Subject:
|
Re: We'll take in your poor, your homeless, your oppressed...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Jul 2004 13:22:43 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1175 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd wrote:
<snip>
> > It has everything to do with justness and unjustness. Being a sovereign nation
> > means that the nation has the right to make laws governing itself and to enforce
> > those laws - furthermore, being a recognized nation means that other nations
> > will respect that right.
>
> So, Germany could slaughter jews at whim in the 20th century because it was a
> sovereign nation and you fully support that?
There's a debatable issue for you--if Pearl Harbor never happened, would the
Americans have 'officially' entered WW2 at all?
I mean, the Allies didn't know Hitler was murdering the Jews until well into the
war, and then it was mostly rumour (iirc), so if Japan didn't strike at America,
would the US have used the extermination camps as a reason to send troops to
Germany?
I dunno--I don't know exact details about WW2 but I wonder if the US would have
sent troops if they weren't attacked.
> >
> > Being legitimate means that Saddam *was* the ruler of Iraq - and we, by
> > recognizing his government, had no right to undermine his rule. The only body
> > that had that power is the UN.
>
> Perhaps you mean "right" and not "power", because you are demonstrably wrong on
> that account. And clearly Bush, at least, no longer recognized Saddam's
> government or right to rule.
So then all world leaders have this 'sword of Dubya(Damocles)' hanging over
their heads--they get to lead their countries daily thanks to the auspices of
Georgie-boy? Slip up and down comes the sword...
> >
> > Think of it this way: If i had killed Timothy McVey I would be guilty of
> > *murder*, despite McVey kill 150 other people.
>
> McVey is about to blow up a another building with hundreds of people in it. I,
> not authorized by the U.N., U.S., or anybody else, pop him with two to the chest
> and one to the head. It would not be murder even though I wasn't directly
> threatened.
I don't know about that--you'd have difficulty in a court of law.
> > The only entity with the right
> > to execute McVey, or any murderer, is the government. Anyone else who does so
> > is doing so illegally.
>
> And has Saddam been executed? I'm not sure where you are going with this.
>
> >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > Are you're saying that Saddam was a jerk and therefore waging war to overthrow
> > > > him was just?
> > >
> > > I merely disputed the assumption that David made that the war was "unjust".
> > > I'll also dispute "illegal". I won't dispute "stupid", "unsanctioned",
> > > "trumped-up", and any number of terms uncomplimentary to Dubya.
> >
> > For the reasons mentioned above, the war was illegal.
>
> Unsanctioned.
illegal
>
>
> > The war was immoral and
> > unjust because the 'ends' do not justify the 'means.'
>
> The war was not about what Bush was claiming it was about, and even if it was,
> his claims certainly weren't accurate - one can make a claim for it being moral
> or immoral either way regardless of whether it was wise or not (was it deception
> or honest error - entirely ignoring that Saddam was a murdering bastard in the
> first place). I am more concerned about the cure being worse than the disease,
> myself.
And I think by demonstation that Dubya is a 'murdering bastard' who has no
remorse for his actions and no concept of responsibility. Moreover, he wants to
'hide' the negative aspects of his 'war on terror' (no photos of caskets, etc)
and when pushed about it, he becomes surly, defensive and snippy. As with
Cheney. But that's all my humble opinion.
>
>
> > By "ends" i mean the
> > capturing of Saddam, placing him on trial, on creation of a new Iraqi gov't.
>
> I think it would have been wiser to let someone else besides the U.S. do this,
> and I would certainly not have a problem with the morality of his neighbors
> doing it, U.N. sanction or no, beyond his neighbors are pretty dubious in their
> own way.
All true, and yet the US hasn't 'picked a fight' with them. Why Iraq?
>
> By
> > "means" i mean the thousands of Iraqi civilians who have died, the hundred of US
> > soldiers, the damage to US's reputation around the world, the damage to the
> > concept of international law, the political chaos in Iraq, and the great cost in
> > dollars to US taxpayers.
>
> This is about "wisdom". I've already questioned the wisdom of this war many
> times here.
>
> >
> > When evaluating a war, we have to weigh the good that will be done against the
> > bad - and then can we determine the justness.
>
> You are confusing wisdom with justness. They are not the same thing, and your
> confusion of such is why you both misunderstand the situation and my views on
> it.
I think in this particular situation, there is no wisdom--taking out Saddam the
way the US went about it wasn't wise from the outset, and I believe most of the
world stated such--and certainly justice doesn't enter the picture at all.
>
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Then why don't be just go around the globe overthrowing random
> > > > other jerks?
> > >
> > > Because it would be just as big a waste as this attempt is? Mind you, in theory
> > > it isn't such a bad idea. In practice, I'm sure it would be a fiasco.
> >
> > In practice, we'd start by throwing out Bush.
>
>
> We need to vote against him a second time, yes, but it would still probably be a
> fiasco no matter which president tried it without firm backing by the U.N.(and
> even then my bet is it would be a fiasco).
>
> -->Bruce<--
The thing is, I still believe that Bob Dole woudn't have done this, Gore
definitly woudn't have invaded Iraq... I think only Dubya has the proper
combination--spoiled rich brat who has no concept of ramifications and large...
well, everything's big in Texas so I'm told...
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
120 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
