Total Posts:40|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Duterte insults Obama

000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2016 11:37:40 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Earlier today, Duterte referred to Obama as a "son of a whore," insisting that he would swear during their meeting if the president questioned his ruthless anti-drug campaign. Obama essentially dismissed the insult, but determined that a meeting with duterte would be unproductive at this time.

Can someone please tell me why this uncouth piece of excrement is leading the philippines?

http://www.nbcnews.com...
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
thett3
Posts: 14,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2016 11:48:59 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
Because he's making the Philippines great again by cleaning up the streets. Already, around 2000 criminals are dead--nobody cares if he says mean words. He is performing an extremely valuable service to his country.

He has no filter and says what's on his mind. When he told the UN to f*ck off, I died laughing. He's probably the greatest living politician, with the possible exception of Donald Trump
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2016 11:54:53 PM
Posted: 3 months ago
91% approval rating: http://www.cnn.com...

Obama (and every other politician) should be begging him for counsel and advice, not coming over to lecture him on the rights of the people poisoning *his* country. The Philippines is not Obama's to rule, and Duterte realizes this which is why he's angry when Obama acts as if this is 1944 and they're still a colony.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 12:16:12 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/5/2016 11:37:40 PM, 000ike wrote:
Earlier today, Duterte referred to Obama as a "son of a whore," insisting that he would swear during their meeting if the president questioned his ruthless anti-drug campaign. Obama essentially dismissed the insult, but determined that a meeting with duterte would be unproductive at this time.

Can someone please tell me why this uncouth piece of excrement is leading the philippines?

http://www.nbcnews.com...

Because they elected him....
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 12:16:21 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/5/2016 11:54:53 PM, thett3 wrote:
91% approval rating: http://www.cnn.com...

Obama (and every other politician) should be begging him for counsel and advice, not coming over to lecture him on the rights of the people poisoning *his* country. The Philippines is not Obama's to rule, and Duterte realizes this which is why he's angry when Obama acts as if this is 1944 and they're still a colony.

I suspect that you don't fully appreciate the value of due process and proportionality ... and that's probably owed to juvenile complacency and a failure of imagination.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 12:36:25 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 12:16:21 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/5/2016 11:54:53 PM, thett3 wrote:
91% approval rating: http://www.cnn.com...

Obama (and every other politician) should be begging him for counsel and advice, not coming over to lecture him on the rights of the people poisoning *his* country. The Philippines is not Obama's to rule, and Duterte realizes this which is why he's angry when Obama acts as if this is 1944 and they're still a colony.

I suspect that you don't fully appreciate the value of due process and proportionality ... and that's probably owed to juvenile complacency and a failure of imagination.

Why because a foreign politician spoke his mind, insulting your sensibilities? That is juvenile.
thett3
Posts: 14,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 12:43:03 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 12:16:21 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/5/2016 11:54:53 PM, thett3 wrote:
91% approval rating: http://www.cnn.com...

Obama (and every other politician) should be begging him for counsel and advice, not coming over to lecture him on the rights of the people poisoning *his* country. The Philippines is not Obama's to rule, and Duterte realizes this which is why he's angry when Obama acts as if this is 1944 and they're still a colony.

I suspect that you don't fully appreciate the value of due process and proportionality ... and that's probably owed to juvenile complacency and a failure of imagination.

No, the lack of imagination comes in when you assume that our legal structures and norms are automatically applicable to a foreign country with a rampant crime problem.

You have no idea what it's like to live in or lead a third world country and neither do I, so I'm not going to criticize a leader with a 91% approval rating who made his city into the safest in the country. He has the overwhelming support of the only people who matter--HIS people.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 12:43:24 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 12:36:25 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 12:16:21 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/5/2016 11:54:53 PM, thett3 wrote:
91% approval rating: http://www.cnn.com...

Obama (and every other politician) should be begging him for counsel and advice, not coming over to lecture him on the rights of the people poisoning *his* country. The Philippines is not Obama's to rule, and Duterte realizes this which is why he's angry when Obama acts as if this is 1944 and they're still a colony.

I suspect that you don't fully appreciate the value of due process and proportionality ... and that's probably owed to juvenile complacency and a failure of imagination.

Why because a foreign politician spoke his mind, insulting your sensibilities? That is juvenile.

No ... because thett has no reservations about the president's extrajudicial killings, and thinks that it isn't Obama's place to condemn them.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 12:53:35 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 12:43:24 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/6/2016 12:36:25 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 12:16:21 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/5/2016 11:54:53 PM, thett3 wrote:
91% approval rating: http://www.cnn.com...

Obama (and every other politician) should be begging him for counsel and advice, not coming over to lecture him on the rights of the people poisoning *his* country. The Philippines is not Obama's to rule, and Duterte realizes this which is why he's angry when Obama acts as if this is 1944 and they're still a colony.

I suspect that you don't fully appreciate the value of due process and proportionality ... and that's probably owed to juvenile complacency and a failure of imagination.

Why because a foreign politician spoke his mind, insulting your sensibilities? That is juvenile.

No ... because thett has no reservations about the president's extrajudicial killings, and thinks that it isn't Obama's place to condemn them.

They can condemn each other. Big deal. That's what world leaders do. Should I be upset at Obama criticizing the sovereign of another country? It's not like stuff is perfect here ... His fed appointee was abysmal.
someloser
Posts: 1,377
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 12:58:05 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
Whatever one thinks of Duterte's killings, he must be appreciated for dealing such a blow to the faux-clean-seriousness politicians like to dress themselves up with.

If only for that much.

Professional-ness in politics is for people who think "professional wrestling" is the real deal or profit from pretending as much.
Ego sum qui sum. Deus lo vult.

"America is ungovernable; those who served the revolution have plowed the sea." - Simon Bolivar

"A healthy nation is as unconscious of its nationality as a healthy man of his bones. But if you break a nation's nationality it will think of nothing else but getting it set again." - George Bernard Shaw
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 1:00:57 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 12:43:03 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 12:16:21 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/5/2016 11:54:53 PM, thett3 wrote:
91% approval rating: http://www.cnn.com...

Obama (and every other politician) should be begging him for counsel and advice, not coming over to lecture him on the rights of the people poisoning *his* country. The Philippines is not Obama's to rule, and Duterte realizes this which is why he's angry when Obama acts as if this is 1944 and they're still a colony.

I suspect that you don't fully appreciate the value of due process and proportionality ... and that's probably owed to juvenile complacency and a failure of imagination.

No, the lack of imagination comes in when you assume that our legal structures and norms are automatically applicable to a foreign country with a rampant crime problem.

You have no idea what it's like to live in or lead a third world country and neither do I, so I'm not going to criticize a leader with a 91% approval rating who made his city into the safest in the country. He has the overwhelming support of the only people who matter--HIS people.

I don't think that the differences in situations between first and third world countries mean that the former cannot critique the latter or vice versa.

There have got to be some basic standards in regards to how people are treated. Not only is there a legal obligation on the Philippines pursuant to international treaties that it voluntarily joined, but I think there is also a moral obligation, if you think (as I do) that all humans have moral worth that ought to be respected (which should mean that there is a presumption against killing them unless and until their guilt is proven). There is also the constitution of his own country that he is disregarding.

So what if he is popular? At one point, even Hitler had a majority approval rating. That doesn't mean that Hitler was a good leader, that he was a legitimate leader, or that he was a moral leader. Popularity cannot be the sole arbiter of legitimacy; the other factors that I mentioned have roles to play as well.

And I also don't like the idea of suggesting that Obama (or any foreign leader) ought not to criticize other countries' internal politics because such criticism is either "imperialistic," "meddling," etc. This misses the fact that the current world is heavily interconnected. The Philippines' internal stability is essential to America's own interests, particularly in regards to its policy on China. Obama, as the American leader, has every right to comment on things that he feels impact US interests, even if those issues are not just about the US.

Moreover, third world countries criticize the US all the time. If they see fit to criticize our internal politics, turnabout is only fair play. They have no grounds for objecting to others doing what they themselves do.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 1:15:20 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 1:00:57 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 12:43:03 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 12:16:21 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/5/2016 11:54:53 PM, thett3 wrote:
91% approval rating: http://www.cnn.com...

Obama (and every other politician) should be begging him for counsel and advice, not coming over to lecture him on the rights of the people poisoning *his* country. The Philippines is not Obama's to rule, and Duterte realizes this which is why he's angry when Obama acts as if this is 1944 and they're still a colony.

I suspect that you don't fully appreciate the value of due process and proportionality ... and that's probably owed to juvenile complacency and a failure of imagination.

No, the lack of imagination comes in when you assume that our legal structures and norms are automatically applicable to a foreign country with a rampant crime problem.

You have no idea what it's like to live in or lead a third world country and neither do I, so I'm not going to criticize a leader with a 91% approval rating who made his city into the safest in the country. He has the overwhelming support of the only people who matter--HIS people.

I don't think that the differences in situations between first and third world countries mean that the former cannot critique the latter or vice versa.

There have got to be some basic standards in regards to how people are treated. Not only is there a legal obligation on the Philippines pursuant to international treaties that it voluntarily joined, but I think there is also a moral obligation, if you think (as I do) that all humans have moral worth that ought to be respected (which should mean that there is a presumption against killing them unless and until their guilt is proven). There is also the constitution of his own country that he is disregarding.

So what if he is popular? At one point, even Hitler had a majority approval rating. That doesn't mean that Hitler was a good leader, that he was a legitimate leader, or that he was a moral leader. Popularity cannot be the sole arbiter of legitimacy; the other factors that I mentioned have roles to play as well.

And I also don't like the idea of suggesting that Obama (or any foreign leader) ought not to criticize other countries' internal politics because such criticism is either "imperialistic," "meddling," etc. This misses the fact that the current world is heavily interconnected. The Philippines' internal stability is essential to America's own interests, particularly in regards to its policy on China. Obama, as the American leader, has every right to comment on things that he feels impact US interests, even if those issues are not just about the US.

Moreover, third world countries criticize the US all the time. If they see fit to criticize our internal politics, turnabout is only fair play. They have no grounds for objecting to others doing what they themselves do.

And he has every right to criticize Obama. Geesh homer listen to yourself. We can they can't? Talk about hypocrisy.
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 1:20:13 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 1:15:20 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 1:00:57 AM, bsh1 wrote:
I don't think that the differences in situations between first and third world countries mean that the former cannot critique the latter or vice versa.

There have got to be some basic standards in regards to how people are treated. Not only is there a legal obligation on the Philippines pursuant to international treaties that it voluntarily joined, but I think there is also a moral obligation, if you think (as I do) that all humans have moral worth that ought to be respected (which should mean that there is a presumption against killing them unless and until their guilt is proven). There is also the constitution of his own country that he is disregarding.

So what if he is popular? At one point, even Hitler had a majority approval rating. That doesn't mean that Hitler was a good leader, that he was a legitimate leader, or that he was a moral leader. Popularity cannot be the sole arbiter of legitimacy; the other factors that I mentioned have roles to play as well.

And I also don't like the idea of suggesting that Obama (or any foreign leader) ought not to criticize other countries' internal politics because such criticism is either "imperialistic," "meddling," etc. This misses the fact that the current world is heavily interconnected. The Philippines' internal stability is essential to America's own interests, particularly in regards to its policy on China. Obama, as the American leader, has every right to comment on things that he feels impact US interests, even if those issues are not just about the US.

Moreover, third world countries criticize the US all the time. If they see fit to criticize our internal politics, turnabout is only fair play. They have no grounds for objecting to others doing what they themselves do.

And he has every right to criticize Obama. Geesh homer listen to yourself. We can they can't? Talk about hypocrisy.

Where did I ever say Duterte could not criticize Obama?
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
PetersSmith
Posts: 5,819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 1:21:17 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/5/2016 11:37:40 PM, 000ike wrote:
Earlier today, Duterte referred to Obama as a "son of a whore," insisting that he would swear during their meeting if the president questioned his ruthless anti-drug campaign. Obama essentially dismissed the insult, but determined that a meeting with duterte would be unproductive at this time.

Can someone please tell me why this uncouth piece of excrement is leading the philippines?

http://www.nbcnews.com...

Duterte needs to stop acting like a loose cannon before someone decides to actually do something.
Empress of DDO (also Poll and Forum "Maintenance" Moderator)

"The two most important days in your life is the day you were born, and the day you find out why."
~Mark Twain

"Wow"
-Doge

"Don't believe everything you read on the internet just because there's a picture with a quote next to it."
~Abraham Lincoln

Guide to the Polls Section: http://www.debate.org...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 1:33:43 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 12:43:03 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 12:16:21 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/5/2016 11:54:53 PM, thett3 wrote:
91% approval rating: http://www.cnn.com...

Obama (and every other politician) should be begging him for counsel and advice, not coming over to lecture him on the rights of the people poisoning *his* country. The Philippines is not Obama's to rule, and Duterte realizes this which is why he's angry when Obama acts as if this is 1944 and they're still a colony.

I suspect that you don't fully appreciate the value of due process and proportionality ... and that's probably owed to juvenile complacency and a failure of imagination.

No, the lack of imagination comes in when you assume that our legal structures and norms are automatically applicable to a foreign country with a rampant crime problem.

proportionality is something most members of our species intuitively expect ... and death is not commensurate with selling drugs. This isn't about transplanting american legal structures into a foreign country ... it's about applying common sense and imposing some strictures on state conduct.

Also, due process isn't a luxury contingent on good behavior ... it's a legal instrument that renders the power of the state more regular, efficient, and restrained. It's a requirement for effective statecraft in a modern democracy as much as it is a moral imperative. It doesn't go away just because crimes are rampant --- and in fact, one could argue that it's most necessary under such circumstances.

Also, the business of policing human rights violations literally requires foreign oversight. The notion that a government is at liberty to do with its people as it pleases is self-evidently absurd... and I know you don't sincerely believe it.

You have no idea what it's like to live in or lead a third world country and neither do I, so I'm not going to criticize a leader with a 91% approval rating who made his city into the safest in the country. He has the overwhelming support of the only people who matter--HIS people.

lol As it happens, Obama's approval rating in the philippines is also considerably high.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
thett3
Posts: 14,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 1:42:59 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 1:00:57 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 12:43:03 AM, thett3 wrote:

No, the lack of imagination comes in when you assume that our legal structures and norms are automatically applicable to a foreign country with a rampant crime problem.

You have no idea what it's like to live in or lead a third world country and neither do I, so I'm not going to criticize a leader with a 91% approval rating who made his city into the safest in the country. He has the overwhelming support of the only people who matter--HIS people.

I don't think that the differences in situations between first and third world countries mean that the former cannot critique the latter or vice versa.

There have got to be some basic standards in regards to how people are treated. Not only is there a legal obligation on the Philippines pursuant to international treaties that it voluntarily joined, but I think there is also a moral obligation, if you think (as I do) that all humans have moral worth that ought to be respected (which should mean that there is a presumption against killing them unless and until their guilt is proven). There is also the constitution of his own country that he is disregarding.

You'd be better served if you thought of it as a civil war with the drug cartels, similar to what's going on in Mexico...which is exactly what's happening. When you realize that it's war rather than ordinary police activity, the picture becomes a lot clearer.

Sometimes harsh measures are necessary when you're at war, and these people chose their fate. The issue that actually concerns me is how easy it would be to just kill a random person you don't like and have it waved off as vigilante justice.


So what if he is popular? At one point, even Hitler had a majority approval rating. That doesn't mean that Hitler was a good leader, that he was a legitimate leader, or that he was a moral leader. Popularity cannot be the sole arbiter of legitimacy; the other factors that I mentioned have roles to play as well.

And I also don't like the idea of suggesting that Obama (or any foreign leader) ought not to criticize other countries' internal politics because such criticism is either "imperialistic," "meddling," etc. This misses the fact that the current world is heavily interconnected. The Philippines' internal stability is essential to America's own interests, particularly in regards to its policy on China. Obama, as the American leader, has every right to comment on things that he feels impact US interests, even if those issues are not just about the US.

You basically said it yourself here, dude. Obama's interest is in the *stability* of the Philippines, not the wellbeing of its people. An explosive drug war to excise the criminal elements of the country, however necessary it might be, is against US interests.

Dressing it up in language about abstract rights and principles is essentially lying. The US wants stability, and it doesn't care if the status quo was failing the people of our "allies" miserably. Duterte is smart enough to realize this...Obama has his own interests. Obama, the man who kills dozens of civilians every few weeks with drone strikes, has no right to lecture Duterte about due process.

Civilian casualties happen in war. But if we want to compare the human rights records of Obama and Duterte, it's incredibly clear who is worse. Duterte was right to tell him to f*ck off if he was going to come and moralize at him in his own country.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 1:50:43 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 1:33:43 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/6/2016 12:43:03 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 12:16:21 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/5/2016 11:54:53 PM, thett3 wrote:
91% approval rating: http://www.cnn.com...

Obama (and every other politician) should be begging him for counsel and advice, not coming over to lecture him on the rights of the people poisoning *his* country. The Philippines is not Obama's to rule, and Duterte realizes this which is why he's angry when Obama acts as if this is 1944 and they're still a colony.

I suspect that you don't fully appreciate the value of due process and proportionality ... and that's probably owed to juvenile complacency and a failure of imagination.

No, the lack of imagination comes in when you assume that our legal structures and norms are automatically applicable to a foreign country with a rampant crime problem.

proportionality is something most members of our species intuitively expect ... and death is not commensurate with selling drugs.

The vast majority of East Asia, and the government of the United States, would disagree with you: https://en.wikipedia.org...

Why do you assume your perspective is automatically more valid than theirs? Have you ever even been to the Philippines?

This isn't about transplanting american legal structures into a foreign country ... it's about applying common sense and imposing some strictures on state conduct.

Also, due process isn't a luxury contingent on good behavior ... it's a legal instrument that renders the power of the state more regular, efficient, and restrained. It's a requirement for effective statecraft in a modern democracy as much as it is a moral imperative. It doesn't go away just because crimes are rampant --- and in fact, one could argue that it's most necessary under such circumstances.

