Re: War: why everyone wishes it would stop but no one can stop it.

ijdavis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Ian Davis) wrote in
news:e4lm2u$gem$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:

In article <Xns97C8B25244FA0mcruise@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
JEB <enon@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Let me pose a couple of hypothetical questions here.

Presume that the same pictures were a result of Iran invading Iraq
after Iraq had lobbed a bomb at it? Assume the same history of
violence unfolded. Would you feel gripped by the same horror?


What is the point of your hypothetical. Are you trying to suggest
that the US invade Iraq after Iraq had lobbed a bomb at it. There has
never been anyone who has presented any evidence whatsoever that Iraq
was in anyway involved in 9/11. Why your chosen story line?

The hypothetical had nothing to do with any facts about 9/11 or Iran.

I was trying to frame the situation in a different context. I was
interested whether or not that change of context changed your reaction to
what you saw. It did for you. For me it did not change it that much. Your
emotion seem mostly driven by whether or not it was done by the U.S. or
done in some justified manner. Mine is simpler. It is primarily a feeling
of human sympathy for civilans that suffer the harshness of war that has
little to do with those issues. Thus I feel much the same about what I read
and see in Africa, where the U.S. is not involved, whereas you probably do
not.


Why not stick to the facts. Iraq invaded Iran in what was then called
operation whirlwind. Back then I held that as the victim the world
should have sided with Iran against Iraq. I've said that many times
since, and I firmly believe that had the world opposes Saddams first
war of aggression, their would never have been his second.

You may have been prescient about Iran. My hypothetical had nothing to do
with that. To me, the suffering in Iraq is not at all about who's doing it.
The maimed children suffer the same whether or not some someone met a test
of justification about promulgating the war. I believe many who are
screaming about the U.S. would shrug off the suffering if Iran were causing
it. The burns, the wounds, the grief are indifferent to all of those
notions.

How in just six
years could all that has transpired take on such normality that it not
even a subject in need of any airing, concern or apparent alarm by
most in the US?

One dynamic has changed whether you acknowledge it or not. Most of the
mayhem in Iraq today is NOT at the hands of the U.S. and would not stop if
the U.S. left tomorrow. I think that's true, whether or not it suits
someone's ideas about the U.S. presence.


I know where my various horrors can be found, but I really don't see
where yours can. You tell me you'd not give up your freedom to do it
all again, even knowing what the doing it all again would mean. What
is the point of arguing that what has been done is wrong with one who
would do it all again tomorrow.

You really missed my point. I simply refused to surrender my free for a
tyranny of control that you believed could prevent such a war. And I still
feel the same. One because I have no faith in the bargain, And two I
believe freedom and its associated creativity have a better chance of
shaping a postive future for mankind than heavy-handed control that has
been the hallmark of historical governance.


Presume that the 9/11 attack had been perpetrated by some cell
quartered in Iraq. The same pictures. The same history. Would you feel
gripped by the same horror?


Again why the need for hypotheticals. It may not be the case but it
is easier to imagine that the 9/11 attack was perpetrated with some
support from the then government of Afghanistan.

Same point as above. Given different reasons for the war, the pictures for
you would apparently not be as horrible. If the outcome is the same, my
point is that except, for intellectual anquish and inner moral angst, the
outcome is the same. That fact makes me very reluctant to jump on the
bandwagon of suffering, no matter what I feel about the justification for
retaliation or even defense. It is that basic reluctance to go to war
because one is deeply aware of the evil it spawns and the suffering it
causes that provides an antidote or at least forbearance for either
intellectually justified wars or cowbow forades.




Is it really the horror of what's happening? If so, then war, whether
internal, or between external combatants is seen for the unruly
offense against mankind it usually is, regardless of the justification
or lack thereof.

No my horror is at starting an illegal war of aggression.

We differ quite a bit about what horrifies us. That's not to dimiss
consideration of any legality or illegality. A "legal" war can be just as
devastating as an illegal one, and I am not immediately mollified by the
fact that it is "justfied." Wars are always "justified" in someone's mind.

I'm looking at something beyond the "right" to start a war.



If everything's different, then I would think your distress is more
about the U.S. premise for promulgating the war, than the actual
horror of what you see.


Everything is not different. The dead people are still dead. All the
horrors are still real. Why would you try to say otherwise.

I wholeheartedly agree. And that is the key point. It makes not one iota of
difference to the dead and wounded in my hypotheticals about who did what
or whether or not they met someone's test of justification. I start from
that point of compassion, and work back to what must be done, rather than
starting from some theoretical ground of whether or not it fits someone's
idea of a just war.

This is
not some radio show that you can switch channels on when you find your
self disturbed by its content.

Actually many people do this. They do not even bother to look or turn on
your radio. This willingness to ignore is a significant part of the
problem, because people don't really understand the suffering involved. I
believe they would react differently if they did. My contention is that
looking at Iraq because the U.S. is there is equally selective when there
is ample cause to look elsewhere too. I think this is a difference between
us. You look at Iraq because you think the U.S. involvement there flawed.
My contention is that it deserves to be looked at independent of U.S.
involvement, and certainly independent of whether the war was "justified"
or not.


For me the logical premise is that horror and suffering are just
horror and suffering without mitigation of some "just" or "unjust"
initiating premise.


For me the logical premise is that horror and suffering are a
consequence of a universe gone horrible astray, and I'll mourn that
fact, even if you will not. There was a moment in time where futures
hang in the balance and we betrayed whatever good futures exists in
our then universe by using our power of choice to choose that which
was wrong instead of that which was right. It is the story of the
garden of Eden all over again, just set in a 21st century context. It
is even set in that very same mythical location where Eden is supposed
to have existed. You can call it time and chance if you wish. I call
it a blight on all future history.

We see things quite differently. I doubt we'll ever agree on this. I'm
little concerned about war theoretically marring someone's ideal pristine
world.I'm much more concerned about what is actually going on.


There's no zinger here, nor ANY belittling of what you see or feel. To
me it's just that the picture is much bigger than whether the U.S. had
adequate "reason" to start this.


Yes the picture is much bigger, and it begs a very big question. Is
this going to be the last time the US and the US people are going to
think that their right to start war trumps the right of other people
not to have wars of aggression imposed on them.

That is a significant question. And to me an equally important question is
whether or not we'll come to our senses and realize the suffering that war
engenders whether or not we want to feel pleased about our justification
for initiating them - and whether or not we caused them.



or is it the case that with the US what one now
sees is what one is in future going to get more of. Is this a ship on
the beach from which anything will be learned or just one more
shipwreck courtesy of the American people in what is to be an endless
production line that produces as its finished product new shipwrecks.
Is 2006 to be labelled the beginning of the end, or the end of the
beginning.


Don't know. That troubles me too. I hope it's an aberration and that we've
not lowered our threshold for the indefinite future.

jeb

.

Relevant Pages