Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Ben writes: "non-coercively purveying the views and values of democratic and representative government yields more democratic and representative governments." Sounds great, but if we have to forcibly invade a country in order to do that, I believe that is the opposite of "non-coercive."

Oh that again: Ben''s response.

Iraq was a threat to it's own people, the Mid-east --- including other Arab sects which can hate each other as much as they hate Israelis --- or more.

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ben writes: "Iraq was a threat to it's own people, the Mid-east --- including other Arab sects which can hate each other as much as they hate Israelis --- or more."

Agreed. But do you agree that in America's drive to "non-coercively purvey the views and values of democratic and representative governments," Iraq can't be included, since democracy in that country could only be accomplished by coercive military action?

November 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Agreed.

Nonsense. How was Iraq a "threat"? Certainly not because they possessed WMDs -- it has been convincingly proven they did not. Iraq was a nation whose military capability was destroyed by more than a decade of sanctions, as the early course of the war made clear. Sanctions whose sole purpose was to make sure Iraq was not a threat; sanctions that without a doubt contributed to much civilian suffering and death in Iraq. So who will be held accountable for the failed yet murderous policy of sanctions?

Moreover, none of that was the reason given for the war. And at this point in time only the base and intellectually dishonest continue to suggest otherwise, or try to make up these ex post facto justifications.

eh

November 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Finally you've turned off comment moderation; thanks for that big improvement. In return I will add my initials to my 'anonymous' comments.

However, much of the content here is still utter hogwash.

eh

November 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Iraq was a threat to it's (sic) own people,...

If that's going to be the criteria for deciding which nations the US invades, then I guess the planning for the Zimbabwe operation must be well underway, because it seems things are so bad there now that life expectancy for women in Zimbabwe is now at 34 y/o. Not to mention the suffering behind that gruesome statistic. Much of it due, of course, to the malign policies of the Mugabe government.

But somehow I don't think they're burning the midnite oil in the planning dept over at the Pentagon.

eh

November 22, 2006  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This post has not title -- it's better that all posts on your blog have a title.

eh

November 24, 2006  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home