indio said:
The overall moral imperitive of World War 2 is not in doubt or even being debated, the geo-political chess game that currently exists is.
First of all, the Second World War definitly had doubts as per it's conduct and execution. To think anything else is revisionist history. I'd, at the very least, hope you'd have the knowledge concerning the Nuclear Weapon usage in your head - not to mention the other questioning of invasions (such as the first Normandy landing which was primarily Canadian) or the taking of cities by certain countries, et al.
Also, I'm to presume that the million Iraqis that Saddam tortured and subsequently killed are in someway less of an imperative (or reason or justification) than, say, a million Jews Hitler killed. Because, at the end of the day, when the geopolitics and leftist thinking of yours is pealed away you're left with two regimes who murdered it's own citizens that were ultimatly liberated and democratized.
If the Iraqis should pay a horrible price Karl Rove can sacrifice something too and not bitch about it. Do you think anyone in the administration other than maybe Colin Powell would sacrifice there own life it would result in Al Queda's destruction? Hell no!
First, the is a loss of life in all conflict, which is what makes it such a powerful and important decision. Yet.. Yet.. there is no clear line of connection between those killed in Iraq during that countries liberation and that which happened liberating fascist Itay, or Nazi Germany, or holding back the Communists in Korea. Our way of life is something we (or atleast I) value and am willing to sacrifice for should the need arise. We're all free to leave the country (as you most certainly can) if you disagree with it, you're also protected in your right to legally challenge the leadership and their position - but nowhere, fucking nowhere, does it say you can illegally assemble and protest in front and on a private residence in this manner. Not only is it wrongful, it's tactless and immoral to do such to the families of such men. It was wrong and didn't happen in Louis Howe's time and shouldn't happen today.
I also do believe there are many true patriots in the Administration, not just Colin Powell.
However they will gladly drop a missile on woman and children if there is a slight chance of killing any one member of Al Queda member. The moral of the story is this . Double standard to the nth degree.
This is such an immature, almost juvenile and college-esque look at the world we live in. A world of choices, a world of consequences. There is no fictional Utopia, nor will there be with men such as those in al-Qaeda actively persuing their war against the United States. Woman and Children, regrettably, die in war. They've died in every active war our civilization has seen - but the role of a nation-state is to protect it's citizens, that's its function, it's purpose for being. It just so happens that we've evolved to a stage in our civilization's history where technology and fanatical beliefs have changed the dynamic by which we must protect our fellow citizens. There is no turning back, there is no other way...
Yet, nowhere does this truth entitle somone to use it as justification for such an act as these protestors committed. To use ones necessary evils which were committed in the belief it was their duty (of which Rove hardly applies as a politican advisor) against them at their personal residence and families is immoral, wrong and sets a bad precedence. End of story.
