|
Kirkuk, Iraq—For all the talk about a widening religiosity gap between the right and the left, sentiment from the left indicates a certain religious fervor about the war in Iraq. A string of recent letters and articles from those of a more liberal persuasion suggest that they choose to ignore or simply do not believe information which is inconsistent with their basic tenets. Theirs is a policy of faith, and here is their creed.
- No, it is a policy based on reason and evidence. Bush's policy, the belief that if we just "stay the course," everything will turn out ok, is the policy that cannot be based on evidence.
We believe in the United Nations, and Kofi Annan, the maker of international legitimacy.
- Actually, I don't believe in international legitimacy, other than as something to make other people happy. However, making other people happy is a good thing to do, because angry people can be dangerous, vindictive, etc.
We believe that the UN inspections worked.
- I would say that containment worked, of which inspections were a part.
We believe that SCUD missiles fired at U.S. troops minutes after the war began don’t change anything;
- WTF does that mean?
We believe that 3 liters of sarin gas used against U.S. troops doesn’t change anything;
- It hardly rises to the level of threat that would make invasion justified, or wise.
We believe that finding evidence of mustard gas doesn’t change anything.
- Not really.
We believe that the war in Iraq conducted by a Republican president was unjustified because it lacked UN approval;
- No, I believe it was unjustified because it was downright stupid, and was a foreign policy blunder.
We believe that the "military action" in Kosovo conducted by a Democratic president was justified without UN approval.
- Yes, but as I already said, UN approval or disaproval is not how I determine whether I support a war or not, though it could be a factor.
We believe that the Iraq war was unilateral.
We believe that the participation of Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Thailand, United Kingdom, and Ukraine does not change the fact that the war was unilateral;
We believe that multilateralism can only be achieved with the participation of France and Germany;
- I don't tend to say that, but it's true that the vast majority of the burden has been taken by the US. Just go look at how many soldiers from Kazakhstan and Mongolia have been killed, compared to US soldiers.
We believe in multilateralism.
- Yes. In other words, I believe in playing well with others. If you do that, you may be able to avoid pissing off others, and may even be able to convince them to give you a hand every now and then.
We believe that this war was motivated by greed and oil;
- That was probably a factor, though I give the neocon fantasy's role more credence.
We believe that when France, Germany, and Russia opposed the war, they were motivated by principle, and not by sweetheart oil deals or Oil-For-Food kickbacks;
- Actually, at the time I thought they were being stupid by saying they would support the war if any WMDs were found by inspections. It would have been a bad idea even if inspections had turned up a few of those Sarin arty shells.
We believe that US oil prices are too high, and that the administration failed in its responsibility to do something about it.
- Actually, I believe that they are not nearly high enough.
We believe that the U.S. may only legitimately use force for humanitarian ends in one place if it does so in all places where aid might be needed;
- Ah, I see what he is getting at. But I don't really see anything humanitarian about the Iraq invasion. It is still unclear, and will remain unclear for many years, whether the "Iraqi people" were made better off by the invasion.
We believe that the U.S. may not quell threats in places where the cost is relatively low unless it is willing to use force in places like North Korea, where the cost in lives would likely be very high;
- I believe that saying thousands of people dead is "very low" trivializes thouse deaths. And no, I don't support the invasion of North Korea either.
We believe that a humanitarian action is only truly humanitarian if there are no strategic interests to muddle the altruism.
- No, I believe that humanitarian action is only humanitarian if there is reason to believe that they will actually provide a humanitarian benefit.
We believe that President Bush lied.
- Either that, or he was woefully ignorant. Either of those options is entirely unacceptable to me, as is a combination of both of those.
We believe that Prime Minister Blair lied.
- Either that, or he was woefully ignorant. Either of those options is entirely unacceptable to me, as is a combination of both of those.
We believe that when Hillary Clinton and Dick Gephardt voted for the war based on the same intelligence relied upon by Bush and Blair, they made reasonable decisions based on the intelligence available at the time.
- I didn't know that I thought that.
We believe that the administration did not make the case for war;
- They made "a" case for war. They didn't make any case for war that made any sort of sense, however.
We believe that the administration offered many different reasons but could not offer a coherent message explaining the need to go to war;
- It was quite coherent, in that they agreed with themselves a lot, but that doesn't make it rational, just self consistent, with the exception of the times that it wasn't.
We believe that the administration made perfectly clear that the only reason we were going to war was because of the threat from WMDs.
- That was the focus, more specifically the unfounded idea that Saddam enjoyed giving his WMD to territs.
We believe that there were no WMDs.
- Depends what you mean by WMD. There wasn't anything that was a threat to us, though.
We believe that finding sarin gas is 14th page news;
- I don't have an opinion about what page it should be on actually.
We believe that if the sarin gas is old, then it really isn’t a WMD we were looking for;
- That would mean that it wasn't an example of continued development of WMD, which Bush said there was.
We believe that it wasn’t really sarin gas;
- Well, the tests show that it was, I thought.
