Al-ithara wa al-faza

[ebonlock]

If you haven't read Where is Raed ? yet you should. I just hope this blogger can keep posting once the bombs start falling in ernest because this is one of the most fascinating windows into what it's like to live in Iraq today.

We will for the moment try to ignore whether this means a divided Iraq or federalism thrust down our throats or a redraw of the Iraqi map because this will be after all the decision of the invaders liberators, we have the right to remain silent otherwise we get smacked upside the head.

And they ask why the Arab nations are such a farce; it is because we have kings and presidents who behave like kids in a sandpit.

I think sometimes we forget that not all Iraqis are fundamentalist psychos or swaggering bullies, or even the oppressed masses. They're also intelligent, articulate, witty, caring human beings just like us. It makes me profoundly sad to think that thoughtful folks like this blogger are caught up in the middle of all of this.

But back here in this country, something to ponder:
Some Dare Call It Treason By Bill Berkowitz

Support the troops, yeah, we all want our fighting men and women to come back unscathed by all of this, but that doesn't mean we're traitors for not believing in the war. Nor are we traitors for expressing our dissent and speaking out about our disgust with our leadership. I strongly believe our current policy is wrong, I don't like the direction Bush & Co. are taking us, but I hardly think that means I should be lined up against a wall and shot either. The only countries where opposition to governmental policy and leadership is considered treason are those under the boot of a dictator.

I think those of us who disagree strongly with our leadership at this time love our country, but it's a mature love, that of an old married couple that understands one anothers' foibles and shortcomings. It's not the love of honeymooners, asking no questions, seeing no faults, not facing the reality that everyone is flawed in their own ways...indeed that it is the nature of humanity to be so. Disagreements and arguments are healthy in any relationship, and doubly so in one of this kind.

Update:
Just found this via Yahoo! News:
An Air of Empire

I think this paragraph sums up a lot of my misgivings and some of the biggest points of contention that I think the pro and anti-war movement disagree vehemently on:
First of all, we will have made clear that the United States answers to no authority other than itself when it comes to the use of military force. Moreover, the authority of the United States will be mostly indistinguishable from the personal will of its president. The Bush doctrine of preemption becomes a replacement for international law: Any president at any time in the future can decide to attack any country, provided only that he is satisfied that said country might at some point represent a direct threat to the United States.

Does the US have the right to act in such a manner? That's where both sides vehemently disagree. One thing is certain, though, it definitely has the might to do so. I guess for me the question has become, "Do the ends justify the means?" I'm still wrestling with this one, but my gut keeps saying, "No."




Now for something that brightened my day yesterday:
Senate kills Alaskan wildlife refuge drill plans By JAMES KUHNHENN, score one for the good guys.

My sisters arrive tomorrow, I'm going to be a bit of a wreck until their plane actually touches down, I'm afraid. But once that happens I intend to really enjoy this weekend, and yes, there will be lots of pictures, promise!

Comments

Re:

[ebonlock.livejournal.com]

Perhaps you mean to ask: Should the United States be unaccountable to international public opinion or debating societies like the United Nations?

That might be a debate worth having, because I have a few unanswered questions of my own, there.

Very well, if you prefer "accountable" I certainly won't quibble about the terminology. Is the US "accountable" to the international community for its actions?

[centerfire.livejournal.com]

Actually the distinction I was trying to draw was not between accountability versus authority, but rather between what is versus what should be.

Reality: the United States is a sovereign nation which has ceded none of its warmaking discretion or authority to international public opinion or the extra-national bodies. In point of fact, any law or treaty which attempted to do so would be constitutionally invalid.

We can talk about whether this is a good or bad thing. That might be a conversation worth having. But let's not behave as if it's a startling new development, and hasn't been the status quo since 1783.