[thechat] Arguments for war

[David Wagner]

Apologies in advance if this response is excessively aggressive. These are
issues that get me very worked up, and I've had too much coffee today.

> I'll get this out of the way right now:  George Bush is a stupid fuck
> and I wouldn't follow him to a picnic let alone into a foxhole.

Yes.

> That being said, I've actually started to find some reasonably
> intelligent analysis that supports the idea of taking out Saddam Hussein
> (and going even farther).  I'm pretty anti-war but there are arguments
> to made made that sometimes its the best option.
>
> I wanted to pass on a thought provoking piece that I read today
> advocating such a position:
>
> http://denbeste.nu/cd_log_entries/2002/09/Whoisourenemy.shtml

Wow -- if you want to make me suspicious of your intentions, use the words
"they" and "them" four or five times in every paragraph. This guy seems a
little kindergarten-ish in his attitude.

While the essay contains some interesting arguments, it is also based on
several fallacious assumptions:

- If I'm your enemy, then you're my enemy.
- The US is culturally superior to all Arab cultures.
- Arab resentment of Western imperialism can only be changed by eradicating
Arab cultures.

In addition, despite all of the introductory hemming and hawing to the
contrary, there is no attempt made in the essay to make a truly objective
intellectual argument. It is a racist and imperialist manifesto, carefully
cloaked in an "I know it's not PC, but here's all my excuses..." statement.

I understand where the sentiment comes from. I have an aching urge in my gut
to tear apart the guy who raped a friend of mine years ago -- but I haven't,
and I won't, because I don't believe in killing people, no matter how much I
want to. Also, I would be put in jail.

I know that some people have the same urge to tear apart Osama bin Laden,
Saddam Hussein, Yasser Arafat, Hamas, the al Qaeda network, Iraq, Islamic
fundamentalism, OPEC, Arab cultures, and the brown-skinned guy down the
street -- but they don't, as a general rule, because we have decided (as a
species, through evolutionary democracy) that killing each other is
regressive, not progressive.

"Western Civilization" has raped the land and cultures of the Middle East
for years. Some of its residents have decided to try to tear us apart.
What's our solution? Kill them back? Why?

When do defensive measures require offensive measures? When is a retaliatory
or pre-emptive attack justified? I can't answer these questions, and so I
will always err on the side of caution. The potential consequences are too
great.

> And Eric S. Raymond follows up on this piece with a bit about
> imperialism and cultural genocide:
>
>
http://armedndangerous.blogspot.com/2002_09_15_armedndangerous_archive.html#
81815163


ESR has never struck me as being a terribly rational guy. Brilliant, yes,
but kinda rabid. And not necessarily all that coherent:

"Civilizing the barbarians needn't even be a bloody process if you start the
job right after their will has been smashed by a major defeat in war."

Huh?!?

Try that argument again.

> Is cultural genocide called for?  Is there a dangerous meme in
> Arabic/Islamic culture that needs to be wiped out?  Is that even possible?

C'mon, Judah, you of all people should know that memes don't work that
way -- you can't "wipe them out" by destroying them, just as you can't pull
a gene from your DNA and expect to become healthier. Sorry, I don't mean to
get personal about this, but you're the one who introduced me to these
concepts, years ago...

--

David Wagner
dave at worlddomination.net