Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
Flare Sci-Fi Forums
»
Community
»
The Flameboard
»
Saddam got caught!!!?!
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message:
HTML is enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by David Sands: [QB] Oh my, where do I start? (Number 1 you say? You did give me a nice numbered list after all. Thanks for that. I appreciate it when people organize their arguments. No sarcasm meant there. A semester of reading disorganized cases from courts and you appreciate the little things like people numbering stuff.) This really isn�t the place to give the fullest account of all my objections to each of these statements, but I�ll try to give a concise answer to each and we can agree to disagree. I would also point out that I think there are two issues I see in your response: the war and the economy. The two are linked, but I was trying to point out that capturing Saddam might remove some of the criticism of current policy regarding the war. But in the spirit of debate, I�ll respond to each. That said, though, I�m not looking to start a flame war here. I just want to give the other side too. I�m not going to respond to anything arising out of this exchange from here on out unless it is patently false. 1. If I recall correctly, when he said that at NATO headquarters, the context he meant that in was the admission of new states, e.g. Poland, Romania, the Baltic states, versus the established states. But I understand quite well that we all know he thinks lowly of the Rhineland nations� policies. No argument there. Ultimately, this is a diplomatic argument over style. How much it�s hurt us is a counterfactual argument we can�t know with metaphysical certitude. But I think it�s given more significance than an underlying difference between the United States and the continental EU. See number 12 below. 2. I won�t get into an argument over public international law here. I will let the statement of the Dean of Princeton�s foreign affairs school speak for me. Regarding the invasion of Iraq, she called it �illegal but legitimate.� I think it�s important to see in international law the much greater importance of the second over the first. Again, see number 12 below. 3. Just give the interrogators time. It�s been less than 24 hours since we got him. On a related point, just because something is a weapon of mass destruction kills masses of people doesn�t mean it has to be big. A vial of the right stuff hidden in the desert with the help of a GPS would make it unfindable unless we nab the burryer. On a more ultimate point: WMD are not the only reason we went in. Even Christopher �Mother Theresa is a fraud� Hitchens endorsed the war. It�s the difference between motivation and justification. All that is sufficient for the policy to be acceptable is to have a single good justification. The motivation is irrelevant. 4. Again, give things a little time. Nabbing Saddam might get us that yet. I�m optimistic, but just remember that the people, like the polls that measure them, are fickle. Give it a few weeks and we can discuss this more. 5. Give the economy time to rev up. We�ve got near double digit growth last quarter. A few years of growth like in the 1990s, and we can get things solvent again. I�m not going to get into economic policy here. I�ll leave the debate to people like Robert Samuelson, Larry Kudlow, and Paul Krugman. But I think we�re going to see a lot more good happen over the next 6 months than the Left wants. 6. Suicide bombings are linked to supporters of Saddam (again, give things time to settle with this and let it sink in) and groups like Al Qaeda and Islamic Jihad. I think more is going on with the latter than we�re let on to. And with good reason. I say give them more time to separate the two out; then we can focus our attention on the latter. The constitution part will be made easier with the capture of Saddam, but remember we are losing good Iraqis over there every day to assassinations. Let�s see how much people come out of their shell with Saddam captured. 7. Hmmm. That�s a little too broad to be answerable. But this gets back to my point about my earlier post: not saying that this will take all the wind out of their sails, only that it will take a little out. 8. Bin Laden is a red herring now according to most intelligence agencies reports I�ve read about second hand. The real catch is Zawahiri (sp?). But now that we have this significant thorn out of our paw, I�m sure we can start going after Al Qaeda a little harder. Let me also say something else: I think you�re argument looks a lot like �unless we can go after all of them at once, don�t go after any of them.� Have to choose your battles. Round 2, US. Round 3 is coming up. You can�t fight everyone at once. 9. When has the UN ever, on its own, succeeded in building up a nation from scratch like Iraq? Never. Kofi Annan has said he�s not putting his people on the ground until things start getting safer. Things will now I think, and they can do a lot of good when things are settled down, but they are batting .000 when it comes to nation building. Leave it to the people with proven track records (German, Japan, Korea, the Philippines, etc) 10. Again, this gets to the argument over the sufficiency of single justifications. Just because one piece of evidence didn�t come in just right didn�t mean we didn�t have other reasons to go. All you need is one. 11. I�m not denying that the House of Saud hasn�t been very cooperative, and I would like to see them take a little more responsibility for spreading Islamofascism around the world, but I am going to leave it to the professionals whether we ought to be ripping down a country like we might do if we cut Saudi Arabia out like that. 12. This is topic WAY too big to address here. But I have an essay from Francis Fukuyama you ought to read about the underlying difference between the US and EU. This is not an argument over unilateralism but over the legitimacy upon which nations are founded. Before you start arguing over unilateralism again, I ask that you please read this essay: http://www.cis.org.au/Events/JBL/JBL02.htm 13. Methinks you might have an interest in this, being a Star Trek fan? :) I would like to see a space program more attuned to interstellar traffic, given that we have placed all our species�s eggs in this basket we call Earth, but something tells me we need more basic science before we can do that. I would rather see more funding for that than more shuttle flights. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
© 1999-2024 Charles Capps
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3