Understanding the "Other"

[Buzzbee]

Originally posted by Radii
I think you totally missed the point of the post, Tarkus. I'm assuming none of us remember the Civil War personally, so the comparasion to 9/11 seems a valid one to me. For those of us in America it is the only example of innocent lives being taken within the safety and security of our homeland by an outside force.

For the compassionate among us, it seems reasonable to simply think about the fact that there are going to be a lot of innocent iraqi's who die at our hands, intentional or not.

The fact that Saddam is a ruthless leader who has been known to kill his own, is certainly a valid counter to this argument, but still I don't see the problem with simply letting the initial posts speak for themselvse without twisting them wildly.

If we're going to pre-judge Darkiller because his location is "Paris, France" the least we can do is pre-judge John Galt for his location saying "Manhattan" He certainly has more of a right than my "Atlanta, GA" to discuss 9/11.

Third post of the day I'm going to regret not deleting.

Ummm, Radii - are you SURE that's not Manhattan, Kansas? And are you SURE he is REALLY in Manhattan?

I don't know. He very well could be and probably is, but just wanted to make a point.

[Radii]

I have no idea I'm just trying to follow the crowd and make snap judgements about people's personalities based on words they type on a webpage!

I'm actually lying about the whole Atlanta thing. I actually live in Marsailles. (it's getting late and I'm tired)

[Anrhydeddu]

It seems that wishing all nations can enjoy the freedoms and liberties we have (as imperfect that might be) is the better and right thing to do. When we see a country run by a maniacal tyrant, or being forced into communistic dictatorship, or by any left-wing tyrant, shouldn't we try something? Apparently it is in vogue for liberal intellectuals to demean the cause of freedom and liberty in saying that it is no better (or even worse) than socialistic/communistic/tyranical governments. I believe in all my heart that it is better and can't be so selfish in desiring others to feel and live the same way. Apparently most of the world feels the same way when they are allowed to, as evidence in the migrations to the US. But as shown in our history with the Revolutionary War and Civil War, such pursuit of freedom and liberty is costly, but certainly the results were worth obtaining.

[Tarkus]

Originally posted by Radii
I think you totally missed the point of the post, Tarkus. I'm assuming none of us remember the Civil War personally, so the comparasion to 9/11 seems a valid one to me. For those of us in America it is the only example of innocent lives being taken within the safety and security of our homeland by an outside force.

For the compassionate among us, it seems reasonable to simply think about the fact that there are going to be a lot of innocent iraqi's who die at our hands, intentional or not.

The fact that Saddam is a ruthless leader who has been known to kill his own, is certainly a valid counter to this argument, but still I don't see the problem with simply letting the initial posts speak for themselvse without twisting them wildly.

If we're going to pre-judge Darkiller because his location is "Paris, France" the least we can do is pre-judge John Galt for his location saying "Manhattan" He certainly has more of a right than my "Atlanta, GA" to discuss 9/11.

Third post of the day I'm going to regret not deleting.

Well, you may have missed my point. The comparison would have been appropriate if we lived under a cruel dictator that was killing his own people by the thousands. My main point was that Saddam has killed, and more than likely would have killed many more innocent civilians than the coalition will most likely kill in this war.

Tarkus

[Radii]

Originally posted by Tarkus
Well, you may have missed my point. The comparison would have been appropriate if we lived under a cruel dictator that was killing his own people by the thousands. My main point was that Saddam has killed, and more than likely would have killed many more innocent civilians than the coalition will most likely kill in this war.

Tarkus

I can definitely respect that point.

[Ben E Lou]

Galt,

Not ignoring you. I woke up later than normal today, and ended up writing a long response in another thread, and now I've got a breakfast meeting at 7am.

--Ben

[Ben E Lou]

OK...back now....here we go...I haven't read past the post I wanted to respond to, so apologies if I'm re-hashing any old ground.

First, the US avoids maximizing civilian deaths because it CAN whereas poorer nations or terrorists don't have that luxury. I agree with Skydog in that the US is good because they have poored tons of money into smart weapons, but I'm not sure our motives are so pure. I think a reasonable argument can be made that smart weapons are just better militarily for targetting and that we decrease civilian deaths to prevent a public backlash in the post-Vietnam era.

1. I'm not sure about whether or not they are better militarily for targetting. Not knowing cost figures (and being too lazy to try to find them all), I just have a sneaky feeling that it would be easier (both in cost and in the time spent developing) to carpet-bomb with non-guided systems, but I don't claim to know that for a fact.
2. Yes, there's definitely a political side to war, and smart weapons certainly serve that side of things well.

Either way, terrorists can't attack Fort Knox in the U.S. because they won't likely succeed. Let me be clear, I am NOT saying that the attacks on the Twin Towers where therefore justified. I am saying that if terrorists want to exercise their will through military means (like the U.S.), they can't do so in the ways we do.

...nor would they want to. You just can't compare the two. We're going after targets of military importance. No rational person would argue that point. They're going after targets of symbolic value and/or targets intended to maximize civilian deaths.

Second, terrorists have not actually caused that many civilian deaths.

...but they sure would cause more if they could.

Civilian deaths in the original Gulf War and in Afghanistan far exceeded the deaths on Sept. 11th. The point that they seek to maximize deaths seems wrong given the targets normally selected. The WTC was targetted for its significance - there were many other targets to hit to increase body counts.

Considering the two-fold effects of 9/11, civilian deaths and shutting down the airlines, I'm not sure there are many targets they could have hit to cause more deaths and disruption of life (assuming that they wanted to use airplanes). The collapse of the towers (and deaths of those within) was apparently a foregone conclusion. I happened to be at the home of an architect who develops commercial real estate on that Tuesday morning. VERY early on, he said that the towers were going to collapse. If that wasn't an expected consequence, then the terrorists aren't as sharp as we give them credit for being.

Third, the US continues to support regimes that don't use our judgment. My examples in the original post go to this point.

We agree on this. I think we're hypocritical on this. Putting political or financial consequences over principals is just wrong.

Fourth, citizens of a dictatorship are "more innocent" (if that is possible) than we are. We are in a democracy and therefore responsible for the actions of our government in aiding anti-Muslim regimes. Citizens of Iraq and Afghanistan have no influence over their government and no means to escape - they cannot be held accountable in the same way.

I agree with you to a point. However, I'm not sure that you can say that massive numbers of Americans are "responsible for the actiosn of our government." If I remember correctly, it has been 15 years since we've elected a President with a simple majority of the popular vote. Even in Reagan's "landslide" victory, I'm fairly certain he won less than 60% of the popular vote. We have some influence over our government, but the fact remains that the majority of those voting in the elections did not vote for Dubya and did not vote for Clinton.

Fifth, the US does target a lot of dual-use targets that ensure civilian deaths including telecomm and other industries.

Yes, and that is an unfortunate consequence of liberation.

[Bee]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
It seems that wishing all nations can enjoy the freedoms and liberties we have (as imperfect that might be) is the better and right thing to do. When we see a country run by a maniacal tyrant, or being forced into communistic dictatorship, or by any left-wing tyrant, shouldn't we try something? Apparently it is in vogue for liberal intellectuals to demean the cause of freedom and liberty in saying that it is no better (or even worse) than socialistic/communistic/tyranical governments. I believe in all my heart that it is better and can't be so selfish in desiring others to feel and live the same way. Apparently most of the world feels the same way when they are allowed to, as evidence in the migrations to the US. But as shown in our history with the Revolutionary War and Civil War, such pursuit of freedom and liberty is costly, but certainly the results were worth obtaining.

Interesting post. I want to respond to your general point without getting into a specific case (Iraq) because there are always other issues that enter into specific instances.

First I'd say that I agree those of us in America are very lucky and our way of life is better than any in the world. That being said, when we took that path by overthrowing the British we did so under our own will. Yes, we got help from the French but it was only help. The French did not come in and "liberate" us. We were prepared for freedom. We , the people, made the choice.

I think it's noble that we wish that others around the world had our freedoms, but with that freedom comes a great deal of responsibility. If the people of those countries are not ready for that responsibility are we really helping them by forcing those responsibliities on them? We've tried many times to "install" democracies throughout the world and many times they have failed. When the people of a country are willing to step up and take their freedom, I think it is our duty to help them. But when the people are not ready to fight for their own freedom, history shows us often the democracy we install becomes nothing more than a new dictatorship.

[CamEdwards]

well, the people of Iraq HAVE tried. Kurdish uprisings in the late 80's were met with chemical attacks by Saddam. Uprisings in southern Iraq after the Gulf War were brutally put down by his regime.

One could make the argument that we're 12 years late in helping these folks... but I say better late than never.

[Maple Leafs]

Originally posted by Bee
When the people of a country are willing to step up and take their freedom, I think it is our duty to help them. But when the people are not ready to fight for their own freedom, history shows us often the democracy we install becomes nothing more than a new dictatorship.

With all due respect, I don't think you have a very strong understanding of what life in Iraq is like right now. Saddam uses his power to crush any dissent, or suspicion of dissent, very quickly. The fact that he has remained in power so long is not an indication that the Iraqi people are content with his rule. In fact, many of the strongest supporters of the way are exiled Iraqis who are desperate to see Saddam out, at any cost.

[Bee]

Originally posted by Maple Leafs
With all due respect, I don't think you have a very strong understanding of what life in Iraq is like right now. Saddam uses his power to crush any dissent, or suspicion of dissent, very quickly. The fact that he has remained in power so long is not an indication that the Iraqi people are content with his rule. In fact, many of the strongest supporters of the way are exiled Iraqis who are desperate to see Saddam out, at any cost.

With all due respect, please read my entire statement that I am not speaking of specific circumstances.

Edit: And to be honest, your assumption that you have a greater understanding of life in Iraq is insulting since you have absolutely no knowledge of my background or experiences.

[CamEdwards]

Just thought all those who think the poor Iraqis are going to hate us for invading would want to see this.

SAFWAN, Iraq - U.S. Marines hauled down giant street portraits of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) in a screeching pop of metal and bolts Friday, telling nervous residents of this southern Iraqi town that "Saddam is done."

