Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greenspirit who wrote (173427)	10/27/2005 6:23:20 PM
From: cnyndwllr	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

"Having said that, I don't blame you for distancing yourself on the broader issue of how a society should decide to wage war. I've come to expect the obvious unwillingness many have in regard to that part of the equation." But wait, who wrote; The question is not "how many," the question is "was it justified." That question is three-pronged. Was there a reason for war that justified the expenditure of the lives of our children? Was there no other way to achieve the mission that justified the war? Was the mission "doable?" If ANY of the answers to those question are "no," then the war cannot be justified and NOT ONE LIFE should have been sacrificed. I guess that would be me...the person who distanced himself from "the broader issue of how a society should decide to wage war." And you certainly knew that when you wrote your essay in response. Let's see if I can get every word of that well-articulated, possibly brilliant response? Oh, now I've got it: "Yes, no, and finally yes, it's proving more so each and every day as Iraqi's take on more of the terrorist hunting operations while building a lasting democracy." Reality, however, is a pesky thing and it has a way of running over the pronouncements of those who believe that saying something loudly enough and often enough will make it true. Let's take a look at the three-pronged test you so casually answered: "Was there a reason for war that justified the expenditure of the lives of our children? "Yes?" Is that why the first and second and third reasons for the war have been discarded. That's right, the reasons that were used to justify, or is that sell, the war have been discarded. And remember, not by those who oppose the war but rather by the architects of the war. Only a few bobbin heads even bother to rake those out of the compost pile. The current reason is "build a lasting democracy." Ok, if you want to send our young to die over there for that then tell me, what would an Iraqi democracy look like? You should know enough about the culture and the religion of that region to venture a guess so tell me, what kind of majority rule would that democracy enforce? Good for women? Good for Christians and other non-Muslims? Good for Sunnis? Non radical? Tell me and then tell me why it's in our interests. I'll be waiting for another one-word answer. But what about the next prong of the test: "Was there no other way to achieve the mission that justified the war" "yes?" OK, which of the many "missions." One thing for sure, though, he-he-he, we didn't let any grass grow under our feet waiting for Saddam to worm his way out of war before we went in there with guns to show them whose side God was on, did we? It's a joke to claim we did everything possible to avoid a war when it's more and more clear that Bush/Cheney did everything possible to assure a war. But let's look at the third prong: "Was the mission "doable?" "Yes?" But we haven't yet found a mission that's "doable" in Iraq. Of course we haven't stopped defining and redefining the "mission" yet even though we've backed far off our initial goals. One day we'll define it in a way that allows us to get out before we're totally shit-kicked and that's when men like you will claim victory. Unfortunately, however you eventually define that watered-down mission it will not meet the first two tests. But hey, you can always tell us again how we need to put these tragic deaths "in context."