We believe that sarin gas isn’t necessarily a WMD.
- Which brings up a good point. Chemical artillery shells really aren't on the same level as nuclear warheads, or a breakout of smallpox. the NBC designation of WMD, in some cases, really doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
We believe that there was no terrorist connection to, or threat from, Iraq.
- There seem to have been "terrorist connections," but you are right that there wasn't any significant threat.
"We believe that members of Abu Nidal in Iraq would not have committed terrorist acts if we had not invaded;"
- No, he wasn't likely to do much of anything against the US. Going after Osama Bin Laden would have been a much better allocation of resources.
We believe that al Qaeda operative Abu Musab al-Zarqawi would not have committed terrorist acts if we had not invaded;
- First, we could indeed have paid more attention to Al Qaeda had we not invaded. Second, if Ansar Al-Islam was really such a threat, we could have dealt with it without invading all of Iraq. All we had to do was send a few thousand ground troops and some air support into the Kurdish controlled region of Iraq. Rolling into Basra and Baghdad was not necessary to do that.
We believe that Saddam’s terrorist training camp at Salman Pak—complete with a Boeing 707 plane used for hijacking drills—did not exist or posed no real threat;
- I believe that it was an anti-terrorist training camp funded in the 1980s by the United States, as the CIA says it was, actually. And I never trusted the testimony of a few INC defectors, which I think has served me well.
We believe that it was merely a coincidence that the pharmaceutical factory bombed by President Clinton in Sudan was using al Qaeda funds and a uniquely Iraqi formula to produce VX gas;
- Actually, I don't definitively know what went on at the plant in Khartoum.
We believe that we are responsible for bringing terror on ourselves.
- When we take actions that increase the risk to ourselves, then yes, we are.
We believe that the prisoner abuse in Abu Ghraib is widespread and is probably the tip of the iceberg;
- Actually, I don't know either way. There doesn't seem to be enough evidence to support either claim.
We believe that Abu Ghraib proves that the America’s occupation is no different than Saddam’s tyranny;
- I believe that it is very bad propaganda, yes.
We believe that any attempt to suggest that there is a moral difference between a regime which systematically killed 300,000 people and tortured countless others and a regime which punished the acts of Abu Ghraib is illegitimate.
- I believe that two wrongs don't make a right. ???
We believe that soldiers deliberately target women and children;
- I don't think that most do, although it is certainly possible that some psychopaths do.
We believe that the soldiers abuse and kill Iraqis because they are racists;
- Again, it is possible that some do.
We support our troops.
- Yep.
We believe that no one should question our statement that we "support our troops;"
- Yep.
We believe that the best thing that could happen for this country would be for Bush to lose in November;
- I might be able to imagine something better, but it would be very difficult.
We believe that the best way for Bush to lose in November is for the Iraq effort to go poorly, even if that means that more Iraqis and troops will die;
- I would prefer that Iraq go well and he lose anyway.
We believe that most of the troops are minorities and the poor;
- I thought that statistics bore that out, though I would have to check to make sure.
We believe that when the word "heroes" is used to describe our troops, it should always be enclosed in scare quotes.
- I don't really care whether you use quotes or not.
We believe in quagmire.
- What is that supposed to mean?
We believe that when fringe Iraqi groups attack hard targets and are soundly defeated with relatively low Coalition casualties, that this is inescapable evidence of crisis;
- I believe that military victory is not the sole thing we are aiming for.
We believe that Iraq is Bush’s Vietnam.
- I believe that broad historical analogies don't make a whole lot of sense, most of the time.
We believe that Vietnam is the lens through which all wars should be viewed.
- I don't believe that wars should be viewed through any historical lens, because lenses often distort reality. That said, history does teach us lessons, and we would do well to study it.
We believe that soldiers in Vietnam were baby killers;
- Any that killed babies were, any that didn't were not.
We believe that John Kerry is a hero for his service in Vietnam.
- Sure, I'll give you that.
We believe that because John Kerry is a hero, he necessarily has the national security expertise necessary to be commander-in-chief.
- No, I believe that he has the national security expertise necessary because he is an intelligent and knowledgeable person, and because of his career in the Senate. His military service doesn't hurt. I also believe that he has a hell of a lot more national security experience than Bush, who doesn't have a clue about anything at all.
We believe that any attempt to question his national security expertise based on his voting record, including his decision to vote against a supplemental bill used to buy the soldiers body armor, is an unfair attack on the patriotism of a hero, who by virtue of this honorific has the expertise to be commander-in-chief.
- I think Kerry's voting record is excellent.
We believe in the trinity: NPR, CNN, and the New York Times. We believe in Ted Kennedy, Tom Harkin, John Kerry, and all the DNC, and we look for President Clinton yet to come. Amen.
NPR is pretty good, I hate CNN, and the NY Times is sometimes OK, and sometimes very bad. I don't believe in people. And yes, I know full well that it's impossible to have one of these nonsensical collections of dribble without at least one reference to Hillary Clinton.
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
