Like I said, I didn't want to, but you posted what amounts to an anti neocon manifesto. If sovereign countries can do whatever they want to their citizens, you can clean out the entire wing of the Pentagon that's full of neocon strategists. They are all about spreading good American values, with the use of force if necessary.

Without debating Iraq, if you could say you reconcile those views, I'd appreciate it. Otherwise fine if you want to drop it.

Here we go. First Iraq this, neocon that. I'm waiting for the Bush's-fault-trifecta.

Do you suggest the UN and Int'l. Criminal Court take care of it all for us?

You apparently think Neocon is a dirty word. Its not, it just identifies a line of foreign policy thought that accepts the use of American military force for human rights issues. They are the opposite of the "realist" conservatives, who believe that force is only appropriate to protect immediate and vital national interests.

Anyway, when someone argues that other countries' businesses are not our business, that's a "realist" argument, and 180 degrees from the neocon policy that got us into Iraq to spread democracy and free a people from a tyrant.

Sorry if you thought I was provoking you, nothing of the sort. I just wanted to know how you squared those competing things.

I don't care what anyone believes the meaning of neocon to be. I haven't met anyone yet who thought Singapore needed outside intervention because they slaughter hundreds of thousands of their innocent populace, using nerve gas on some of them, invade their neighbors or harbor terrorists. When Singapore starts that kind of behavior, I'll be a little more critical of them.

Oh well.

Well I'm always happy to bash Bush but that's been so easy that it's a little boring for me. Yes, you raise good points SoCal. I'd say your examples are situations where the action or decision is somewhat life-preserving. I mentioned I don't believe outcomes are as important as intentions. It's complex, but one life is worth the same as another and the killing of someone about to commit murder simply trades one life for another. Except that a dead murderer may save more than just the loved one's life. Still, I think your examples are thought provoking.

Bush made that poor unfortunate potential voter carry those drugs thru Changi Airport.

I can't wait to hear from our southern (Kiwi) contingent.

Alcohol and tobacco is not the same as Herion/Opium/Meth/Coke/Crack etc. Do you seriously think that they should be treated the same way?

Kiwi? or Australian? :D

Hey - the kid has been hung, it's all over. While we're alarmed at the sentence, it's only because our judicial conditioning means we expect a typically lame punishment for serious crimes. The same crime here would earn a 5 - 8 year stretch, considering Ngyuen co-operated fully with investigators and gave up his source etc. Besides, he'd probably be out of jail within 3 years... our justice system blows. :rolleyes:

However, Ngyuen knew the risks - infact, everybody knows that Asian countries treat westerners poorly when drugs are involved - to that end, he made a calculated decision and gambled his life against a quick financial score. Right or wrong, Singapore's laws call for his head and sadly, we have to accept that.

Adam;

I was expecting one of our usual Kiwi posters to chime in. Your somewhat northwest of Kiwi view is always well read and expressed.

Well said Adam. Is the law in that country, you break it you pay for it.

Someday I will tell the 'fun' story of a friend of mine caught carrying a dummy bullet (the plastic ones with the spring) in Singapore.

This whole episode has been distasteful. Not his hanging, but the infantile response of the public to it. The guy was a drug courier. He was prepared to courier something that he knew would result in death and misery purely for the money. Yet, when caught (and that share of misery aborted) and sentanced we are meant to feel sorry for him? Give me a break! I work in a hospital. I have looked after a beautiful 18y.o. girl who was in a persistant vegative state after an OD, I have pronounced another dead after her first use of heroin, I have looked after an 80 y.o. in Intensive Care bashed in her home by some junkie trying to fund his drug use and have looked after a 16 y.o. stripper /prostitute funding her "habit" the only way she could.
I have 2 daughters of my own.

Let the bastard swing.

If anyone is interested, here's the penalty for speeding in Singapore:

<<
Speeding: Section 63 of the Road Traffic Act

Fine up to S$1000 or jail up to 3 months; and on subsequent conviction, fine up to S$2000 or jail up to 6 months. Disqualification from driving.
>>

1,000.00 Singapore Dollars = $591.89 (USD)
More Singapore laws here:
http://www.getforme.com/Info_Singapore%20law.htm

Sherwood

Am I supposed to feel sorry for the users?

There is a market for drugs in the world. Hanging a man for 14Oz of drugs will not solve anything.

Did you read what he wrote?

How is alcohol not the same?

I want lawlessness. I want a civil war.

I really hope Titor was right.

Am I meant to feel sorry for the pushers?!?

By the way, the 80 y.o. bashed in her bed was a victim, not a user. I think it reasonable to feel sorry for her. The others may not be victims, but are examples of the misery that clown was prepared to spread chasing some bucks.

Did I give you a reason to feel sorry for anyone?

He was gonna spread misery? How?

Those users put the drug into their bodys by choice.

Now we're getting into a philosophical debate. Does one bear responsibility for actions you precipitate rather than you do directly? I think you do. So does the law in a lot of cases. You pay someone to kill the ex. "Hey, I didn't pull the trigger" is not much of a defence. A aggressive, drunk comes into the pawn shop and demands a rifle to "sort out those bastards at the shop next door". Would you sell it to him? I think people bear some responsibility for their actions, even if the damage may manifest at a later point. I realise the whole idea of personal responsibility is considered politically incorrect, and my daughters will probably sue me at some point for inflicting such an outdated notion upon them, but there you have it.

He knew the risks. He knew the consequences of success, and the consequences of failure.

Like I said, Let the bastard swing.

I guess that Coors, Miller, Bud...... are all in REALLY big trouble if you want to hold them responsible for getting people drunk. Which can lead to someones misery. Those tobacco company's are just so evil. They give people the means to get lung cancer.

So yeah let him swing, I am sure that 14oz of Heroin will go to good use over there. The politicians are likely high as I type this. But at least it kept someone from having to actually pay for it.

With any luck, someone will assassinate some Singapore officials soon.

have a nice nite!

Kyle