This is an archived comment posted by Yaacov. You can view the original
here. If AIDS or any other disease could be dealt with as simply as terrorists and tyrants, then it should be, but that's not the case.
But it can Alex. A few changes to international patent laws, a few changes to the US's policy on funding family planning organisations and AIDS could be dealt with at least as effectively as the US is dealing with terrorism. Not to mention all the other diseases out their for which their are effective treatments or vaccinations, which are expensive only because of restrictive regulations.
Whether people are being killed by someone or dying because the way to prevent their dying is being blocked by someone doesn't change the fact that people are dying, and it can be prevented. If you make the sanctity of human life a central tenet of your ethics, then you have little choice but to admit that the American policies surrounding HIV/AIDS (and farm subsidies) are just plain wrong.
I'm actually interested in what you think of Dumbya's oh-so-libertarian refusal to stop agricultural subsidies in the US. And I'm interested in whether you believe in intellectual property, and what you think the ideal IP regulations should be.
And yes, Saddam is a genocidal tyrant. Which is a good argument that he shouldn't be in power, but it's not a good argument that the US should unilaterally remove him. If that's their basis, than they're being hypocritical as all hell, and they're committing themselves to removing the leaders of at least twenty other countries world-wide, a commitment they won't follow up on. [ Parent ]
| 
