[lit-ideas] Re: The Strident Voice of Defeat
- From: JimKandJulieB@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 11 Jan 2007 16:17:41 EST
How many brutal tyrants of how many countries is the U.S. prepared/equipped
to relieve of duty?
Policing the world is a wonderful idea ....if it worked ... if we were God
and knew everything, and innocents were rescued rather than killed....
Please let the brutal tyrants know when the U.S. has achieved omnipresence,
omniscience, and omnipotence.
Julie Krueger
========Original Message======== Subj: [lit-ideas] Re: The Strident
Voice of Defeat Date: 1/11/2007 2:50:34 P.M. Central Standard Time From:
_lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx) To:
_lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (mailto:lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx) Sent on:
Go back and read what I said about why we invaded Iraq. You want me to
respond to a strawman argument that is easily defeated and has been many
times.
Just a hint for you: Paul Berman a legitimate Liberal has been outraged by
all those claiming to be liberal who didn’t want to get rid of Saddam
Hussein
all along. He doesn’t think anyone who thinks Iraq would be better off if
we left Saddam in place deserves to be called a Liberal. To want to leave a
brutal tyrant in charge of a nation, Berman, stridently reminds us, is not a
liberal position. Liberals don’t believe in keeping brutal dictators in
place.
The Iraqi leadership and the majority of all those in Iraq are not religious
fundamentalists, but we should as I urge understood what these
fundamentalists have argued and will argue if we leave prematurely.
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Ursula Stange
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 12:29 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The Strident Voice of Defeat
LH wrote
...much snipped...
If when we leave, the Islamic Fundamentalists can declare victory, that
is if we don’t leave the present Iraqi government in a very strong
position, then we shall be buying trouble for ourselves. As Barnett
suggests, we shall probably have to go back again. We won’t save money
by leaving prematurely.
-------------------------
Lawrence, I snipped most of your post because it's only this bit I want
to respond to. And I don't know where to begin.
First, don't you think about the fact that the Islamic Fundamentalists
are the Shiites -- the very people the Americans trusted the government
to? The very people who are protecting (if not organizing) the
fundamentalist militias? And now we need to work to secure their
positions? So they can keep the Shiites from declaring victory?
Second, isn't there some sense of morality that should have a place on
this stage? You trashed a country in order to oust its leader. You
didn't just kill his children or ruin his life. You trashed a country.
And now you want to arrange the country so that those in power will
favour you with their favours? What of the ordinary Iraqis -- the
children, the grandmothers, the young brides, the schoolboys? Who cares
to protect them? In the end, you're going to sign off on a
fundamentalist dictatorship in exchange for the peace that passeth oil.
And it will put the women back in burqas and the prostitutes in sand up
to their necks. Wait...isn't this why we chased the Taliban out of
Afghanistan? I'm getting confused again...
Ursula
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
