--- Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >You _can_ make this argument, I guess, but actually > >_making_ it makes you an apologist for one of the > most > >brutal dictators in human history - you have to > >believe all of the propaganda that he and his > >supporters put out. Are you willing to go that > far, > >Ritu? > > I dont get this sort of black and white thinking. > It scares me as much as the mob violence we saw on > TV.
Then something's wrong with you. When the mob violence happened, I had friends call me to say that I shouldn't go over there - because, to quote one, "I don't want the last time I see you to be your body on the front page of the New York Times." That really happened to four people. > I had no time for Saddam or his regime. To suggest > that just questioning > the outcomes of the war is somehow supporting Saddam > is ludicrous, and well, > the way you phrased it, somewhat offensive. But this is not, in fact, what happened. And if it offended you, grow up and move outside of your ideological echo chamber. Saying things were better in Iraq before the war than after is, actually, kind of supporting the regime, because the only way you can possibly believe that is to believe what Saddam and his regime said about the way things were in Iraq. If you paid _any attention at all_ to _anything_ about what life was really like there under his regime, you wouldn't say that. The _Iraqis_ don't say that. Who's left, exactly? I'm sure you "had no time for Saddam or his regime." I'm willing to bet, though, that you opposed any and all efforts to actually _do_ something about Saddam and his regime. And you seem a lot more upset about people who _were_ than you are about the regime itself. > > I didn't like Sadaam, and I dont like what is > happening in Iraq now. > I can hold both those postitions and still sleep at > night. Fine. I don't either. But if you hold those positions with _equal intensity_ then you're morally obtuse at best. > The only way I could take your position is to deny > that there was any other > possible approach to dealing with Saddam than the > one we chose. > And that is patently untrue. > > Andrew Well, there was no other way of _getting rid of Saddam_ than the one we chose. There were other ways of dealing with him, certainly But that is immaterial. The question is, are things better in Iraq than they were under Saddam? Yes, they are. A more interesting question is - why are so many people who so self-righteously proclaim their morality and concern for the people of Iraq far more upset about _overthrowing_ Saddam than they ever were about Saddam itself? What does _that_ say about them? ===== Gautam Mukunda [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Freedom is not free" http://www.mukunda.blogspot.com __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Small Business $15K Web Design Giveaway http://promotions.yahoo.com/design_giveaway/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
