Skip to main content

View Diary: Fellow Liberals: Stop Helping Tea Party Racists Stymie Pres Obama On Syria !!! (81 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  there is a concept in law that in order to bring a (21+ / 0-)

    case, that the plaintiff must have "clean hands".  From supplying the Israelis with cluster bombs to use in Lebanon to our own use of mines and cluster bombs in Afghanistan to accusations of our use of ordnance in Iraq, the US hardly has the luxury of clean hands.

    Add to this that slaughters continue apace in Sudan, Somalia and Mali to name a few other places we could become involved and Egypt and Libya remain powder kegs where we could conceivably have to intervene and the question, is if we are the world's "good cop", do we intervene in every war, only in some wars or in no wars outside of actual attack on our soil and once that is answered, what is the criteria by which we determine our policy?

    All I ask of Kerry is for him to remember what it was like 1966-1972 and then determine if he can now support placing other men's sons into harm's way.  All I ask from him is consistency  

    •  Slaughter continues in Bahrain (16+ / 0-)

      of an unarmed resisting populace, but the US continues to arm and equip the royal family's forces.  There's soooo much "credibility" in US policy in the region, we know there must be becauser it's always cited as reason to kill more Arabs.  And nowhere do we have a finer example of that single-standard, that even-handedness with which the US handles all things, than in Bahrain.

      Clap On, Clap Off, The Clapper!

      by ActivistGuy on Tue Sep 03, 2013 at 12:00:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Not exactly (0+ / 0-)

      The doctrine of Unclean Hands, as an affirmative defense, doesn't mean the plaintiff has to have a squeaky clean past with respect to everything to be able to seek relief, it pertains to the particular circusmstances that he or she is trying to sue upon. For example, a plaintiff who has a prior theft conviction won't be barred by the doctrine of unclean hands if he got hit by a car by someone else and wants to sue for his injuries.  Applying your version to international law would essentially mean that no one is able to take action against anything going in the world. What country has clean hands? Certainly not the US, Russia, China, Japan Germany, the UK, France, Italy to name a few.  

      •  however, the relationship between car theft (0+ / 0-)

        and being hit by a car is basically irrelevant while the US supplying or at least sanctioning Saddam's use of gas on his people is certainly germane.

        It seems that Lichtenstein or Luxembourg would be excellent countries to decide if we should become involved in a foreign civil war, unless you consider them as having unclean hands.  The problem is that there is the politic real and then integrity.  In foreign relations they are usually in conflict  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site