[lit-ideas] Re: The Iran Charade
- From: "Veronica Caley" <vcaley@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 16:51:57 -0500
The default position for antiwar converts is
suburban nihilism, i.e., people surrounded by
comfort, who see no immediate threat to their
comfort,
I don't know any one of this description, except for teenagers. Everyone I
know realizes that others have most of the oil and that our whole
civilization is based on fossil fuels. And there are some people, such as
I, who believe that sooner or later there will be rationing of gasoline and
oil.
And if not that, then food will become even more expensive as many are
moving to plant based fuel and people will grow that rather than edible
substances.
Veronica Caley
Milford, MI
> [Original Message]
> From: Eric Yost <eyost1132@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Date: 1/20/2006 3:07:27 PM
> Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: The Iran Charade
>
> >>Change from "pacifists are responsible for nations
> losing wars" to, "lack of popular support is
> responsible for (liberal-democratic) nations losing
> wars.
>
> I already agreed that "antiwar" is a better term
> than "pacifist."
>
> Okay, let me unpack it, and excuse me if I sound
> like Bin Laden while doing so.
>
> People in the post-WW2 West have short attention
> spans and little stomach for privation, sacrifice,
> or extended warfare. This both good and bad. Good
> because it makes most military adventures
> "unsellable" in the short term and untenable in
> the long term. Bad because truly important
> conflicts may be beyond the political will of
> governments that must enter them.
>
> The Powell Doctrine addresses the cynical,
> self-concerned, and impatient aspects of our
> populations by mandating war only for national
> security reasons, only with broad initial public
> support, and only with clearly defined exit
> strategies. That's good, IMHO.
>
> In my experience, when the US enters the war,
> there is always a ready-made antiwar group ready
> to protest it. This group includes pacifists,
> isolationists, idealists, radical leftists, and
> kids who go along for the ride in any protest
> group. They are mobilized primarily by mistrust of
> the power elite's intentions, highly emotional
> propaganda, and a basic spirit of rebellion. This
> is also good, IMHO, because it exemplifies freedom.
>
> The longer a war lasts, the more complex the
> justification for it, the more sacrifice involved
> in its prosecution, the easier it is for this
> ready-made group to attract followers and converts.
>
> The default position for antiwar converts is
> suburban nihilism, i.e., people surrounded by
> comfort, who see no immediate threat to their
> comfort, do not believe the propaganda advanced by
> the pro-war groups. "Bush lied, thousands died"
> ... yadda-yadda.
>
> The Powell Doctrine curbs our warmongers by
> precluding military adventurism. If a conflict
> meets the criteria of the Powell Doctrine, it will
> also be very difficult for the readymade anti-war
> groups to attract converts and new followers
> because: 1. the reasons for the war will be clear
> and simple, 2. the use of overwhelming force will
> make it short, and 3. the clearly-defined exit
> strategy will undercut the formulaic cries of
> "another Vietnam" or "quagmire" (which you may
> recall was voiced in the Afghan campaign).
>
> Hence, in shorthand, the Powell Doctrine prevents
> us from getting into wars that our antiwar groups
> will ensure that we lose.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
> digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
------------------------------------------------------------------
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:
