Originally Posted by
alexxxxx
I think you've taken what i've said too far. Britain does have better morals than a lot of countries in respect to human rights, racism, female rights, gay rights - Social rights are pretty high in this country, not perfect, but good. I was pointing out that our past isn't very moral at all and that you can't say that our past is moral, because in many eyes, it isn't. We can't rely on countries (especially muslim/middle eastern) giving us much respect on our current high standing social morals, as they still live in the past about the crusades, live in a completely different culture dictated by a book, plus with the 'War on [s]oil[/s] terror,' giving money and guns to evil militia in Sudan and other current issues, they don't see us as clean, because it's not true. Most rogue states couldn't give a toss about our social morality because their leaders are reluctant to change, for example, the Afghan governments atrocious new bill on men being able to deny wives food if they deny them sex, therefore i see no reason why we can't let some 'maybe not actually a' terrorist die in libya in return for some oil contracts, which ultimately help us, because in the eyes of alot of the world, we're hardly clean. I'm sure the victims' families will be upset with his release, but in the end he is dying and won't be living much longer. We don't need him to become a martyr. If developing countries need good countries to follow, look at countries like Sweden and Norway, as they have the same level of rights for people socially yet they don't feel the need to invade others for sketchy reasons.
I love Britain, but we can't be in denial about some of our shortcomings. I'd love it to change but it's just not in our culture.
