Sarah wondered: > The interesting question is: do we view that with hindsight as a > just war, and if so, why? And then, why not this one? What do we > see as the morally significant differences?
I'm not sure that ANY war is "just." That aside, while you've mentioned several times that the Iraqi citizens are in "shackles," I have yet to personally see much evidence that the Iraqis are so miserable that they are leaving their country in droves, or anything even resembling that. I know we're just getting the media spin on things, but please, point me to something that can help me understand the "real" Iraq better. Then maybe I can discuss morally significant differences. (And please forgive me if I've missed links that you've already provided.) Further, we knew for YEARS about the Taliban's horrible oppression of women, yet we did nothing until after 9/11. Then, suddenly, we "needed" to wage war on Afghanistan because that country was supposedly harboring Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda. Well, we didn't capture bin Laden or many of Al Qaeda's key people ... so why not wage war against every country who might be harboring them? Why not just blow up the entire Middle East, and make SURE we got them?! I'm very pleased that the Taliban is now longer in power, but as far as I'm concerned, going to war against Afghanistan was a knee-jerk reaction meant to make the American people feel like we had SOME sort of control (which is a joke - we don't, we never will again), and to appease the "jingoists" (thanks for that one, Kate) who were pissed off and wanted to strike back at someone, anyone, just so we could have our "eye for an eye." One more question, since Desert Storm has been brought up: does anyone honestly believe that the United States would've given one shit about Kuwait if there hadn't been precious OIL involved?? Lori
