First and foremost, there is the issue of sovereignty. A
I understand, but UN Generals and Iraqi women are saying fugg all that - when babies are dying evil happens when good people do nothing. That means a lot more to oprah and the christians at the revival than some silly lines on a map.
I mean we just bullied China into not selling body parts anymore you know. That hurts my dad - he can't buy a kidney now like he was going too from them. Evangilist morals busted the chinese free market and possible ended my dads life a lot sooner.
Liberation is a slippery slope. What is to one person liberation is to another interference.
I am sure there were some who would have thought saving 800K in Rwanda was intereference of thier national soveriegnty - so what is supposed to be more important out there in the world - human life or lines on a map? I hear you Regli - I am just having trouble believing you really believe what you are telling me.
however arbitrary. It is not ANY country’s or culture’s prerogative to decide what the laws should be in another sovereign nation.
I hear you Regli - but in my heart of hearts I just can't feel good about myself if I could have done something to stop 800K people from dying senseless deaths but said to myself nope - lines on a map are more important. What of the jews that got murdered in Germany - say he never invaded another country but just killed all those jews - not our business right? Is it so easy for you?
Based on what we know today, Iraq was invaded under the wrong pretext in violation of international law.
Yes, bush leads people were he wants - justified or not. I think 800K died in Rwanda because there was no big oil interests over there. I dont think his reasons for going to Iraq were as noble as he makes out.
Many people have suffered including many Iraqi soldiers that were killed during the attacks. These soldiers often aren’t mentioned but in fact, in an illegal war,
Well now we get back into what is more important, the murder of innocents or lines on a map - the iraqi woman and canadian general said the murder of innocents will always need to be stopped - even if you cross lines on a map to do it.
The problem is that the U.S.' and Britain’s Iraq adventure has resulted in many more lives lost and caused a lot more suffering than was happening under Saddam Hussein.
That may be true - I am not fully committed to that idea yet - I do read a lot of bad things, but I read a lot of good things too. I talk to folks over there over the internet - some like what has happened - some don't.
However, legally this is not the point. Self determination is the key here and Iraq has the right to self determination however painful that may turn out to be.
I don't know Regli - the jews asked we never forget - then I read about 800K slaughtered in Rwanda and wonder if we forgot.
Likely it can’t be any worse than what is happening today as it has never been as bad in Iraq as it is today.
I talked to a road engineer over there - he said he was very thankful Bush came - nothing was as bad as living under saddam.
Just another point, that woman likely will need to "liberated" again soon as under the new constitution women have lost many rights they were afforded under Saddam Hussein.
I am glad you brought this up - this was the main point I was going to drive home and had something waiting for you after you finally responded - Bush used this woman as a show piece for his theater - this convinces many of the shallow envangelicals they have the RIGHT to do what was done - but that is EASY - and usually the world is a lot more complex and hard - your article is good - but this is from the very woman he used at his state of the union in 2005:
tompaine.com
In Salon's War Room (subscription only), Tim Grieve reminds just how big a deal the president made out of his commitment to liberating the women of Iraq: "Remember Safia Taleb al-Suhail? She was the Iraqi woman George W. Bush trotted out for his State of the Union address earlier this year, the daughter of a man murdered by Saddam Hussein who provided the feel-good moment of the president's performance when, sitting up there in the balcony with Laura Bush, she embraced the mother of an American soldier killed in Iraq."
Grieve continues:
We wonder if she'll be invited back for next year's speech.
Bush says he knows that Iraq's still unfinished constitution will be a victory for women because Condoleezza Rice told him so. But if the president were to check in with Suhail, he might come away with a different story. According to a Reuters report, Suhail, who is now Iraq's ambassador to Egypt, believes that the draft Iraqi constitution represents a major setback for the women of her country.
"When we came back from exile, we thought we were going to improve rights and the position of women," she said. "But look what has happened -- we have lost all the gains we made over the last 30 years. It's a big disappointment."
She is concerned -- as many Iraqis are -- that the draft constitution allows religious sects to run Iraq's family courts, likely leaving decisions about divorce, inheritance and other issues important to women in the hands of Islamic clerics. "This will lead to creating religious courts," she said. "But we should be giving priority to the law."
Suhail said the United States has sold out Iraq's women in the drive to get a constitution -- any constitution -- approved by Iraq's National Assembly. "We have received news that we were not backed by our friends, including the Americans," she said. "They left the Islamists to come to an agreement with the Kurds."
Just to be clear: I find not the tiniest shred of satisfaction in having been right about Bush's (un)willingness to defend Iraqi women's rights. Yifat Susskind of MADRE wrote for TomPaine.com recently about how Bush's war has left Iraqi women "worse off today...then they were under the notoriously repressive regime of Saddam Hussein." Some noble cause.
Rove and Bush are very good at theater - he didn't mentions this in his 2006 state of the union did he? :( |