Milling crowds of men and boys watched as the Marines attached ropes on the front of their Jeeps to one portrait and then backed up, peeling the Iraqi leader's black-and-white metal image off a frame. Some locals briefly joined Maj. David "Bull" Gurfein in a new cheer.


"Iraqis! Iraqis! Iraqis!" Gurfein yelled, pumping his fist in the air.


"We wanted to send a message that Saddam is done," said Gurfein, a New York native in the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force. "People are scared to show a lot of emotion. That's why we wanted to show them this time we're here, and Saddam is done."


The Marines arrived in Safwan, just across the Kuwait border, after Cobra attack helicopters, attack jets, tanks, 155 mm howitzers and sharpshooters cleared the way along Route 80, the main road into Iraq (news - web sites).


Safwan, 375 miles south of Baghdad, is a poor, dirty, wrecked town pocked by shrapnel from the last Gulf war (news - web sites). Iraqi forces in the area sporadically fired mortars and guns for hours Thursday and Friday. Most townspeople hid, although residents brought forth a wounded little girl, her palm bleeding after the new fighting. Another man said his wife was shot in the leg by the Americans.


A few men and boys ventured out, putting makeshift white flags on their pickup trucks or waving white T-shirts out truck windows.


"Americans very good," Ali Khemy said. "Iraq wants to be free."


Some chanted, "Ameriki! Ameriki!"


Many others in the starving town just patted their stomachs and raised their hands, begging for food.


A man identifying himself only as Abdullah welcomed the arrival of the U.S. troops: "Saddam Hussein is no good. Saddam Hussein a butcher."


An old woman shrouded in black — one of the very few women outside — knelt toward the feet of Americans, embracing an American woman. A younger man with her pulled her away, giving her a warning sign by sliding his finger across his throat.


In 1991, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis died after prematurely celebrating what they believed was their liberation from Saddam after the Gulf War. Some even pulled down a few pictures of Saddam then — only to be killed by Iraqi forces.


Gurfein playfully traded pats with a disabled man and turned down a dinner invitation from townspeople.


"Friend, friend," he told them in Arabic learned in the first Gulf War.


"We stopped in Kuwait that time," he said. "We were all ready to come up there then, and we never did."


The townspeople seemed grateful this time.


"No Saddam Hussein!" one young man in headscarf told Gurfein. "Bush!"

[Anrhydeddu]

How about we allow some of these liberated citizens of Iraq to come here? We could give them some of our unappreciative citizens in exchange. Maybe they wouldn't be so critical if they have to crave for the freedoms and liberties they take for granted.

[Radii]

Originally posted by Anrhydeddu
How about we allow some of these liberated citizens of Iraq to come here? We could give them some of our unappreciative citizens in exchange. Maybe they wouldn't be so critical if they have to crave for the freedoms and liberties they take for granted.

I refuse to believe that any individual born and raised in America doesn't take their freedom and liberty for granted every single day of their lives in some way. some people are more spoiled and demanding than others, but still...

[Anrhydeddu]

You'd be surprise at the vocal minority of folks that would love to tear up the Bill of Rights and the Constitution in favor of an extreme left-wing socialistic or communistic type government. Just read many of the articles and lectures at various universities and colleges around the country.

[Tarkus]

Originally posted by Radii
I refuse to believe that any individual born and raised in America doesn't take their freedom and liberty for granted every single day of their lives in some way. some people are more spoiled and demanding than others, but still...

Agreed, and I think people who live in oppressive regimes also don't appreciate what it's like to live in a free society. I don't think it makes a difference whether you live in a free society or one with limited human rights. If you've done it your entire life it's all you know and you just can't appreciate anything different. Myself, I can't imagine that other than a very small minority of Iraqis, the country won't eventually appreciate the end of Saddam's regime.

Tarkus

[Hammer755]

Originally posted by Radii
I refuse to believe that any individual born and raised in America doesn't take their freedom and liberty for granted every single day of their lives in some way. some people are more spoiled and demanding than others, but still...

No doubt about it, Radii. My biggest worries in a typical day are that I had to sit in traffic, or my fast food order took forever, or my seats at the Rockets game are too far away from the court. Rarely do I honestly contemplate how good I have it, or thank those who have sacrificed to make it that way.

[Bee]

Originally posted by Tarkus
Agreed, and I think people who live in oppressive regimes also don't appreciate what it's like to live in a free society. I don't think it makes a difference whether you live in a free society or one with limited human rights. If you've done it your entire life it's all you know and you just can't appreciate anything different. Myself, I can't imagine that other than a very small minority of Iraqis, the country won't eventually appreciate the end of Saddam's regime.

Tarkus

I agree as long as the "replacement government" doesn't become so corrupted before the Iraqis learn to appreciate their new freedom that those same freedoms are lost.

[CHEMICAL SOLDIER]

Good point though Galt....Showing that War is War .
People get hurt and sadly many die .

[John Galt]

Skydog (and others) - I hope to return to this thread (I hate starting a thread, triggering a good discussion, and then running), but work has me over a barrel right now.