Not being a puppet government in a country where large areas are controlled by drug lords and criminals is an even bigger prerequisite to becoming a "modern democracy".

Like I told Bsh, there's a reason it's referred to as the drug *war*. It is essentially a state of civil war, with the legitimate and democratically elected government trying to regain control from hostile criminal elements who hold power in much of the country. Obama has no right to criticize Duterte on how he kills enemy combatants. If we want to examine wartime human rights records, it's clear who is worse.

He has no right to moralize at Duterte, who is doing his country a great service. Obama has his own agenda, and both men know it.


Also, the business of policing human rights violations literally requires foreign oversight. The notion that a government is at liberty to do with its people as it pleases is self-evidently absurd... and I know you don't sincerely believe it.

You have no idea what it's like to live in or lead a third world country and neither do I, so I'm not going to criticize a leader with a 91% approval rating who made his city into the safest in the country. He has the overwhelming support of the only people who matter--HIS people.

lol As it happens, Obama's approval rating in the philippines is also considerably high.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 2:02:54 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 1:42:59 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 1:00:57 AM, bsh1 wrote:
There have got to be some basic standards in regards to how people are treated. Not only is there a legal obligation on the Philippines pursuant to international treaties that it voluntarily joined, but I think there is also a moral obligation, if you think (as I do) that all humans have moral worth that ought to be respected (which should mean that there is a presumption against killing them unless and until their guilt is proven). There is also the constitution of his own country that he is disregarding.

You'd be better served if you thought of it as a civil war with the drug cartels, similar to what's going on in Mexico...which is exactly what's happening. When you realize that it's war rather than ordinary police activity, the picture becomes a lot clearer.

No, I don't see targeting and slaughtering often unarmed drug dealers (who may not even be guilty) as war. Sorry.

Calling it war is just an easy way to make it seem okay what is going on. It's away to make yourself comfortable with something that is illegal, unethical, and a gross overreach of executive authority.

So what if he is popular? At one point, even Hitler had a majority approval rating. That doesn't mean that Hitler was a good leader, that he was a legitimate leader, or that he was a moral leader. Popularity cannot be the sole arbiter of legitimacy; the other factors that I mentioned have roles to play as well.

And I also don't like the idea of suggesting that Obama (or any foreign leader) ought not to criticize other countries' internal politics because such criticism is either "imperialistic," "meddling," etc. This misses the fact that the current world is heavily interconnected. The Philippines' internal stability is essential to America's own interests, particularly in regards to its policy on China. Obama, as the American leader, has every right to comment on things that he feels impact US interests, even if those issues are not just about the US.

You basically said it yourself here, dude. Obama's interest is in the *stability* of the Philippines, not the wellbeing of its people.

I think that is only true insofar as you believe Obama is heartless and lacks compassion. Obama's right/legitimacy to speak may be tied to his role in advocating for US interests, but that does not mean that he does not genuinely believe that what Duterte is doing is ethically wrong or violating human rights which Obama believes exists.

Moreover, one could argue that it is in the US's interests to encourage respect for global human rights norms, because these norms create a more stable international environment, and make the internal environments of its partner nations less chaotic. It may be a clinical way of putting it, but Obama does have an interest in the wellbeing of Philippines inasmuch as he has an interest that their basic rights are upheld.

Duterte is smart enough to realize this...Obama has his own interests.

I don't think Duterte realizes this. I think Duterte's thoughts ended at, "Someone dared to speak out against my policies? F*ck them."
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
thett3
Posts: 14,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 2:22:39 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 2:02:54 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 1:42:59 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 1:00:57 AM, bsh1 wrote:
There have got to be some basic standards in regards to how people are treated. Not only is there a legal obligation on the Philippines pursuant to international treaties that it voluntarily joined, but I think there is also a moral obligation, if you think (as I do) that all humans have moral worth that ought to be respected (which should mean that there is a presumption against killing them unless and until their guilt is proven). There is also the constitution of his own country that he is disregarding.

You'd be better served if you thought of it as a civil war with the drug cartels, similar to what's going on in Mexico...which is exactly what's happening. When you realize that it's war rather than ordinary police activity, the picture becomes a lot clearer.

No, I don't see targeting and slaughtering often unarmed drug dealers (who may not even be guilty) as war. Sorry.

Calling it war is just an easy way to make it seem okay what is going on. It's away to make yourself comfortable with something that is illegal, unethical, and a gross overreach of executive authority.

Okay, what would you call it?

It's a central government reasserting its supremacy over bands of criminal warlords. It follows the pattern of tons of wars throughout history. As a weak central state withers away, the power vacuum is filled and when the state wants to reassert power it has to go through them. It's war.


So what if he is popular? At one point, even Hitler had a majority approval rating. That doesn't mean that Hitler was a good leader, that he was a legitimate leader, or that he was a moral leader. Popularity cannot be the sole arbiter of legitimacy; the other factors that I mentioned have roles to play as well.

And I also don't like the idea of suggesting that Obama (or any foreign leader) ought not to criticize other countries' internal politics because such criticism is either "imperialistic," "meddling," etc. This misses the fact that the current world is heavily interconnected. The Philippines' internal stability is essential to America's own interests, particularly in regards to its policy on China. Obama, as the American leader, has every right to comment on things that he feels impact US interests, even if those issues are not just about the US.

You basically said it yourself here, dude. Obama's interest is in the *stability* of the Philippines, not the wellbeing of its people.

I think that is only true insofar as you believe Obama is heartless and lacks compassion. Obama's right/legitimacy to speak may be tied to his role in advocating for US interests, but that does not mean that he does not genuinely believe that what Duterte is doing is ethically wrong or violating human rights which Obama believes exists.

I don't think he's heartless or lacks compassion. I think he has a grand vision for the world that he thinks is good (which includes American supremacy), and this means that keeping the status quo in East Asia is critical. So when an upstart and unabashedly nationalist leader comes in and upsets the status quo, Obama sees it as a threat.

Obama doesn't lecture the Saudis about what they do. He doesn't beat him self up over what he does and has done. He understands the realities of war, and he understands what is happening in the Philippines. Dressing it up in language about "human rights" is disingenuous.


Moreover, one could argue that it is in the US's interests to encourage respect for global human rights norms, because these norms create a more stable international environment, and make the internal environments of its partner nations less chaotic. It may be a clinical way of putting it, but Obama does have an interest in the wellbeing of Philippines inasmuch as he has an interest that their basic rights are upheld.

I'm sure it is. But the government not going to war and ceding sovereignty to the criminals is not in the interests of the people of the Philippines, and Duterte cares about his own people not ours.

There's a reason Duterte's city was the safest in the country. There's a reason he has a 91% approval rating.


Duterte is smart enough to realize this...Obama has his own interests.

I don't think Duterte realizes this. I think Duterte's thoughts ended at, "Someone dared to speak out against my policies? F*ck them."

You don't give him enough credit. He's putting himself at great personal risk to clean up his country
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 2:32:26 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 2:22:39 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:02:54 AM, bsh1 wrote:
No, I don't see targeting and slaughtering often unarmed drug dealers (who may not even be guilty) as war. Sorry.

Calling it war is just an easy way to make it seem okay what is going on. It's away to make yourself comfortable with something that is illegal, unethical, and a gross overreach of executive authority.

Okay, what would you call it?

I would call it vigilantism. Illegal and unethical vigilantism.

I think that is only true insofar as you believe Obama is heartless and lacks compassion. Obama's right/legitimacy to speak may be tied to his role in advocating for US interests, but that does not mean that he does not genuinely believe that what Duterte is doing is ethically wrong or violating human rights which Obama believes exists.

Obama doesn't lecture the Saudis about what they do.

People fear losing things more than they enjoy getting them. Obama fears losing a country that had respect for human rights more than he might enjoy getting a country who has never respected human rights to change. That might be the wrong way to go about things, but it is a simple fact of human psychology.

It doesn't mean Obama doesn't genuinely care about human rights or that he is not also concerned for the welfare of Filipinos, even if they are not his primary concern.

There's a reason Duterte's city was the safest in the country. There's a reason he has a 91% approval rating.

His popularity is not a measure of the legality, morality, or legitimacy of his activites.

I don't think Duterte realizes this. I think Duterte's thoughts ended at, "Someone dared to speak out against my policies? F*ck them."

You don't give him enough credit.

And you give him too much.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
thett3
Posts: 14,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 2:46:26 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 2:32:26 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:22:39 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:02:54 AM, bsh1 wrote:
No, I don't see targeting and slaughtering often unarmed drug dealers (who may not even be guilty) as war. Sorry.

Calling it war is just an easy way to make it seem okay what is going on. It's away to make yourself comfortable with something that is illegal, unethical, and a gross overreach of executive authority.

Okay, what would you call it?

I would call it vigilantism. Illegal and unethical vigilantism.

Okay, well it's pretty similar to many conflicts in the past that were classified as "war"


I think that is only true insofar as you believe Obama is heartless and lacks compassion. Obama's right/legitimacy to speak may be tied to his role in advocating for US interests, but that does not mean that he does not genuinely believe that what Duterte is doing is ethically wrong or violating human rights which Obama believes exists.

