I read your view in another thread and while it was compelling and interesting, it was nowhere to be seen from nations or leaders of real importance. Essentially it was entirely unrealistic, so from a practicality standpoint it was completely unworkable.
I don't think you can rule it out as unworkable. China is a real world analogue, is it not?
China is just as guilty as Iraq in nearly every area: invasion of another country (Tibet), terrible human rights abuses, actual nuclear-biological-chemical weapons, authoritarian rule, and so on. The only reason we dealt with them diplomatically, is because of their size and power. India is a democracy, has vast amounts of cheap labor, has lots of brain power, yet it's been China that has been given most favored nation trade status. And the economic advantages given to its people because of that is slowly turning the country around.
With Iraq we have the choice of war, but why choose such a path when it can be attained by other means.
Quote:
Well who is "they"? The people of the country. I'm willing to bet that quite a few people in Iraq want Saddam overthrown. I'd say the vast majority of the voices we hear from Iraq say Saddam needs to go.
...
You think the Iraqi people could actually speak honestly about their desires under Hussein?
...
Are we to accept the wholesale slaughter of innocents until they make the proper diplomatic request and even then only if everyone else agrees it's ok?
I don't want you to say the vast majority of voices will say this, I want you, and by proxy the administration, to know the vast majority of voices want Hussein out.
And we accept the wholesale slaughter of innocents all the time, and you know that. Nearly the entire continent of Africa has various peoples under wholesale slaughter at some point or another.
Quote:
Well even if the administration's intentions are not so good they will be gone soon, such is our democracy. Also, it's not just the Bush administration that has a say in the future of Iraq, the people of Iraq and the UN will be involved as well.
Heh. I would hope so. But the administration has to follow through since they brought this about. They should be contributing 90% of the total funds in reconstruction, if the intent is to have a democratic Iraq. Not only that, if Bush isn't re-elected, the next administration will have to continue to do so.
Comments
Originally posted by groverat
I read your view in another thread and while it was compelling and interesting, it was nowhere to be seen from nations or leaders of real importance. Essentially it was entirely unrealistic, so from a practicality standpoint it was completely unworkable.
I don't think you can rule it out as unworkable. China is a real world analogue, is it not?
China is just as guilty as Iraq in nearly every area: invasion of another country (Tibet), terrible human rights abuses, actual nuclear-biological-chemical weapons, authoritarian rule, and so on. The only reason we dealt with them diplomatically, is because of their size and power. India is a democracy, has vast amounts of cheap labor, has lots of brain power, yet it's been China that has been given most favored nation trade status. And the economic advantages given to its people because of that is slowly turning the country around.
With Iraq we have the choice of war, but why choose such a path when it can be attained by other means.
Well who is "they"? The people of the country. I'm willing to bet that quite a few people in Iraq want Saddam overthrown. I'd say the vast majority of the voices we hear from Iraq say Saddam needs to go.
...
You think the Iraqi people could actually speak honestly about their desires under Hussein?
...
Are we to accept the wholesale slaughter of innocents until they make the proper diplomatic request and even then only if everyone else agrees it's ok?
I don't want you to say the vast majority of voices will say this, I want you, and by proxy the administration, to know the vast majority of voices want Hussein out.
And we accept the wholesale slaughter of innocents all the time, and you know that. Nearly the entire continent of Africa has various peoples under wholesale slaughter at some point or another.
Well even if the administration's intentions are not so good they will be gone soon, such is our democracy. Also, it's not just the Bush administration that has a say in the future of Iraq, the people of Iraq and the UN will be involved as well.
Heh. I would hope so. But the administration has to follow through since they brought this about. They should be contributing 90% of the total funds in reconstruction, if the intent is to have a democratic Iraq. Not only that, if Bush isn't re-elected, the next administration will have to continue to do so.