--- Andrew Paul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: Dan Minette > Firstly, I just cant subscribe to the view that I > have to give wholesale support > to the US actions or wear a "I Love Saddam" badge. > Cant I be upset why whats happening > in Iraq? Cant I ask questions without bing a > traitor?
Yet no one has accused you of wearing an "I Love Saddam" badge or of treason. The only person being that hysterical is - you. > I thought that was waht democracy was about. > Secondly, please remind me in which post Gautum "has > shown" that people are better off > in Iraq. Look, I dont deny that they may well be so. > There is enough nasty shit on my TV each night > that I feel justified in asking the question. How do > we show that they are "better off"? There have been opinion polls on the topic. There's also common sense. Either you believe that Saddam's government was as described or you do not. If you think his government wasn't that bad, then I don't think we can have much of a discussion. If you acknowledge the truth of what his government was like, then you have to explain how what the United States is doing resembles institutionalized torture, rape, and mass murder. > I objected however to being cast as Saddams secret > love child just cos I asked the question. > Surely some middle ground exists? I only said that > cos he denied me that grey area, Well, if you're taking a middle ground area between Saddam and the American government, I think that's kind of a problem. You cannot equivocate between God and the Devil, as Catholics used to (still?) say. Just saying "grey area" over and over again like a mantra is not judgment - it is a substitute for judgment. > So, where is this space. I am not being > anti-American, > but surely we need space to be able to debate this > without being called > Saddam lovers. Its even more confronting when the > whole pretext of the war > had nothing to do with "saving" Iraq. Its annoying > to be called a traitor just cos > the government moved the goalposts on you. And its > distressing to see moral men > forced to squirm and invent so many excuses cos > their government stuffed it up. Who called you a traitor? Who called you a Saddam lover? Other than you, who in this discussion is saying anything of the sort? > So we did the latter for 30 years, after putting the > rapist in power, and now we decided its our turn. > And that makes us Princes of Morality? So you die in > a paper shreder or in from a tank shot. > Dead you are. > I know thats a provocative way to put it, and I > apologise in advance (sorry Mike) but I cant see how > the unprovoked invaders of an independent nation can > so easily take the moral high ground, or perhaps, > to be fairer, cast aspersions on those who question > the heights they seem so keen to climb. > > Andrew Again the moral equivalence. For someone who claims to dislike Saddam, Andrew, you don't seem to actually _object_ to him very much. Where's the outrage? While the actual extent of American support for Saddam is very small (the belief that we did a great deal is one of those wonderful fictions of the America-hating left), even if it were so, does that not _increase_ our responsibility to get rid of him? The sum total of what you're saying, Andrew, is Saddam is bad, the US government is bad, so I can't judge between them. I reject entirely the second and third contentions. The United States is spending untold blood and treasure to try and fix a shattered society - and it is one that _we did not destroy_. The damage to Iraq was done by Saddam, long before our invasion. To say otherwise is to say that the surgeon who cuts into your skin to remove a cancerous tumor is seeking to harm you. Even if, however, the US government were as bad as you say, you _can_ judge between it and its enemies. Either Iraq is better off being run by Saddam, or it's better off being run (for a very short time) by us. That's the choice that has been presented to you, and your vitriolic attacks on the occupation - so much more passionate than the condemnations of Saddam that came only when I challenged you - suggest, to me, which choice you would make. If you don't think so, then say so, and explain how that squares with your previous statements. ===== 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
