Saudi Arabia beheads female activist in public (unverified)

[Mopsus]

If you’re against beheadings, you’ll want to protect your country from the influence of beheaders, while encouraging anti-beheaders in other countries. “Actually, conservatives are the REAL postmodernists” isn’t going to catch on.

And if you're a nationalist, you have to respect "national cultures" and that different people's have different ethics, deserve different standards of human rights etc. You're not allowed to criticise other countries because of the stupid nonsense that is "sovereignty", something dreamt up by national elites that enjoy exploiting their captive populations without criticism.

I don’t think it’s that people deserve different standards of human rights, but that people are best organized according to the ethical system they consent to; even if that ethical system seems morally bankrupt, trying to force a different one on them is necessarily going to make you a tyrant. It just makes practical sense to focus on human rights within your own community - and that implies that you would be wary of outsiders whose values differ from yours.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

I can't figure out the sequence of these updates from another site, but it may be that this story is fake news.

I hope it turns out this way.

[Karpatsky]

If you’re against beheadings, you’ll want to protect your country from the influence of beheaders, while encouraging anti-beheaders in other countries. “Actually, conservatives are the REAL postmodernists” isn’t going to catch on.

And if you're a nationalist, you have to respect "national cultures" and that different people's have different ethics, deserve different standards of human rights etc. You're not allowed to criticise other countries because of the stupid nonsense that is "sovereignty", something dreamt up by national elites that enjoy exploiting their captive populations without criticism.

I don’t think it’s that people deserve different standards of human rights, but that people are best organized according to the ethical system they consent to; even if that ethical system seems morally bankrupt, trying to force a different one on them is necessarily going to make you a tyrant. It just makes practical sense to focus on human rights within your own community - and that implies that you would be wary of outsiders whose values differ from yours.

Consent is meaningless and immeasurable in such autocratic and repressive societies. The 'tyranny' of the liberator is subjectively but definitely better than the real tyranny of the oppressor. Some values shouldn't be tolerated, especially when they infringe on the rights of others.

[Mopsus]

Consent is meaningless and immeasurable in such autocratic and repressive societies. The 'tyranny' of the liberator is subjectively but definitely better than the real tyranny of the oppressor. Some values shouldn't be tolerated, especially when they infringe on the rights of others.

I’ll grant that nations with the means to do so ought to intervene in order to put a stop to genocide or some similar humanitarian disaster, but are you seriously suggesting that NATO should invade Saudi Arabia and imprison its royal family?

[Karpatsky]

Consent is meaningless and immeasurable in such autocratic and repressive societies. The 'tyranny' of the liberator is subjectively but definitely better than the real tyranny of the oppressor. Some values shouldn't be tolerated, especially when they infringe on the rights of others.

I’ll grant that nations with the means to do so ought to intervene in order to put a stop to genocide or some similar humanitarian disaster, but are you seriously suggesting that NATO should invade Saudi Arabia and imprison its royal family?

Morally and ideally speaking, yes. There are of course pragmatic concerns, but they must be separated from the moral concerns so to not lose our moral compass to political necessity, as so many have.

[Mopsus]

I’ll grant that nations with the means to do so ought to intervene in order to put a stop to genocide or some similar humanitarian disaster, but are you seriously suggesting that NATO should invade Saudi Arabia and imprison its royal family?

Morally and ideally speaking, yes. There are of course pragmatic concerns, but they must be separated from the moral concerns so to not lose our moral compass to political necessity, as so many have.

Ideally, the House of Saud would be deposed by its own subjects.

[Cassandra]

That,  killing Yemeni children, and threatening Canada with a terrorist attack prove that they are a really good country for use to be allies with.

As long as Ghawar is still pumping strong, this is the way it's going to be, unfortunately. Luckily (or perhaps not), Saudi Arabia may not have much more room to grow oil production.

[Greedo punched first]

Saudi Arabia is not our friend. Their government funds terrorists who attack us.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Still can't find a confirmation. It appears, for now, she's in prison.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

Only bad when ISIS thugs do it. Saudi-Arabia is our ally.

Honestly, this regime should be sanctioned to hell and not be considered an ally. They're sponsoring terror and spread the worst ideology of Islam. Saudi-Arabia is far worse then Iran when it comes to democracy, civil rights and liberties. Especially their treatment of women is a disgrace and incompatible with western values. When do our leaders recognize this?

Saudi Arabia is not our friend. Their government funds terrorists who attack us.