Debate on The Iraq War via Facebook

me: A nation is being born in Iraq, a dictator who gassed kurds and tortured innocents has been removed, and a democratic revolution is under way! The USA wasn't exactly Disneyland in 1779 either. Saying that we've failed because things are terrible on the ground now is terribly shortsighted, anti-historical , and utopian. Democracy is hard fucking work, and the people of Iraq will succeed or fail, but their inability to snap their finges and create, fully formed, the democratic institutions it took our nation two hundred years to establish is, in the words of the french, sourd-muet logic While we can't assure peace and justice for the Iraqis, we are giving them a chance for human dignity, which is unfortunately, more than most of you "neo-liberals" think they deserve. When we invade and topple genocidal dictatorships we are doing bad and when we allow genocidal dictatorships we do bad. Ah the moral irony!

him: I've always been against nation buildling You want to actually help ppl Enlist and thrust your conservative support towards ending the massacres in Darfur Saddam Hussein was not a threat to the United States Yes, he was a bad man, but when he was killing the Iranians, he was a good guy, as was the Shah :P The thrust from democracy must come from within I think we could have saved $500 billion by listening to Blix Since I don't control things, let me tell you what I'd do If I were made dictator, I'd raise taxes on everyone who voted for Bush to pay for this war I'd also give all of you the opportunity to go and fight for the freedom of these Iraqis Patience is a virtue Wouldn't it have been better James, to have listened to Blix, and to have let inspections continue, realize Saddam was bluffing, and saved $500 billion and embarassment The easiest case scenario in my mind, is even if you think Saddam has weapons, would be to buy him off It's as simple as that Yes, I am a neo-liberal in terms of foreign policy Take Causes of War and come back to me when you realize that there's no credible way in hell Condi Rice believes what she says Do some research on what it means to be a realist in terms of IR An example of why I hate Bush: As Congress moves to slash $40 billion in spending, no program will take a bigger hit than college loans, where almost $13 billion would be cut over five years. For students, the upshot is mixed. Excessive government payments to banks would be halted, freeing up some dollars for new grants, larger loan limits and reduced loan fees. But overall, the student loan program would endure the largest cut in its history, and most of the money would not be pumped back into education. Instead, under a plan the House approved Monday, the money would be counted only toward reducing the federal deficit James: We both know that a soaking the rich policy is one of the only ways to pay down the deficit In order to stop from raising taxes on the rich, they're going to cut student loans for deserving and needy students Not exactly the best way to build human capital :)...is it!?!! Especially with the US lagging so far behing in science, wouldn't it make sense James, to keep great science students such as myself, shouldn't the US invest money into our education so the US remains #1 in tech. know how? And, by the way James, the USA was fighting a war against another nation in 1779 The war in Iraq is a battle of factions of the nation, it's not the entire populace against the US or against Saddam Further, you seem to forget, speaking of treason, which type of political ideologues fought with the Confederacy and who were the Torries? I always have found it ironic how the American idols of conservatism were all unabashed liberals.

me: Oh Danny Boy, You justify our supposed malfeasence in Iraq with the argument that we shouldn't solve humanitarian crises because... there are humanitarian crises elsewhere. Hmmm. The US has already given 700 million dollars in aid to Darfur, which is infinitely more than other governments are doing. You suggest that US marine involvement in Africa would be a smashing success, but you're an anti-military interventionist, who must confess when you put christian yankees inbetween fighting Arab Sudanese Muslims and Black Sudanse muslims; it makes a mess - innocent people will die in a utilitarian calculus you'll claim is unjust. Bush'll be responsible and the same criticisms and factions and "polls" (if that's what you call them in tyrannical dictatorships) will ring true in Africa just as you say they do now in Iraq... So who ya gonna call? At heart your neoliberalism desires to work through the UN, but they'll just repeat another Srebrenica and Rwanda. Both of which, aw shucks, happened during the clinton administration. (But 'ol Clinton was careful not to use what is called “the G word” about Rwanda, as the U.N. has eschewed it regarding Sudan. There is a Genocide Convention,and uttering that word entails responsibilities.) Back to Iraq: To say that because Iraqis aren't Americans they deserve brutal dictators and genocide seems a little grotesque to me. And please remember, our "occupation" will have to increase its brutality and its duration and its so-called torture to come close to inflicting as much death as Hussein, or any of his factions did. The moral balance is still ours. But especially so because most American soldiers are dying right now following the moral imperative your international relations professor neglected to mention while bashing realism's peccesmistic view of humanity (as well as condi rice); our marines die determing if that Iraqi in that roadside car over there is an innocent woman or child or just an insurgent sick enough to be camouglaged as one. Their death is honor in restraint on their aggressive quest for others' freedom, and is more "virtuous" than your Keohanian, soft-power view of "patience" will ever be.

NJO: Originally posted on the blog Feathers of Steel at liberabit.blogspot.com.