A minor border incident

[Fuchs]

This is an ugly world...but others wouldn't be less so.

The Islamic Republic of Iran appears unimpressed by U.S. complaints about a minor incident at the U.S.-Mexican border. 25 U.S. soldiers were reportedly killed and 14 more wounded when Iranian attack helicopters opened fire on U.S. soldiers in a Texan border village a few days ago.

The Iranians have helped the Mexican government to suppress the rising drug cartels in a decade-long civil war. There are repeatedly complaints about how little the U.S. does about its huge pool of drug abusers who create the world's greatest demand for drugs and pull Mexico deeper and deeper into drug crime-driven chaos.

U.S. officials complain that the attack on the border post was unprovoked and dozens of other U.S. troops have supposedly already been killed by such attacks since summer, but the media in Iran and the entire Muslim world dismiss this as typical propaganda claim of a government that isn't trustworthy due to its tolerance of drug demand and the overt corruption of its political elite.

Iranian representatives declare that they will investigate the incident.
A report is expected to be finished once nobody cares any more.

[Stan]

Hey Fuchs,
Could you provide a link to the source ? I can't find anything on this article other than being linked to your blog.

[Fuchs]

It's mine.

The source of the satire shouldn't matter (nor should its accuracy - it's all about assuming a different perspective.

[carl]

Fuchs:

You forgot the part about how the CIA is training, funding and directing the cartels.

[Stan]

... it's all about assuming a different perspective.

I 'd go along with you on the perspective approach but my thoughts are that such an incident would be far more fatal than a bunch of political bantering if 25 US Soldiers were actually killed on the Mexican border regardless of where the helicopters originated from.

I'll bite, but I don't know where you're going with this. Pakistani soldiers die on the border following US aircraft bombing ?

[Hippasus]

Great post! In mature normative ethics, the actors on either side of an action don't make a difference. If we believe it is wrong for actor A to commit action X against actor B, then it doesn't become right is we swap the actors. Of course, this is a big problem when you're really powerful and want to do whatever the hell you want without regard to others.

[carl]

Great post! In mature normative ethics, the actors on either side of an action don't make a difference. If we believe it is wrong for actor A to commit action X against actor B, then it doesn't become right is we swap the actors. Of course, this is a big problem when you're really powerful and want to do whatever the hell you want without regard to others.

We don't know the details of what happened yet, but I would call attention to the following.

In Big Boys Rules, if you are an army that allows people who are shooting at guys who can call up fighter bombers and Apaches to hang around in your vicinity; you got no complaint coming if your people get killed.

[Stan]

Great post! In mature normative ethics, the actors on either side of an action don't make a difference. If we believe it is wrong for actor A to commit action X against actor B, then it doesn't become right is we swap the actors. Of course, this is a big problem when you're really powerful and want to do whatever the hell you want without regard to others.

Thanks for the lesson on ethics and philosophy as if everything was simply based on right and wrong when dealing with world super powers and politics

Although I'm waiting for Fuchs to support his post, I gotta wonder where you're going. I don't have to look far to see that applied ethics in this theoretical scenario just won't work other than in a text book.

[Fuchs]

Great post! In mature normative ethics, the actors on either side of an action don't make a difference. If we believe it is wrong for actor A to commit action X against actor B, then it doesn't become right is we swap the actors. Of course, this is a big problem when you're really powerful and want to do whatever the hell you want without regard to others.

I never got much positive reaction from anglophone audiences for my older satire about Iran invading Ireland as part of its war of terror, though.

...piss enough of the world off, eventually they gang up you because you're a bully.

That didn't work for Germany so well either.

[Fuchs]

I 'd go along with you on the perspective approach but my thoughts are that such an incident would be far more fatal than a bunch of political bantering if 25 US Soldiers were actually killed on the Mexican border regardless of where the helicopters originated from.

I'll bite, but I don't know where you're going with this. Pakistani soldiers die on the border following US aircraft bombing ?

It's in the news, apparently not at your place?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...rder-post.html

[Stan]

It's in the news, apparently not at your place?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...rder-post.html

Thanks, but that was the story I thought you were using in your theoretical version above.

I heard it on the news last night and I get your point (if that's where you were going with this border issue).

Now, I won't go calling it "indiscriminate" and I'm sure some soldiers or airmen are in deep Kimchi as we correspond