Obama doesn't lecture the Saudis about what they do.

People fear losing things more than they enjoy getting them. Obama fears losing a country that had respect for human rights more than he might enjoy getting a country who has never respected human rights to change. That might be the wrong way to go about things, but it is a simple fact of human psychology.

So the criminals killing people and ruining wide swaths of the country is okay, but stopping them by punishing those culpable isn't? The things that actually happen to people on those islands doesn't matter as long as the de facto government pays lip service to abstract rights?

Come on. Obama doesn't give a f*ck about human rights in the Philippines, dude. If he did he would be offering Duterte the full support of the United States in his quest to rid the country of its criminal elements.

The rights of the innocent civilians are more important than the rights of the drug dealers who knowingly tangled with the government. If they don't want to die, they can surrender. Over half a million already have.

And like I said...Obama has zero right to criticize him on his human rights record. None. Not after everything he's done, all of the people he has killed. The reality is that running a country (especially a superpower) is so much more complex than any set of abstract principles would allow.


It doesn't mean Obama doesn't genuinely care about human rights or that he is not also concerned for the welfare of Filipinos, even if they are not his primary concern.

There's a reason Duterte's city was the safest in the country. There's a reason he has a 91% approval rating.

His popularity is not a measure of the legality, morality, or legitimacy of his activites.

I don't think Duterte realizes this. I think Duterte's thoughts ended at, "Someone dared to speak out against my policies? F*ck them."

You don't give him enough credit.

And you give him too much.

Well I did say he was the greatest living politician, when in reality he's probably behind Trump, Nigel Farage, and Marine Le Pen
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 2:54:00 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 2:46:26 AM, thett3 wrote:
So the criminals killing people and ruining wide swaths of the country is okay, but stopping them by punishing those culpable isn't? The things that actually happen to people on those islands doesn't matter as long as the de facto government pays lip service to abstract rights?

Those rights are not abstract to the people who have them violated or to the family's who have lost unarmed, unconvicted loved ones to mob rule and kangaroo courts.

I think Duterte is a criminal little better than the people he is trying to round up. I think Obama has just as much a right to talk about Duterte and to criticize him as Duterte has a right to do those things regarding Obama.

I think we're gonna have to just agree to disagree. We're not going to budge on our respective opinions of Duterte.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
thett3
Posts: 14,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 3:00:11 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 2:54:00 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:46:26 AM, thett3 wrote:
So the criminals killing people and ruining wide swaths of the country is okay, but stopping them by punishing those culpable isn't? The things that actually happen to people on those islands doesn't matter as long as the de facto government pays lip service to abstract rights?

Those rights are not abstract to the people who have them violated or to the family's who have lost unarmed, unconvicted loved ones to mob rule and kangaroo courts.

And they aren't abstract to the many more people who have died or lost loved ones to the criminals.

The criminals should've thought of the backlash before they committed their crimes.


I think Duterte is a criminal little better than the people he is trying to round up. I think Obama has just as much a right to talk about Duterte and to criticize him as Duterte has a right to do those things regarding Obama.

Obama has killed hundreds of civilians doing things as ordinary as attending a wedding: https://www.washingtonpost.com...

Duterte is killing criminals.

Any criticism from Obama is insincere and hypocritical


I think we're gonna have to just agree to disagree. We're not going to budge on our respective opinions of Duterte.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Vox_Veritas
Posts: 7,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 3:01:37 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
What he's doing wouldn't be good policy for a wealthy, developed country with a strong emphasis on human rights.
But whenever we're talking about a 3rd world piece of crap like The Philippines, pragmatism should supercede liberal principles. Whatever makes the people safe and prosperous should be embraced; if this means summarily executing public officials who are rumoured to be corrupt and individuals who are rumoured to be drug dealers (as the country's legal system cannot effectively deal with all those criminals the right way), then so be it. If Duterte makes The Philippines a better place to live in for 90% of Filipinos then he will be remembered as a hero, regardless of what Obama says (or of what he says to Obama).
The Philippines can be civilised whenever its people come to enjoy a high standard of living. Rushing a government's moral development far past its populace's economic development can be counterproductive in many cases.
Call me Vox, the Resident Contrarian of debate.org.

The DDO Blog:
https://debatedotorg.wordpress.com...

#drinkthecoffeenotthekoolaid
thett3
Posts: 14,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 3:01:40 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
Obama has also intentionally prolonged the Syrian civil war, causing tens of thousands of death and driving the country into ruin.

