Post #91,749
3/26/03 9:12:56 AM
|
The most diabolical article yet.
ABCNews.com has the following article that purports to explain why many people feel conflicted about the war:
[link|http://abcnews.go.com/sections/scitech/DyeHard/dyehard.html|http://abcnews.go.co...Hard/dyehard.html]
"Feeling conflicted? It's nothing more than a common biological reaction."
B.F. Skinner would be proud of that one, methinks.
Not to disparage the research being done by those folks over there, but could people feel conflicted because there are issues on both sides of the argument that they find compelling?
For myself, I am against the war -- that said, I am troubled by my own position, because there are arguments put forth by the hawks that I can't completely dismiss. I find myself in the position of being against the war not because I feel sorry for Iraq, but because I think the US is setting a horrible, horrible precident that can lead us towards justifying anything we want to do, at any time, for any reason, simply because we want to.
But there's the rub -- I am uncomfortable with the fact that my preferred course of action involves LEAVING HUSSEIN ALONE. Which means, essentially, that I think the right thing to do is to PERMIT Hussein to continue brutalizing the Iraqi people, and to continue his progrom against the Kurds.
I'm not comfortable with that. While I don't believe Bush truly has the Iraqi people's best interests at heart, I do think there's a CHANCE that they might come out better than they did before we invaded.
But that can't excuse our positioning ourselves as "King America." But... but... but...
It's a dialectic. The fact that I'm troubled isn't enough for me to come out and endorse the war, but my opposition to the war isn't enough for me to stop being troubled.
This is a moral conflict, and I'm always a bit bothered when a scientist says, in effect, "you are having a moral conflict because of these specific neurological pathways." If there's a biological reason for it, then it can be "corrected" medicinally, and I'm not comfortable with that thought, no, not one bit.
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #91,755
3/26/03 9:42:05 AM
|
Your not cured yet boy.
I've learned my lesson, sir. I see now what I've never seen before. I'm cured. Praise God.
[image|http://www.gryp.fsnet.co.uk/orange.jpg||||]
|
Post #91,764
3/26/03 10:00:46 AM
|
Look at more options.
But there's the rub -- I am uncomfortable with the fact that my preferred course of action involves LEAVING HUSSEIN ALONE. Which means, essentially, that I think the right thing to do is to PERMIT Hussein to continue brutalizing the Iraqi people, and to continue his progrom against the Kurds. We're spending $75,000,000,000 (that's BILLION with the big B) on this war. Is that the BEST way we could spend that much money to help those people? I'm not comfortable with that. While I don't believe Bush truly has the Iraqi people's best interests at heart, I do think there's a CHANCE that they might come out better than they did before we invaded. Some will come out better, some will come out worse. That's what happens when you destroy the current power structure. Again, we're spending $75 BILLION on this war. Is this war the BEST way to help these people? I don't believe it is. We haven't even educated these people on what a Democracy is.
|
Post #91,768
3/26/03 10:07:48 AM
|
So if we send 75 billion...
...in aid to Iraq...10 years from now you'll be back telling everyone how we continued to support a horrible Iraqi dictatorship and how everything is "our" fault for doing so.
Lather, rinse, repeat.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #91,771
3/26/03 10:14:39 AM
|
Sweet.
That's the *only* other option is it? Nice strawman Bill.
The world is only a simple place to the simple.
|
Post #91,774
3/26/03 10:16:51 AM
|
Not the only one...
...but one supported by historical precedent....and that aid didn't even total 75B.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #91,780
3/26/03 10:26:39 AM
|
Don't bother.
That's one of the reasons I've stopped responding to him. He can't make a point that isn't based upon lies about what I've said.
It would cost practically NOTHING to setup a broadcast over Iraq that provides an education about the different political systems. That's the first step. We need to educate the people on what their options are.
|
Post #91,792
3/26/03 10:51:52 AM
3/26/03 10:53:50 AM
|
Theres another story already posted...
...about RF broadcasts directed at Iraq in their native language.
Next.
If you push something hard enough, it will fall over. Fudd's First Law of Opposition
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
Your fear is showing again...humble god.
Edited by bepatient
March 26, 2003, 10:53:50 AM EST
|
Post #91,779
3/26/03 10:26:32 AM
|
I do understand that
Truly. The cost of this war is staggering. Is it the best way to help the Iraqi people? I doubt it. I don't know what the best option is.
Everything about how the US went about getting into this war is wrong. Manipulating US Citizens, wrong. Violating international law, wrong. Destroying any pretence of diplomacy among our ALLIES -- so very, very wrong. The precedent the US is setting for the future, if I may be blunt, scares the shit out of me. And that we're doing it while wrecking an economy that, barring the war, could actually be *recovering*, really pisses me off.
And I certainly don't want to see this happen with North Korea, which is led by another madman that I would be perfectly happy to see kick off tomorrow. All that aside, part of me hopes that we win this war quickly, and that a democratic Iraq DOES get established. I don't know if that's my optimistic side or my naive, jingoistic side.
At any rate, that's not the part of me that wins the argument. It's just the part that never really goes away.
"We are all born originals -- why is it so many of us die copies?"
- Edward Young
|
Post #91,785
3/26/03 10:36:30 AM
|
'wot 'e said...
Despite Moron^h^h^h^h^hMarlowe's attempts to portray me as something I'm not, I'm pretty much in the same boat. The dictators have to go, including dictator Bush. The problem is, how do we get rid of them without setting a much worse precident.
"Many that live deserve death. And some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them? Then do not be too eager to deal out death in judgement. For even the wise cannot see all ends." - J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring.
|
Post #91,799
3/26/03 11:14:23 AM
|
Or replacing them with another dictator.
That's why we need to start at the most basic level.
The individual.
Educate the individual.
But we haven't even done that with our own people.
|
Post #91,786
3/26/03 10:40:28 AM
|
hers something to make you feel better
[link|http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=31718|http://www.worldnetd...?ARTICLE_ID=31718]
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
Since corporations are the equivelent of human but they have no "concience" they are by definition sociopaths
|
Post #91,960
3/26/03 5:58:46 PM
|
YAN version, via NPR this AM:
..that "some-Saddam" was indeed sleeping 'near' the bunker so thoroughly bashed: in a house right next door!
Sometimes.. precision is just a tad toooo Precise. Maybe. At any rate, fotos would reveal if in fact this house did withstand the chaos feet away; this wouldn't prove the matter, but would surely lend credence.
In 5 years - we'll Know. Before? meta-Spin by Experts.
Ashton
|
