<snip>
>I similarly don't take "self-determination" seriously outside the
> >democratic context of a right of a people to choose their
> >representatives. So when a people such as the Iraqis lack that basic
> >right, issues of sovereignty are pretty irrelevant in my view.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the Iranians in this sort of a situation with first the Shah, then Khomeni (and the latter was, arguably, a "popular" leader)? Last I heard, they're developing institutions of self-government, although heavily influenced still by religious law, quite nicely.
Beware Nathan; you're getting close to a paternalistic viewpoint, I think . . . .
>Iraq lacks even a hint of democratic institutions and I find the "let >them
>settle it themselves" argument ridiculous, when one side >dominates the
>state and military apparatus and butchers those who >dissent.
True enough that last clause, so why not a boycott of military paraphanalia going into the country? Then watching what happens to Saddam and his bullies.
Ultimately though, Saddam's going to go: by natural forces. Successors I suspect would "do things differently", as in Iran, and, without molestation by foreign powers, decisions could ultimately be made in a more communist direction. Since it takes a lot more energy to hold a "center" against entropic effects (such as the death of a leader with a particular "style of government" shall we say), change will come, will or nil, to the region.
>Should the French have stayed out of our "internal" war with >Britain, >a
>far more debateable issue of internal injustice?
I'll hazard a guess and say that the French and the Spaniards were acting just like the US government now: taking down a rival (or in the case of Iraq: an obstacle) to their own ambitions.
>Should >domestic >abuse in families be settled by themselves?
With the aid of a government that gives a damn, yes. If the women and kids had someplace they could go where they knew, beyond the shadow of a doubt, they'd be helped without question until they could get back on their feet financially, emotionally, and physically (and any other adverbs I missed) without the abuser being present or able to get at them, I doubt they'd bother waiting for the "I'm sorry" before heading out the door after the first punch landed.
So the Iraqi people should be given the chance to set things (relatively) right for themselves, with the international community providing the environment that this can happen. Patriarchal interference is an answer, but it's not one of the better ones.
Todd
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx