Regarding The War

[coalescent]

I agree with this. Specifically, with the part that opines that "anyone who is 100% sure of the morality of their position with regard to the war in Iraq probably hasn't understood the issues involved." I'm getting more than a little tired of the amount of absolutist commentary in the media; a lot of it feels way, way too simplistic. This war is not an absolutely good thing, and it is not an absolutely bad thing. I don't think it's possible to make it fit into one box or the other, and I don't think it's right to try to do so.

I know that I sure as hell don't understand enough about this war to feel comfortable making such assessments, anyway.

In other news, my brother is going to be on Boys and Girls this evening. I decline to comment.

Comments

[greengolux.livejournal.com]

I agree that the issues are complex, and far from black and white. I agree that this war is not an absolutely good or bad thing. I agree it's very difficult to be sure that one's position on the war is a morally right one.

But that doesn't stop me having a position. I may not be absolutely sure I'm right, but I'm willing to read about the issues, think things through, and make my own ethical judgement on the situation.

I think the one thing I am sure of is: the situation in general sucks, and I don't like it that we have had to get to this stage of ethical decision making. It sucks that administrations like Saddam Hussein's still exist, it sucks that anyone has weapons of mass destruction, and it sucks that we don't know any good ways to deal this kind of thing peacefully and end up going to war.

In virtually identical mindset PLUS...

[applez.livejournal.com]

...I would add that whatever you think of the situation, I personally find that short-circuiting of the debate, the ethical conversation, by rushing on to war (and thereby securing the 100-0 support of the Senate, for example) to be downright *terrible!*

I also fear that the only rational thing anyone in the world can do now, is to arm like there is no tomorrow. By foresaking the rule of law, the US ensures that only force and the threat of force are absolute guarantors of security.

That, of course, may change, if the US attacks North Korea ... but that rationale is validated thus far.

----

Re: In virtually identical mindset PLUS...

[mattia.livejournal.com]

...I would add that whatever you think of the situation, I personally find that short-circuiting of the debate, the ethical conversation, by rushing on to war (and thereby securing the 100-0 support of the Senate, for example) to be downright *terrible!*

For me, this pretty much nails it. It's been rhetoric from both sides, violent anti-war protest with dubious basis and rationale vaguer than the the pro-war parties. My issue, the entire time, has been the way this campaign for war (it's hard to see Bush's foreign policy as anything else, now..) has neatly sidestepped diplomacy, international law, and international consencus. I don't know that the war is Right, or Wrong (I suspect the truth is, as is almost always the case, somewhere in the middle), but I know I'm seriously dissapointed and worried by the way we got here.

Re: In virtually identical mindset PLUS...

[mattia.livejournal.com]

Interesting article on Salon.com (if you're not subbed, watch some spammy stuff, read for a day)

"It's a display of diplomatic and political incompetence on a colossal scale. We're going to pay for this."

Interesting read. Still digesting it, not sure if I agree with all of the man's conclusions, but it's definitely an interesting read. Reading the Wesley Clark thing now...

Re: In virtually identical mindset PLUS...

[applez.livejournal.com]

Right or Wrong is a measure of morality, and on those grounds the US is certainly in the Wrong I think.

If one asks on practical grounds whether the current war is in the US's best interests for security ... the nature of how the war has come about and the lack of post-war planning would seem to indicate that security will not be obtained.

If one makes the humanitarian argument, there are worse cases in the world which the US is conveniently ignoring - so that argument is pretty much scuppered. Moreover, it remains to be seen whether this war is going to translate into bona fide betterment for the Iraqi people, soon or ever.

Re: In virtually identical mindset PLUS...

[mattia.livejournal.com]

Re: morally right or wrong, in terms of post-war planning we're looking at a pretty decent-sized mess, with Rumsfled advocating a short, US-led effort in Nation Building, and Bush at least paying lip service to UN security council involvement (and Blair urging him to do so as well). His own administration can't agree on what to do.

In terms of making a humanitarian case, it could have been made, and made legitimately. That there are other places in the world that face perhaps worse situations doesn't make this choice morally wrong; it merely makes the choice for this cause OVER another cause bizarre at best. Also, WMDs are an issue; I just don't think they're an issue that's a clear and present danger to US national security, or even necessarily international security.

Bush's biggest blunder was cocking up making a good, clear, supported case for War. The urgency is something that's still not been proven, so this curtailing of diplomacy and kneecapping of international law is simply made all the more disturbing.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

But that doesn't stop me having a position

Sure. I think I'm just tired of the rhetoric - on both sides - as anything.

I think the one thing I am sure of is: the situation in general sucks, and I don't like it that we have had to get to this stage of ethical decision making.

I'd go along with that. And I think (very broadly) I'm for the ends that hopefully this should all achieve, and (equally broadly) against the means that have been used to get here.

Something I've been pondering with regard to the US/UN split: It seems to me that if the UN never had the power to really arbitrate this type of situation in the first place - if, as seems to be the case, it has been entirely reliant on the US playing nice - then the recognition of this fact is an important plus point to come out of this situation. Better to restructure the whole thing now and maybe give it some real power than leave the situation brewing even longer, and come to a head with even more damaging consequences in ten years' time. A toothless organisation doesn't really help anyone.

[gagravarr.livejournal.com]

In other news, my brother is going to be on Boys and Girls this evening. I decline to comment.

Just watched the first part of that, to see what it's like

Well, unless your brother was quite drunk when taking part, I think he may need quite expensive amounts of therapy afterwards.... So, are we going to actually see him in it, or is he just one of the loitering masses?

[gagravarr.livejournal.com]

Hmm, just how many times can they get the wrong number?!?

Kinda commedy for their inability to count, otherwise....

[despotliz.livejournal.com]

Ow. Ow ow ow my eyes.

Vernon Kay went to my school. I apologise to you all for not striking him down years ago.

[coalescent.livejournal.com]

So, are we going to actually see him in it, or is he just one of the loitering masses?

Apparently, he was part of the mass, and not picked out at any point. There are meant to be some brief shots of him early on, but we can't see them.

Chris Evans is so crap!

[applez.livejournal.com]

I'm fascinated that he can continually resurrect his career.