[lit-ideas] Re: Comparing Bush and Chirac
- From: Eternitytime1@xxxxxxx
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 09:14:08 EST
In a message dated 11/1/2004 4:42:50 AM Central Standard Time, goya@xxxxxxx
writes:
Eric sees a foreigner (Didier) attack Bush, which for Eric is=20
equivalent to an attack on the US. So he attempts to relativize Bush's=20=
crimes, drawing attention to Chirac's financial peccadilloes in order=20
to imply that Bush isn't really all that bad, because other world=20
leaders also are guilty of misdeeds.
Hi,
Just another note: I do not think that you really do understand that for
many Americans, they feel that the UN did not watch over the store (so to
speak) and thus even more Iraqis were harmed than needed to be--for the $$ that
ought to have gone for food for little children went, instead, to "France" and
"people in the UN".
This was (and is) a huge problem here in the US for those of us who would
prefer that the UN continue to have some sort of moral authority to and for
those in the USA. There are many many (at least in my area) who completely
discount all of what is said by someone who believes in the principles of the
United Nations and the greater community of nation-states having an impact.
The
isolationist group is quite large--and they would very cyncially state that
the *only* reason why people in France (especially, since they 'benefitted'
from the corruption of Saddam Hussein) did not want the invasion of Iraq to
occur was so that they could continue to feather their nest. (so to speak)
It is not that someone (like me, even) would ever think that France ought to
clean house just like the USA should clean house simply because someone in
France tells me to do so. It is because if you really care about a clean
house, you will take care of your own.
(the whole 'don't throw rocks if you live in a glass house' maybe?)
I have no idea as to why Eric would have posted his question--but I do think
that it really IS a relevant one and not one to be ridiculed. If we (okay,
me) could get some real articulate answers, then we (okay, me) are better
able to use those answers when we are confronted by people who completely
discount anything that is said in regards to either the UN, people from other
countries who opposed the War in Iraq, especially, sad to say, France. It
does
NOT necessarily have to be an antagonistic question--it very well is often
something that would be helpful to have other points of view or answers
to--especially for me (for example--please believe me when I tell you that I
live and
work in an incredibly narrow-minded world...and it is often a good thing that
I do the light in darkness thing for myself and my child else we just
couldn't cope)
If I could say to those in 'my world', that Others in France (and/or other
places) are also not just having a 'too bad, so sad' attitude but as upset at
the corruption in highest places in their countries as I am about the same in
mine--it really makes a difference. If not, it does not mean that I will
not do all that I can do make positive changes in my world--both the little one
in terms of attitudes but in the larger one like volunteering for the
Kerry-Edwards campaign (and the Secretary of State in Missouri who is running
for
governor has NOT done what needed to be done in order for this election to be
fair--there are all sorts of problems happening...it's a mess). I have, as
I said, no idea about Eric's motives--but it really was a valid question for
MY world to know the answer to. But, it would not only make it easier to be
able to diffuse the attitudes which are against international cooperation but
(actually) make ME feel less alone in the world.
Thanks for any thoughtful articulation,
Marlena
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
