Are Americans morally responsible...

[Autumnleaf]

for people in other countries who are harmed or killed by the use of their tax dollars? As an American it seems like my country is warring in other parts of the world. It is doing this in part from taxes I pay. Am I and my countrymen responsible for kids and old people that my countrie's military blows up or shoots accidentally?

 

[chingchang]

for people in other countries who are harmed or killed by the use of their tax dollars? As an American it seems like my country is warring in other parts of the world. It is doing this in part from taxes I pay. Am I and my countrymen responsible for kids and old people that my countrie's military blows up or shoots accidentally?

Your income tax goes DIRECTLY to paying interest on debt. That has been the case for MANY years now. Our government (and war effort) is financed via accumulating debt.

But...to answer your question...NO...we are not responsible. We are not their enemy...our Millitary Industrial Complex is their enemy. The NWO is their enemy. Don't worry though...Obama will fix everything....NOT!

CC

 

[Wiccan_Child]

You're not morally responsible for it. Though it's your tax dollars that fund it, you have no direct say in how it's spent. If your government acts immorally, then the ethical dilemma falls to your senators and your governors.

That said, it's your government, and it is behaving unethically. Obama is, I think, a good influence, but you have something of an obligation to give it a kick in the backside. Maybe not a moral requirement, but certainly a societal duty.

 

[Autumnleaf]

You're not morally responsible for it. Though it's your tax dollars that fund it, you have no direct say in how it's spent. If your government acts immorally, then the ethical dilemma falls to your senators and your governors.

That said, it's your government, and it is behaving unethically. Obama is, I think, a good influence, but you have something of an obligation to give it a kick in the backside. Maybe not a moral requirement, but certainly a societal duty.

Obama is the leader of our military and our military is fighting undeclared wars against two countries. Obama could have stopped the wars his first day in office. He did not, nor has he done anything that looks like he will. He is continuing with what Bush put in motion. But he is black and he sure speaks pretty so we probably should not call him a warmonger like we did Bush.

 

[chingchang]

Obama is the leader of our military and our military is fighting undeclared wars against two countries. Obama could have stopped the wars his first day in office. He did not, nor has he done anything that looks like he will. He is continuing with what Bush put in motion. But he is black and he sure speaks pretty so we probably should not call him a warmonger like we did Bush.

He's going to increase the # of troops in Afgahnistan....

CC

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

for people in other countries who are harmed or killed by the use of their tax dollars? As an American it seems like my country is warring in other parts of the world. It is doing this in part from taxes I pay. Am I and my countrymen responsible for kids and old people that my countrie's military blows up or shoots accidentally?

The tax dollars aren't the problem - it's who you vote for. Okay, maybe I'm overemphasizing the significance of democratic elections here, as the public image of parliamentary democracies has very little in common with the actual power dynamics behind the screen. The voter's power is laughable compared to the influence exerted by big businesses and their lobbyists.
But THEIR power, in turn, is influenced by your shopping behaviour, and your energy consumption.
So: shop responsibly. Don't send the multi-nationals the signal that outsourcing their production facilities to sweat shops in third-world countries is perfectly acceptable, or that stowing away their profits in tax havens is the way to go.

 

[BasinBrat]

You are responsible for your vote - vote for the party you believe to do right. If you belive none are capable of doing right, vote no confidence by voiding your ballot paper.

The problem for Obama as it stands is that Iraq and Afghanistan have had their governments overthrown and if the troops currently in there are pulled out immediately, the countries aren't magically going to choose to become democratic - The rule of the country will fall to whoever has the biggest weapons and can convince the most people God is on his side.

 

[JGG]

Obama is the leader of our military and our military is fighting undeclared wars against two countries. Obama could have stopped the wars his first day in office. He did not, nor has he done anything that looks like he will. He is continuing with what Bush put in motion. But he is black and he sure speaks pretty so we probably should not call him a warmonger like we did Bush.

Yes. Because it's that simple.

 

[brinny]

You're not morally responsible for it. Though it's your tax dollars that fund it, you have no direct say in how it's spent. If your government acts immorally, then the ethical dilemma falls to your senators and your governors.

That said, it's your government, and it is behaving unethically. Obama is, I think, a good influence, but you have something of an obligation to give it a kick in the backside. Maybe not a moral requirement, but certainly a societal duty.

how does one give it a kick in the backside?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

how does one give it a kick in the backside?

