Against Pacifism

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Again you're being selective with facts. By world police I gather you mean the USA. Yesterdays allies like Qaddafi and Hussein were toppled.

Tell me how peace has prevailed in Iraq after local elections?

Tell me how a wall in Israel stopped tyranny and ensued justice for the Palestinians.

Where to now?

worldview.stratfor.com...

'Coalition of the Willing' Continues To Undermine United Nations

Lets get a few mates together make some snip up about Roger having WMDS - but in reality we want to enter Rogers house to rape Roger's wife.

No, it can be anyone so long as they defend liberty and justice.

originally posted by: TheConstruKctionofLight
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

but then again, we are unable to determine what might have happened had they done nothing at all. Perhaps things might have turned out better, and perhaps worse.

So you ignore history for "what ifs"

Its not like we haven't had the knowledge of Irans repressive regime under Shah Reza Pahlavi and its cozy relationship with
USA & UK

en.wikipedia.org...
Several other factors contributed to strong opposition to the Shah amongst certain groups within Iran, the most significant of which were US and UK support for his regime, clashes with Islamists and increased communist activity. By 1979, political unrest had transformed into a revolution which, on 17 January, forced him to leave Iran.

Unable to determine? You think these things happen in a vacuum.

What no reports and scenarios coming out of think tanks prior to military action?

But being men of reason we can see that Saddam & others wanted to replace the petrodollar with a gold backed dinar.

But you know this and thats why you leave your arguments vague.

I’m speaking theoretically, Sherlock, but you know this despite going on your Typical tangents.

There's a well known rant that covered this, nearly 250 years ago:

all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

People will naturally put up with quite a bit, hoping the bad stuff will stop. But you can push a person only so far....

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Your response to metallicus was discussing the US being deemed the world police. You responded in kind.

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Theoretically and yet you spoke of real instances and real "what ifs"

even going so far as to a "call to arms" and moral imperative

But not every war is a useless one. In matters of defending ourselves, the innocent, and freedom itself against those who would rob it, martial combat is not only the practical choice but also the moral one.

Unlike your "Britain would have been conquered" I gave you the real facts of Iran that you avoided.

The recent crowds that marched in Britain and the US against war in Iraq were hardly pacifists. They were opposed to invasion of sovereign nations.

I’m speaking theoretically, Sherlock,

I prefer Socratic references if you would be so kind, my dear Watson