From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Wed Apr 02 2003 - 23:16:50 MST
John Grigg wrote:
>
> "U.S. warlords" you say? From my point of view the term is "U.S. military defenders of human rights." Hubert, try to think of all the people who will be saved every year from torture, murder and rape (a form of torture) when the U.S. and British forces overthrow Saddam's sadistic regime.
>
US warlords is quite adequate to describe Rummy and company.
"Defenders of human rights" is not descriptive of invading a
country on spurious grounds for reasons that have nothing to do
with defending anyone's rights.
> Very sadly, sometimes for a time humanity must endure suffering and
> death to stop a far greater evil.
What evil is that? Who says it is justified in this particular
case? There are mamny fine arguments that it is not in the
least justified and that this is an act of aggression on our
part. We are talking about the invasion and occupation of Iraq
by the US, occupation for an indefinite time-period, and only
involving those US-picked Iraqis that we deign to have as mere
advisers. In exactly what way is this liberation from tyranny?
In exactly what way will this act lead to an improvement in the
attitudes toward the US in the region? In what way will it lead
to less terrorism? In what way is the deterioration of US
citizen rights under Patriot and other Acts conducive to
"defending human rights"?
> This is what is going on now. To want to stop all wars of this
>nature would be a horrible disservice to oppressed and violated people
>everywhere.
The USSR used to make the exact same argument about "liberating"
various oppressed people. It is a popular excuse for aggression.
> It is not being cold-blooded, but simply being realistic in the
> sense that at times a high price must be paid to cut a cancer
> out of the human body politic.
>
The highest cost will be paid to cut out the cancer that is
bloating the body of the US beyond all recognition and infecting
all the world with a lop-sided chop logic justifying any and all
aggression if we can claim oppression of others, any semblance
of threat to ourselves, or warm-hearted sharing of the "American
Way" whether they are free to admit they want it or not.
>
> Oh, by the way, don't call me "pro war", instead call me
> "pro justice"...
I think I am going to be sick.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 02 2003 - 23:17:27 MST