The Russians managed it at Red October (вива ла революция!). I'm not suggesting something that drastic, but it can certainly be done. In essence, let your government know that there is a problem.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

By now, it should be quite plain to see who holds the real power in parliamentary democracies: even elected presidents are powerless in the face of the plutocratic elite and their lobbies. Just look at Barack Obama:

He wanted to curb the power of banks and speculators, and introduce a measure of responsibility into the global casino by introducing checks and controls into the system.
He failed.

He wanted to give the United States a proper health care system, so that millions of citizens aren't left out of the loop, being unable to afford a private health insurance company.
He's still trying.

He wanted to give the United States a leading role in combating global warming, assuming responsibility for the way in which resources are wasted in the US.
The verdict is still out on that one, but it seems as if there's nothing left of those plans.

He wanted to close down Guantanamo Bay, and hold the people involved in that operation legally responsible for violating human rights.
Nothing much is left of that.

And none of that is Obama's fault, really. It's not for lack of trying that nothing changes as it ought to. He's just learning that lobbies and private businesses are infinitely more powerful than the president of the United States. They control the press, the media. They determine state policy behind the screens. They provide the money that makes presidential campaign possible to begin with.


And if you think this is only happening in the US, think again. The same is happening in Germany, for example. Our chancellor, Angela Merkel, wanted to take a leading role in the battle against global warming. Then, the German automobile industry made its will known - and they weren't interested in building more fuel-efficient cars or creating a fleet with a lower CO2-output. Accordingly, Merkel had no choice but to backpaddle.

 

[Blackmarch]

for people in other countries who are harmed or killed by the use of their tax dollars? As an American it seems like my country is warring in other parts of the world. It is doing this in part from taxes I pay. Am I and my countrymen responsible for kids and old people that my countrie's military blows up or shoots accidentally?

Accidently? no. There is not justice for being held accountable for an honest accident.

However for everything else yes we are responsible... however there is also a responsibility in regards to people where we can help but don't, in what happens to them.

Now is there going to be enough to justify considering it a sin? probably not.
But one should do what is in their power to see what they believe is right is done in the government. Whether it's voting for a person who holds your view, or whether it is the use of your authority and or power in a just manner towards that end (supposing you're in a position with such power and authority), or whether it's making the public aware of whatever.
-Once you've done what you've can to affect whatever change you are off the hook.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Accidently? no. There is not justice for being held accountable for an honest accident.

What about manslaughter? What about neglect (e.g., a mother forgetting to crack open a window to her car)?

 

[Blackmarch]

What about manslaughter? What about neglect (e.g., a mother forgetting to crack open a window to her car)?

what about it?Like I've said if you've done what you can to prevent or avoid it then youi're off the hook. Also in both cases you've given are not just accidents.

 

[lawtonfogle]

Yes. Because it's that simple.

Republican in office: Well, you see he can't remove the troops because it would lead to this and that and...

Democrat in office: He could just pull the troops on the first day.

Had the democrat pulled the troops, you think the republicans would be happy about it or would they be saying "Well now you led to this and that happening, and it was a bad choice from a bad leader,"?

 

[JGG]

Republican in office: Well, you see he can't remove the troops because it would lead to this and that and...

Democrat in office: He could just pull the troops on the first day.

Had the democrat pulled the troops, you think the republicans would be happy about it or would they be saying "Well now you led to this and that happening, and it was a bad choice from a bad leader,"?

Allow me to restate my point, just in case that really is directed at me:

[sarcasm]Yes. Because it's that simple.[/sarcasm]

 

[Autumnleaf]

Republican in office: Well, you see he can't remove the troops because it would lead to this and that and...

Democrat in office: He could just pull the troops on the first day.

Had the democrat pulled the troops, you think the republicans would be happy about it or would they be saying "Well now you led to this and that happening, and it was a bad choice from a bad leader,"?

He said he would pull out the troops during his campaign. If he actually did pull them out his approval rating would go through the roof because America elected him based on what he said he would do. If Republicans complained all Obama would have to do is say, "President Bush started those crazy expensive wars based on bad intel about Saddam and the odd idea that Afghanistan should pay for the actions of a dozen or so Saudi Arabian hijackers. Its time we dedicate our resources to helping Americans here at home!" He would get a standing ovation from America.