----- Original Message ----- From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, September 26, 2004 1:15 PM Subject: Re: John Kerry in 1997
> At 08:02 AM 9/26/2004 -0700 Nick Arnett wrote: > >To me, the oversimplification of arguments along the lines of "Saddam > >was a brutal dictator, therefore the war was just," is another example > >of the sort of polemics that passes for argument in our culture. As if > >war's only effect on the world is to determine whether or not the stated > >desired outcome would come to pass! > > > >Surely the war planners at least considered what sort of effect this > >would have on the rest of the world's attitudes toward us. Yet the > >administration, much less its supporters, seems unwilling to give even > >lip service to that or any of the multitude of other reasons that argue > >against the war. > > You are confusing "justified" with "wise." Kerry explicitly said that > the brutality of the dictator alone is not sufficient for justification. I tend to like Gautam's criterion for justification needed for a President to decide to start a war. We need to consider the overall harm to the world, as well as the benefit to the people involved. By this criterion, Gulf War II has not qualified...although a reasonable person could have thought that it once did. As an aside, I think that one more criterion needs to be added. The United States should not go to war in order to stop a people from freely select a government that, in the honest consideration of the United States, would be harmful to the people in that country, as well as the interests of the United States. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
