[lit-ideas] Re: Ideology vs Experience
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 30 Sep 2006 10:16:36 -0700
What are you doing Judy? Are you asserting that "deal with" Pakistan means
"approves of" Pakistan? I know Simon said I approved of Pakistan, but he
lied. I have never approved of Pakistan. In a number of messages I have
warned about the potential danger of Pakistan. Pakistan has nuclear weapons
and they exported them to others. I quoted the head of Stratfor, George
Friedman, to show how hard the US leaned on Pakistan to stop their Dr
Strangelove from exporting nuclear weapons. I quoted Friedman to say that we
had threatened to bomb Pakistan unless we got its cooperation in our plans
to invade Afghanistan and go after Al Quaeda. Musharaff decided to
cooperate. I have speculated several times about the Deobandi school of
Islamic Fundamentalism and why it gave rise to the Taliban and wondered
about the influence of Salafism on it. I could go on and on.
To say we must deal with a nation as it is not the same as saying we approve
of it. The same people who say that we shouldn't have removed one of the
most evil regimes in the last 100 years say we should oppose the regimes of
such nations as Saudi Arabia and imply we are hypocrites if we don't. We
cannot change all the regimes we disapprove of, nor should we. We are still
debating whether we should have changed the regime in Iraq and if we were
going to change a regime it would be the one considered the greatest threat,
i.e. Iran. But I would prefer leaving them alone as well -- getting along
with them if we can find some way to deal with them as they are. Does this
mean I approve of Iran? No Judy it does not. No Simon it does not.
Lawrence
_____
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Judith Evans
Sent: Saturday, September 30, 2006 9:45 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Ideology vs Experience
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.
"In the meantime we must deal with the world as it is. Not
all nations are presently Liberal Democracies. Pakistan is
not a Liberal Democracy. We know that. Everyone knows that.
We must deal with Pakistan as it exists, not as we would like it to be."
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
a bit relativist, this. OK, that's not fair. But we can try to
signal that we would like it to change, as people have been
doing during Musharraf's current visit hereabouts.
Tomorrow, a Briton cleared of murder twice but convicted by
a religious court (one sharia judge dissenting) is due to be executed
in Pakistan.
We know about him because he's British. Most people in
this situation in Pakistan presumably simply go to their
deaths in silence.
Please read this piece:
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/legal/article1772359.ece
In Pakistan, rape is dealt with under Islamic law. There
are moves to change this, but I doubt they will succeed.
Here is one of many media reports on the situation:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/pakistan/Story/0,,1874358,00.html
(perhaps next time you accuse feminists of ignoring
Islam/women you could remember this -- I'll try to
remember to post links to the outcry among feminists in
the US re the rape of Mukhtaran Mai....)
Pakistan under its current regime is as it were in the vanguard of torture
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1883582,00.html
while doing deals with militant Islamists who probably count
as terrorists
http://www.guardian.co.uk/afghanistan/story/0,,1883737,00.html
Judy Evans, Cardiff
Other related posts:
