Off Topic — HabitableZone

Off Topic » in reply to offered as an aid to your precision......

Political processes and disarmament
Tom Brosz — (archived)

<War itself cannot be either moral or immoral.

No. No more than owning or firing a gun is moral or immoral in itself. It is the purposes and motivations that can be labeled so, and accurately.

What I did say was that war was always a political failure. It is politics by other means and only happens when the political process is exhausted and abandoned.

Okay, I can see where you can make a case for this. One does not engage in a "last resort" unless nothing else worked.

I think what pisses me off is that Bush has been getting the total blame by the Usual Suspects for the political process not working, when non-military solutions were continuously undercut not only by Saddam, but by a number of our "allies."

It takes two sides to make diplomacy work, and you would have to admit that Iraq has not been trying very hard in that area for the past decades.

I can think of nothing diplomatic that Bush and our allies could have done that could have worked without real and honest Iraqi cooperation. Saddam just assumed he could "play" the system as he has been doing all along.

It is worth noting that South Africa, as well as a number of former U.S.S.R. satellite states, did successfully undertake full nuclear disarmament, with a history of full and obvious cooperation with the U.N. nuclear inspectors.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (42 posts)