Anniversary

Jeffrey Fisher jfisher at igc.org
Thu Sep 12 11:30:29 PDT 2002


On Thu, 12 Sep 2002 12:51:13 -0400 Dennis Perrin <dperrin at comcast.net> wrote:


> Jeffrey Fisher
>
> > i don't favor an invasion, so i don't feel
> the need to address that.
> > incidentally, that stuff is far from worked
> out in afhganistan, either,
> but
> > that apparently doesn't affect your view of
> that situation.
>
> Of course it's still a mess in Afghanistan, and
> may be for some time. What
> "affects" my view of the situation is that a
> fascist terrorist network
> slaughtered US civilians while being protected
> by the tyranny of the
> Taliban. To do nothing would have doubtless
> brought on more attacks, so
> there really wasn't any choice, morally or
> geopolitically. I would have
> preferred Security Council approval, which Bush
> could have easily gotten
> (and we know why he bypassed the UN), but
> overall I think the choice to hit
> back was the right one. Obviously.

the problem is the reduction of alternatives to a single one and the ease with which dismissal of the only approximation of a full international body the world has.


>
>
> > well, that's what i'm getting at and that's
> where i have a hard time
> > understanding any alleged "difference"
> between AQ and saddam as anything
> other
> > than imperial vengeance.
>
> I've stated what I think the difference is. If
> you reject it or otherwise
> can't see it, what more can I say?

well, you see a difference i don't think exists. but that just means we've come to an impasse, i suppose. maybe that's my version of "so be it".


>
> > you're arguing that the US military won't be
> able to manage the
> > situation, and then you hope that the people
> he's gassed in the past or
> ther
> > starving millions will rise up and overthrow
> him?
> >
> > unlikely.
>
> Maybe. Who really knows -- you?

snide rhetorical device, but it certainly doesn't make your argument any more persuasive if you're proposing that we base policy on the distant and almost certainly (cf. luke's "would probably") illusory hope that the People of Iraq will rise up and take their freedom all on their own. i think, a la luke, they "would probably not" . . . who knows better -- you?

j



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list