Monday, July 12, 2004

Talk about confusing the issues!

I don't ordinarily do two postings in one day, but then again, I don't often run into articles as patently farcicle as this entry in the Sun newspapers by Michael Coren, entitled "Rewriting War History"

Talking about the American Civil War, and trying to compare it to the situation in Iraq doesn't even constitute laughable. Ostensibly, the war on Iraq was about an alleged, growing military threat to world peace. So, instead of addressing the cause, Coren attempts to self-justify invading Iraq by claiming that deposing Saddam Hussein is analogous to emancipation of black slaves. There are huge differences between a civil war within a nation's borders, and invasion of another nation - no matter how onerous its leadership may appear.

Mr. Coren should be ashamed of his rather sad attempt at a straw man argument. I've seen better done by first year college students who don't know any better. The US _INVASION_ of Iraq was an invasion of a sovereign nation by another nation. No more, no less. Since purported reasons for invasion have been substantially disproven, one can only speculate as to the real intentions of the US government.

If deposing an onerous dictator was the only reason, then why did the US spend most of the 1970's and 1980's supporting some absolutely horrific regimes in Central and South America? Why did the United States stand by while the Taliban in Afghanistan robbed people of their civil rights and destroyed that country's historical monuments? Why does the United States leave Robert Mugabe in power in Zimbabwe? How come they haven't intervened in the horrific civil war taking place in Sudan? How come the United States has left Kim Jong-Il in power in North Korea?

The pattern is obvious - the United States didn't invade Iraq for any reasons so noble as liberating its people. That wasn't the intention in the first place. Deposing Saddam Hussein was a goal, I'm sure - but to claim it was about 'liberating Iraqis' is the weakest form of 'the ends justify the means' reasoning that I have ever seen.

No comments:

The Cass Review and the WPATH SOC

The Cass Review draws some astonishing conclusions about the WPATH Standards of Care (SOC) . More or less, the basic upshot of the Cass Rev...