Re: The smug satisfaction of moral equivalency!
[ Follow-Ups ]
[ Post Followup ]
[ Canadian Coalition for Democracies Public Message Forum ]
Posted by Bill Narvey on 15:09:39 2007/06/07
In Reply to:
Re: The smug satisfaction of moral equivalency! posted by Dr. Tom Murphy
Tom,
I have taken your post and broken it down and put it in quotes. My answers to your points follow each point made .
"Bill, It is clear that we approach these issues from rather different perspectives":
We do.
"I hope that we can disagree respectfully."
Yes we can.
"I don't think the question is about how I define my safety and security--probably the same way you and others do--but the question is, what is more likely to bring this about?"
Tom, I do not think we define safety and security the same way or in the same context.
"Even though Saddam Hussein was a sadistic tyrant--on that we agree--is Iraq today a more peaceful, democratic state than it was under Saddam. Clearly not--indeed, the broad consensus is that it is vastly worse for Iraqis than even in the worst of the Hussein years.
Certainly, many more thousands of innocent civilians have been killed since the Bush war than in all of the Hussein years combined. Not that the Americans or the Brits are doing all of the killing. In fact. mostly not. It is Shites killing Sunnis killing Kurds killing Shites etc. etc. Bombs go off daily. Iraq is returning to the stone age and is likely to be a dysfunctional country for another century. So even though Saddam was a tyrant, and the Taliban in Afghanistan are god-awful, if we have learned anything at all, it is that unilaterally bombing a nation will not bring about peace, but will foment more war."
Let me take your last statement first. Unilaterally bombing Afghanistan and Iraq is not what was done. There were allies involved. Secondly, Afghanistan was where Al Qaeda was. The decision to take Saddam Hussein out was based on British intelligence he was secretly gathering WMD.'s. Given Hussein's track record that was a grave concern. The intelligence turned out to be wrong, but nations make best judgments on the intelligence they have.
Fault lies not with the execution of going into Iraq and Afghanistan, but naively thinking that Muslim dictatorships can be democratized relatively quickly and easily and secondly by anticipating how radical Islamists would think based on Western standards of reason, logic and sanity. Secondly those wars have been mishandled.
"So what to do about Iran, you ask? It may be developing a nuclear bomb. Well, Israel already has an arsenal of nuclear bombs--should we bomb Israel? Obviously not! India now has the bomb. Should we bomb India? China? France? Russia? The U.S.? Who gets to decide? George Bush?"
That is a most spurious and ridiculous argument. Those nations that already have atomic weapons are not threatening use them to blow anyone up, let alone threatening other nations and carrying out those threats. Iran makes no secret of it pursing nuclear capacity including having nuclear weapons and wanting to turn those weapons on Israel, America and the West.
"Let's work in more creative ways--the might makes right approach has obviously failed big time. How about some back channel diplomacy?"
More creative ways? Creativity taken beyond the realm of reality has already been applied in both back and front door diplomatic channels in order to avoid a military confrontation with Iran. The EU is neurotically war adverse to the point of being almost suicidal and America thus far with all their problems in Iraq are neurotically averse to a war option against Iran.
By advocating more diplomacy you are advocating an exercise in futility.
I expect you are a big fan of the line from HAIR, "Fighting for peace is like f#@king for virginity"
That line at first blush seems so filled with insight and wisdom. You obviously haven't gotten past the first blush stage. It is a real nifty line that I still chuckle at to this day, but it was penned by a writer at the height of his pot smoking euphoria and was as devoid of meaning and insight then as it is today.
"How about supporting opposition movements within Iran?"
Reports do not suggest that Iranians who are unhappy with their Mullocracy are unhappy because it is so antiAmerican/anti-Israel and anti-Western or that Ahmadinejad is pursuing a nuclear agenda.
Rather Iranian youth in large measure want more freedoms and to live under a less oppressive regime, but that does not mean they want only good relations with the West.
"In the end, if Iraq or Iran or Afghanistan are even going to be democratic, it will be because the people of those countries bring it about."
Agreed, but democracy is not in the cards any time soon and probably not for a generation or so, if it happens at all.
"It will never be brought about by the soldiers of invading armies,"
Agreed, except it is naive to even think that peace and harmony with the Muslim world lies in their being persuaded to adopt Judeo Christian culture and go with Western democracy as regards all that it entails.
I see no profit in such naïve approach and only losses for those who foolishly pursue that policy.
I do advocate bombing Iran back to the dark ages so that thereafter Iran will be consumed with rebuilding their nation and have no time to threaten any other nation and support terrorism against the West.
"especially from countries such as the U.S. whose own commitment to real democracy has all but disappeared in its flagrant violations of human and civil rights."
Why are you singling out the U.S. in this regard? That is a nonsensical comment.
Compared to the great many Middle Eastern Muslim nations, Iran,, the Sudan and various African developing nations where violations of human and civil rights, if there in fact are any is the norm, America and Israel are paradises of respect for human rights.
If you do honestly believe what you say about America, why not move to live in any one of those nations that have no human rights to speak of or trample whatever they do have that I have referred to explicitly or implicitly?
Follow Ups:
Post a Followup
[ Follow Ups ]
[ Post Followup ]
[ Canadian Coalition for Democracies Public Message Forum ]