Lookin' for troubleGiven that President Bush has declared an end to major combat operations in Iraq; I may seem a bit tardy in jumping into the fray. I've managed to date to avoid all public discourse of the latest Iraqi butt kicking for reasons of personal outrage over the concept of "anticipatory warfare". But alas, I read a blog. So you can blame Hooman's Scribbles for this little soap box moment.
Now before y'all decide to dixie-chick me, just remember that I'm entitled to my opinion and that American patriotism does not apply in my case. That's right, I'm a dirty "International" (watch me quake in terror from a potential US blitzkrieg a la Grenada 1983).
Why didn't I join into the virulent debate before now? It occured to me that we all seemed distracted by the players in this farce and not the greater themes. So to avoid name calling how about we couch the discussion, now that the tempers are cooling, in terms of the following:
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling which thinks that nothing is worth war is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself."
John Stuart Mill (1806 - 1873)
"What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?"
Mahatma Gandhi (1869 - 1948), "Non-Violence in Peace and War"
At the end of the day, is it not just a question of intent? In the Caribbean we have too often seen America's good albeit misinformed intentions go woefully awry. But I have a question of more sinister import. What if it's intentions are not altruistic?
Check these links out.
Project for the New American Century