman fallacy. C'mon, you can do better than this. So you're saying that because nations make mistakes, we should simply ignore them and let them continue?</p>

<p>You seem to believe that every time a Western nation effs up, that we should give other nations a "commit one human rights violation free card." </p>

<p>
[quote]
Whats wrong with Canada? At least Canada isnt ruled by the Bush dynasty.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Right. The "Bush Dynasty" that will end in 2008.</p>

62

<p>I forgot JamesN was a troll for a second...</p>

63

<p>
[quote]
So you're saying that because nations make mistakes, we should simply ignore them and let them continue?</p>

<p>You seem to believe that every time a Western nation effs up, that we should give other nations a "commit one human rights violation free card."

[/quote]
</p>

<p>My point is that America has no right to intevene in other people's affairs, since America isnt the kingdom of the world. Although American efforts are admirable, they tend to go for less serious threats. There is severe injustice in numerous countries, do you expect America to deal with them all? I prefer dealing with the more dangerous threats, which America has failed to do.</p>

64

<p>No, it's that you guys think these people are living in oppression and what not. If they were having such an awful time, they would've fleed their country. People there are so carefree for the most part, and they don't think that they're missing out a lot because they can't live here. I know people who have visited the united states, lived here for so long, and go back to live there. Some people visit and would do anything to live there, but can't because of money issues. I mean, you guys think they're suffering every day, but for the most part, people are living there just fine. I hate how Americans feel they have to intervene in everyone's goddamn business. America wants to go change every country into the same country they are, but some countries simply want to live as they have.</p>

65

<p>I never said that I'm necessarily for US intervention in every matter.</p>

<p>But, just because that's the case, doesn't mean that I can't say, "North Korea sucks. China sucks. Syria sucks... etc."</p>

66

<p>sarorah,</p>

<p>I'm sure some people love living in Saudi. But I bet it sucks being an imported maid from Southeast Asia who can't leave. ;)</p>

<p>Oh oops, I didn't go there.</p>

<p>And you know, lots of people try leaving North Korea. You know what happens to them? They get tortured and brought back. Then if they try again, they get killed. Sounds like a good, wholesome regime to me.</p>

67

<p>Lets not forget that black women were sent to a white man's jail so that they can be raped.</p>

<p>Lets also not forget that blacks (men and women alike) were publicly lynched on a regular basis.</p>

<p>I know that thinks have gone better since then, but we shouldnt be critisizing rights of other nations because of it. After all, we learned from our mistakes. </p>

<p>Also, I doubt a democracy would be stable in Iraq, because for a democracy to me stable, the middle class must be larger than the lower class. This is why US and UK are stable democracies, while Bangladesh and Russia are not.</p>

68

<p>Again with the North Korea. . North Korea isn't exactly like S.Arabia, Saudi Arabia is probably doing more expulsions than not allowing people to leave. I never heard of imported maids actaully, I just saw poor people working there as maids so they can live. It didn't look like they were being oppressed and beaten or anything.</p>

69

<p>"Lets not forget that black women were sent to a white man's jail so that they can be raped."</p>

<p>Stop making things up. I have never heard of this, and there is no proof of this. Bye now.</p>

70

<p>
[quote]
Now, I know you guys might roll your eyes, and be like, omg give me a break, but constantly "poking fun" at islamic countries and how they deal is just really not necessary. But hey, this is a free forum, and even though it says somewhere in the rule book to be a little respectful of other people's cultures/religions, i'm not the one to enforce any such rules and I won't waste my time arguing again.