He has no right to criticize Duterte for his conduct in a war in his own country. Duterte was 100% right to tell him to piss off
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 3:05:34 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 3:00:11 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:54:00 AM, bsh1 wrote:
I think Duterte is a criminal little better than the people he is trying to round up. I think Obama has just as much a right to talk about Duterte and to criticize him as Duterte has a right to do those things regarding Obama.

Obama has killed hundreds of civilians doing things as ordinary as attending a wedding

I am not going to discuss Obama's drone strike policy, but I don't find it analogous.

Duterte is killing criminals.

Duterte is killing unconvicted people, oftentimes based on sketchy evidence, and is inciting mobs and individuals--who often select targets based on rumors, personal animosity, or as a result of the mob mentality than any rational analysis of the evidence--to go out an kill people

I think we're gonna have to just agree to disagree. We're not going to budge on our respective opinions of Duterte.

^
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 3:24:38 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 3:00:11 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:54:00 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:46:26 AM, thett3 wrote:
So the criminals killing people and ruining wide swaths of the country is okay, but stopping them by punishing those culpable isn't? The things that actually happen to people on those islands doesn't matter as long as the de facto government pays lip service to abstract rights?

Those rights are not abstract to the people who have them violated or to the family's who have lost unarmed, unconvicted loved ones to mob rule and kangaroo courts.

And they aren't abstract to the many more people who have died or lost loved ones to the criminals.

The criminals should've thought of the backlash before they committed their crimes.

Committing a crime does not grant the state license to do whatever ... there has to be a process for determining firstly that the crime was in fact committed, identifying some response commensurate with the severity of the infraction, and ensuring that the punishment is fairly and consistently applied.

What part of this could possibly be controversial. The U.S. has its own drug problem, would you expect the government to employ duterte's tactics?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 3:28:46 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
A world governed according to thett's wayward instincts would be pretty miserable and chaotic for a lot of people.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
thett3
Posts: 14,338
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 3:28:50 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 3:24:38 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/6/2016 3:00:11 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:54:00 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:46:26 AM, thett3 wrote:
So the criminals killing people and ruining wide swaths of the country is okay, but stopping them by punishing those culpable isn't? The things that actually happen to people on those islands doesn't matter as long as the de facto government pays lip service to abstract rights?

Those rights are not abstract to the people who have them violated or to the family's who have lost unarmed, unconvicted loved ones to mob rule and kangaroo courts.

And they aren't abstract to the many more people who have died or lost loved ones to the criminals.

The criminals should've thought of the backlash before they committed their crimes.

Committing a crime does not grant the state license to do whatever ... there has to be a process for determining firstly that the crime was in fact committed, identifying some response commensurate with the severity of the infraction, and ensuring that the punishment is fairly and consistently applied.

It's not ordinary policing.

It's war.

Either the innocent civilians are going to continue to be terrorized, or the central government is going to rescue them by cracking down on the criminals. If the drug dealers don't want to die, they can surrender.


What part of this could possibly be controversial. The U.S. has its own drug problem, would you expect the government to employ duterte's tactics?

If the situation was as bad as it was over there I could only hope and pray that they would .
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/6/2016 3:35:17 AM
Posted: 3 months ago
At 9/6/2016 3:28:50 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 3:24:38 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/6/2016 3:00:11 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:54:00 AM, bsh1 wrote:
At 9/6/2016 2:46:26 AM, thett3 wrote:
So the criminals killing people and ruining wide swaths of the country is okay, but stopping them by punishing those culpable isn't? The things that actually happen to people on those islands doesn't matter as long as the de facto government pays lip service to abstract rights?

Those rights are not abstract to the people who have them violated or to the family's who have lost unarmed, unconvicted loved ones to mob rule and kangaroo courts.

And they aren't abstract to the many more people who have died or lost loved ones to the criminals.

The criminals should've thought of the backlash before they committed their crimes.

Committing a crime does not grant the state license to do whatever ... there has to be a process for determining firstly that the crime was in fact committed, identifying some response commensurate with the severity of the infraction, and ensuring that the punishment is fairly and consistently applied.

It's not ordinary policing.

It's war.

Either the innocent civilians are going to continue to be terrorized, or the central government is going to rescue them by cracking down on the criminals. If the drug dealers don't want to die, they can surrender.

"war," as it pertains to the abolition of drug trafficking, is strictly metaphorical ... the drug war is not an actual war. Stop pretending like it is. There are no enemy combatants. There are criminals. This is a plain statement of fact.

Without due process, the possibility exists that the state is murdering some of the innocent civilians whose lives you (evidently) cherish so much.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault