Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: TopQuark
I agree with your argument. The reason this is a war 0bama can love is simply that progressives need their enemies and will create them if necessary. The assumption is that one must by definition be morally righteous if one is opposing evil; the advantage to the argument is that it avoids an examination of one's own actions; the disadvantage is that it depends on the magic of inevitable historical progress in order to make things come out right.

0bama is perfectly clear who and what this is against. What it is in favor of, however, is conveniently vague. Who are we helping? What is their agenda? If we don't know this by the time the shooting starts we're already in too deeply. We saw a similar lack of deliberation when the progressives spent so much moral capital demonizing the Shah and simply assuming that anything that would follow after would inevitably be an improvement. It wasn't. We saw it with respect to Cuba, to Vietnam, to Bosnia, to Zimbabwe and Uganda. They don't learn because they aren't thinking, they're feeling their way through life.

We saw it in Bush Sr, whose need to maintain a coalition led us to cease fire in Iraq too soon. We saw it in his son, who wasted 14 months attempting to obtain UN approval for his own actions and paid when that proved enough time for Saddam to cover his tracks. It isn't restricted to party; it is restricted to internationalists whose allegiance is to something nobler and greater than nationalism but whose blind spots are commensurately expanded. The upshot is that people who are volubly in favor of peace and love and harmony are perfectly willing to kill other people who are insufficiently utopian.

Worst of all, we simply do not have a strategic objective in this thing: neither to eliminate an extant threat nor to advance any U.S. interests. We're doing it because it makes 0bama and his little coterie of internationalists look and feel good. And that simply is not an adequate reason to kill people.

53 posted on 03/20/2011 10:26:52 AM PDT by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies ]


To: Billthedrill
Worst of all, we simply do not have a strategic objective in this thing: neither to eliminate an extant threat nor to advance any U.S. interests. We're doing it because it makes 0bama and his little coterie of internationalists look and feel good. And that simply is not an adequate reason to kill people.

Bears repeating.

55 posted on 03/20/2011 10:30:09 AM PDT by EternalVigilance (Nice 'til I'm not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

To: Billthedrill
Nobody could’ve said it better; many thanks for your thoughtful post.
97 posted on 03/20/2011 12:59:46 PM PDT by TopQuark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson