[lit-ideas] Re: Quds forces
- From: "Mike Geary" <atlas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 13:15:51 -0600
Brian:
>>Mike, you believe there can be a just cause for war? I thought you were a
>>pacifist?<<
I'm not an absolute pacifist, never have been. If violence is absolutely
necessary to stop someone from killing or injuring one's self or others then
violence is justified. Homicidal psychotics must be stopped. So must
political homicidal psychotics. Sometimes in the political realm though it's
difficult to determine who's the real psychotic. From the beginning I've
thought our invasion of Afghanistan was justified. When the Taliban government
would not arrest and extradite the leaders of Al Qaeda -- people who openly
professed their involvement in the attacks on the World Trade Center -- I
believed that, due to the scope of the crime and the goals of those who
perpetrated it, we were justified in invading Afghanistan for the purpose of
arresting and bringing those responsible for the attacks to justice. We
conquered the Taliban with little trouble (no surprise there), but botched the
arrest of Al Qaeda. That was a surprise -- an immensely regrettable,
blunderous surprise, probably due to the fact that the attention of the
Administration had alreary shifted to selling the invasion of Iraq to the the
American people. They couldn't catch the leaders of Al Qaeda, but by God, they
could sell a war. Sell it even though our invasion of Iraq had nothing to do
with Al Qaeda. Nothing to do with the attack on this country. The
justifications were based totally on conjectures that turned out to be totally
wrong. Not only that, but the conjectures were known to be highly dubious by
those making them. The invasion was nothing more than a Realpolitik grab for
power in that region of the world. From certain points of view there were very
attractive political reasons for invading, but there was absolutely no
justification for it. Not by any standards. No more so than the attacks on
the World Trade Center could ever be justified. I consider them equivalent
crimes. And I honestly hope the leaders of this administration are brought to
trial before an international court of justice. I don't know if that statement
shocks you, but I think it's imperative that all nations be reigned in by
international courts of justice. We committed these very same crimes only 40
years ago. And we'll do it again (already the rhetoric that led to this
atrocity is being used against Iran) if we're not brought up short by some
international tribunal. Otherwise these military adventurisms will continue
until China or India or Indonesia finally overwhelms our economy and turns us
into a "kinder, gentler" country and they assert their turn at imperialism. The
world belongs to no nation. Only international rules can keep the world under
some semblance of justice and order. I believe that strongly.
>>There was plenty of cause - see Nicholas Lehmann's arguments for going to war
>>in this 2003 article in the New Yorker. He's a liberal writer commenting in
>>a liberal magazine and detailing the reasons. They haven't changed.<<
I don't know this Nicholas Lehmann. But I read the article you cited. If he's
a liberal, I'm a Maoist. Possibly in his defense, the article was written in
2003 when even the NYT and the WP were supporting this fiasco. I couldn't any
justifiable cause for invading Iraq in his article. I found a bunch of Neocon
bullshit, but nothing that justifies killing three hundred thousand people,
throwing away a trillion dollars for and making all the world hate us -- just
some wistful conservative think-tank trash. Sorry. Maybe next time.
>>What I'm embarrassed by is the lack of wisdom on the Left.<<
Yes, but of course, I shake my head in sorrow over the blindness of the Right.
>>There are good people with good intentions but little wisdom and moral
>>clarity.<<
Those leftists opposed to this war you mean? : ) Yes, well, there are few
things more open to interpretation than moral clarity and wisdom. We all
believe we're the true possessors of both, else there'd be no disagreements. I
don't think that supporters of this war are evil and stupid, just immensely
confused.
>>I posted a report that Iranian Quds forces may be responsible for the attack
>>that resulted in the murder of five Americans in Karbala and you ask me if
>>I'm embarrassed by American involvement in Iraq.<<
Two points here. First, I don't believe anything this Administration puts out
as a justification for any policy. They've been caught in too many lies too
many times. But suppose that this intelligence conjecture is accurate
(conjecture is all it is at this point), so what? Does it really surprise you
that Iran is involving itself in the conflict? They share a border, Iraq
invaded them 20 years ago, they lost over a million men to that war, of course
they have an intense (even extreme) interest in the outcome of this chaos and
seek to influence that outcome the best they can. Get real. Would you also be
surprised that Syria is involved in Iran? or Jordan? or Turkey? or Saudi
Arabia? I'm almost certain they are. This is what Old Europe tried to tell
that dimwit Bush and his boys when he started all this shit. But no, oh no,
they knew best. They knew how the world works. Weren't they the rich elite,
eh? The Bechtel, KRB, Halliburton boys. Why, they're so bright they can
manipulate anything to their ends. Ha!
Mike Geary
Memphis
---- Original Message -----
From: Brian
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 9:11 AM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Quds forces
* Do you want us to win?
* Would you prefer that more Americans were dead so that it would even out
the war scorecard? (and don't give a mealy-mouthed answer that you would prefer
we beat our swords into karaoke machines like the Japanese)
On Jan 29, 2007, at 10:39 PM, Mike Geary wrote:
Brian, aren't you at all embarrassed complaining about Iran's involvement
in Iraq when your own government invaded the country with no just cause
Other related posts: