Thanks, Tim
I think Tim Blair was trying to be ironic in a recent post about Iraq. After quoting approvingly from a column in The Independent that argues Iraqis would support a war that toppled Saddam Husseing, Tim added, “That’s until they realise that their freedom is really all about oil.” Thanks, mate. I couldn’t have said it better myself.
He’s unwittingly hit the nail on the head. Of course it would be good to topple Saddam Hussein. Of course he’s an evil dictator who oppresses his people and doesn’t deserve to rule. But the war on Iraq, as it is being presented at the moment, is only tangentially related to that.
When Generic US-supported Moustache-wearing Dictator Number One makes way for Generic US-supported Moustache-wearing Dictator Number Two, the Iraqi people will probably not be happy. Why should they be? They’ll just have to go through the whole thing again when George Bush III decides he needs a sympathetic dictator in the Middle East.
As I’ve said repeatedly: I support a war to topple Saddam Hussein. But only if it’s waged for the right reasons.
Gota love it, democracy in a box.
“American Democracy” in a box… that was the subject of an animation by Terry Gilliam of Monty Python fame.
“I support a war to topple Saddam Hussein. But only if it’s waged for the right reasons.”
I don’t think toppling Saddam is about making us feel good inside. If its done for money or done for ‘love’, the outcome is the same - a 100% chance of a murderous dictator gone, with a slim possibility they won’t like the next guy.
When people are being oppressed do we really have the luxury of waiting for our personally prefered moral justification to arise?
We’re chosing between the lesser of two evils - if we don’t chose one, then the greater of them - Saddam in power - continues.
Idealism isn’t going to help anyone. But it will make you feel better ;-)
Bullshit XXX. Give me morals any day.
Ah, but who’s morals? I don’t think I want yours- probably you don’t want mine.
It’s a good idea to not get too bogged down in ‘morality’ for this reason.
Rubbish. You’re right, none of us want each others’ morals, but we’d be stupid to go into war without at the very least acknowledging that there are ethical questions that need to be addressed first. Adn they’ll do more than simply “make us feel better”.
I believe Saddam should be toppled - just not by us.
I think the theory is that the ends doesn’t justify the means. However, if the means are merely adhorent to us and not to others (i.e. only subjectively bad) and the ends are objectively good, is there really a problem?
Note, this is a question, not an answer.
XXX, there’s more than just a “slim possibility they won’t like the next guy.” America has a long and rich history in not giving a shit about who they stick in power, as long as the person/group in question is either pro-American or gets an itchy trigger finger at the slightest mention of leftism.