Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cowperson
About four or five years ago on this board I asked a theoretical question of moral ambiguity of whether we should start an action we knew would kill tens of thousands so that hundreds of thousands might be saved and millions freed OR should we save tens of thousands of lives realizing that hundreds of thousands more might be killed in the future as a result of inaction and millions remained enslaved.
Well, tens of thousands have died and thousands more have yet to die but I remain in favour of the decision to go into Iraq for the principle reason of the changes that are being wrought in a backward and dangerous part of the world, both electorally and media-wise. I even love the election of Hamas in Palestine yesterday frankly, provided they face a second ballot down the road.
Sticking a fork in that part of the world has been long overdue and I think as the century turns over to 2100 we'll look back and see it as one of the more profoundly positive turning points of the century . . . . . yet tens of thousands will have died.
The issue is whether or not you had to kill tens of thousands to achieve that momentum and the final results. Given the nature of a region stuck in a time warp that wasn't likely to change otherwise, I think you did. You think otherwise.
Cowperson
|
Yeah, but its easy to be in favour of such an action if you're not one of the sacrificial tens of thousands of victims. Do you think some Iraqi kid who's seen his entire family killed cares about some people in 2100 looking at it as a positive turning point? Further still, maybe you've just turned that kid against you. I don't think he's gonna love the fact that it was done simply to better his backwards society in the future. Way to go, another terrorist is born. Your ideas reek of arrogance. I agree that some democratization and change is necessary in the region, but it has to come from a genuine will of their population to carry it out. Maybe cultural influence from democratic countries. But for the West to basically decide who is allowed to live and die, and how they should live or die, is not going to decrease their anger towards us. So who gets to decide who lives and dies? Who gets to play God? If you were on the other end of it,would you personally be willing to sacrifice yourself, or your family, for some distant future cause?