I will suggest that many who suggested keeping Saddam in power have
the same flaw in their logic...

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NDExN2FiZTY3ODZlMGQyNzdmM2E1MDIxMWI4NmVlODk=

>>> But the problem with such moral equivalence is that it equates things that 
>>> are, well, not equal — and therefore ends up not being moral at all.

To pull it off, one must distort both the past and the present for the
presumed higher good of getting along. In the 1930s, British
intellectuals performed feats of intellectual gymnastics in trying to
contextualize Hitler’s complaints against the Versailles Treaty,
assignment of guilt for the First World War, and French bellicosity —
straining to overlook the intrinsic dangers of National Socialism for
the higher good of avoiding another Somme. Over the short term, such
revisionism worked; over the longer term, it ensured a highly
destructive war.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to