[/quote]

Your argument makes no sense. We are not required to respect human rights violations just because they are part of another country's culture. Do you think Europeans in 1860 viewed slavery as acceptable just because the US said it was legal?</p>

<p>Not all slaves were Nat Turners. Most had dealt with slavery their whole lives and just decided that was the ways things had to be. Maybe it's true most Saudi women are not actively protesting. It still doesn't mean they wouldn't appreciate some added human rights.</p>

<p>I think the OPs title is fine and actually pretty funny. It's amazing South Dakota actually was the home to one of the most powerful senators of the Democratic party just a few years ago.</p>

71

<p>Are you required to interfere, to run the country as you see fit?</p>

72

<p>If comparing South Dakota to Saudi Arabia makes me a redneck, then I'm PROUD TO BE A REDNECK! I never voted for Bush! Ever since the Katrina fiasco, I would have paid good money to shout obscenities at him! Oh, and I refuse to see <em>Fahrenheit 9-11</em> as long as Bush is in office, because I'd only get into fistfights with his supporters.</p>

<p>By the way, only the people on this forum will see what I wrote. My post won't be shown to everyone all over the world.</p>

<p>I see NO reason to apologize for this thread. I stand by everything I've said here.</p>

73

<p>
[quote]
Again with the North Korea. . North Korea isn't exactly like S.Arabia, Saudi Arabia is probably doing more expulsions than not allowing people to leave. I never heard of imported maids actaully, I just saw poor people working there as maids so they can live. It didn't look like they were being oppressed and beaten or anything.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It's pretty common knowledge amongst those who follow human trafficking that Saudi Arabia is one of the worst known offenders. What, because you never saw it, it means it isn't happening? That's like saying that because I've never seen a sweatshop in Los Angeles that they don't exist.</p>

<p>Sources:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/050613/2005061338.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/050613/2005061338.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_trafficking_in_Saudi_Arabia%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_trafficking_in_Saudi_Arabia&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2005/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.state.gov/g/tip/rls/tiprpt/2005/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

74

<p>
[quote]
Are you required to interfere, to run the country as you see fit?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I believe that if largescale murder is occuring, as in Darfur, then yes, interference is necessary. Right now, Saudi by no means should have interference occur. However, we shouldn't be silent either.</p>

<p>People seem to forget that compliance has allowed crimes such as the Armenian genocide, Holocaust, clitoridectomy in Africa, Darfur massacres, Rwanda, Somalia, and other horrible things to go unabated. Why should the world just stand by and let it happen? To "respect" culture? No way.</p>

75

<p>Well, Ari, sorry for kinda making this entire argument. I like your posts, most are logical. I mean, I'm not agreeing to perpetuate human abuse. Let's see it from a different viewpoint, the lack of rights, agreed by other female Muslims. </p>

<p>Letting a girl not drive is not a complete lack of human rights (i mean, even in the United States; "driving is a privelege, not a right"), but you're right that they are given fewer freedoms than other countries. From another female muslimah living in the US:</p>

<p>"The whole not driving thing is not really to oppress them, but as an added protection. If a girl started driving by herself in Saudi Arabia, she would be more prone to guys acting 'immature' and if she got into an accident, she'd have to pull over. And a guy would have to help her, and from that point she's vulnerable to anything pulled by the guy, and just seeing a girl drive by herself would cause a lot of unwanted attention. Plus, what's so bad with letting someone chauffeur you around and not having to deal with driving in 98 common degree weather every day. Hey, at least we don't have to deal with traffic."</p>

<p>Even if you gave the right immediately, I don't think as many as you think would start driving by themselves.
They're not treated the same obviously, and I guess it's great that the US wants to help everyone, but I still don't think the US has the right to interfere and change the way every country is done. Sure, if you want to stop US Trafficking, and want to stop the "human abuse", go, but the US shouldn't change the way the entire country is run the way it believes it should be run. Freedoms are very different in the view of Saudi Arabia versus in the view of the United States, but the "lack" of some may not even be seen that way in SA. . and I don't think that this "lack" should be criticized, and constantly nagged about and urged to change. Some of the "lack" of freedoms are done for the better, in their eyes. It's almost like changing the way a person has run their entire life, just because you don't like the way they've carried it so far. Some things are done for disciplinary matters, some decisions/acts they carry out is "immoral" in your eyes, and may not be the best choice, but it's not like the US is the ultimate supreme perfect country, able to tell other countries how to be run.</p>

76

<p>sarorah,</p>

<p>You've been putting words in my mouth the whole time. I'm not advocating for US direct involvement. I'm not saying that we should roll in, guns brandished, and tell the Saudis "let your women drive or die."</p>

<p>But it's perfectly reasonable to criticize and say that "x action" is wrong. Culture is not sacrosanct.</p>

<p>Oh, and your stated arguments against women driving are incredibly poor. A woman can be mistreated when she's ANYWHERE. Women in Japan don't drive, and they still get treated like dirt on trains. And as for the women not driving in the heat argument, that's also silly. Last time I checked, the kinds of cars driven by Saudis usually have a little thing called A/C.</p>

<p>
[quote]
It's almost like changing the way a person has run their entire life, just because you don't like the way they've carried it so far.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Why is this bad? Most Hutus and Tutsis have spent most of their lives killing one another. What's so bad about this change?</p>

<p>Most Southerners in the Jim Crow South spent their lives thinking it was okay to discriminate against blacks.</p>

<p>Your argument is a classic example of argumentum ad antiquitatem (e.g. it's always been that way, so let's keep it!) This is the logic that the Japanese use to maintain discrimination against Koreans, and how Americans used to argue against freeing slaves. Bad logic.</p>

<p>
[quote]
but it's not like the US is the ultimate supreme perfect country, able to tell other countries how to be run.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Of course it isn't. Who said that? I love how whenever moral relativists are faced with a criticism of another country, their immediate response is always, "Well, the US isn't person, nyah nyah!" So what? It doesn't mean that what another place is doing isn't WRONG.</p>

77

<p>Ari, are you saying it's wrong not to let women drive? Are you saying it's wrong that they make every person dress modestly in their own country? And yes, I think that if someone has been living their entire life obeying their disciplinary rules they think needs to be followed, that there isn't really a reason to interact without just cause. Your just cause is that there is a lot of human abuse in Saudi Arabia, right? And that it needs to be stopped, right? Isn't there lots of human abuse in the United States too, in fact all over the world? Doesn't the US have a lot of problems as is, and yet it still feels the need to worry about the "wrongs" other countries are doing? You see, I think SA has a better way of handling things, take the following:</p>

<p>"Saudi Arabia, the world's largest oil producer and Washington's closest Arab ally for more than a half century, follows a strict interpretation of Islam that calls for the death penalty for murder, rape, drug trafficking and armed robbery."</p>

<p>I mean, this may just be my opinion, but I think a country that follows such standards is generally a more moral and reliable country, and to let the United States, that's had problems with drugs and rapes for years to interfere with such is not necessary at all, regardless if they think that such rules are human oppression or not. </p>

<p>This is why a statement like "EWW SAUDI DAKOTA", is an unneccessary bs statement that is not even funny to begin with.</p>

78

<p>i think i found out why you have no vader love...</p>

<p><a href="http://www.patrickruffini.com/archives/vader.jpg%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.patrickruffini.com/archives/vader.jpg&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

79

<p>sarorah: and when those rules lead to children burning alive because they aren't wearing proper attire to walk outside?</p>

80

<p>
[quote]
Ari, are you saying it's wrong not to let women drive? Are you saying it's wrong that they make every person dress modestly in their own country?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The not driving is ALMOST understandable. The human trafficking is digusting. </p>

<p>Either way, IMPOSING something upon a society is wrong. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Isn't there lots of human abuse in the United States too, in fact all over the world?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yep. Two wrongs make a right. </p>

<p>
[quote]
to let the United States, that's had problems with drugs and rapes for years to interfere with such is not necessary at all, regardless if they think that such rules are human oppression or not.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh, I'm sure there's NO rape in Saudi Arabia. I'm sure that there's no drugs either.</p>

<p>Oops, nevermind. You're wrong.</p>

<p>Rape:
<a href="http://gvnet.com/humantrafficking/SaudiArabia.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://gvnet.com/humantrafficking/SaudiArabia.htm&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/07/saudi_assault_mobile_misuse_case/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/01/07/saudi_assault_mobile_misuse_case/&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2001-01/14/article3.shtml%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.islam-online.net/English/News/2001-01/14/article3.shtml&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Considering how many public beheadings there are of rapists and drug traffickers, you'd think they'd have none. They don't.</p>

<p>By the way, morality in Saudi Arabia only extends to Wahabbists. God help you if you're a Jew, Christian, or other non-Muslim.</p>