--- Gautam Mukunda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > But it is not anti-American to be critical of poor > > policies. I caught flak for that back in high > > school Civics class... <shrug> > > Not A Sheep Maru > > Not in the least. But when that criticism is mated > with giving America's enemies the benefit of every > doubt,
All of the folks I know who want 'more proof' or a 'UN-sanctioned international coalition' before war is declared think Saddam is a monster who ought to have a bullet through his head - so they are not giving him any 'benefit' WRT his heinous crimes and his basic unfitness to be a nation's leader. > and when the people who make those criticisms > seem so enthusiastic about it, but acknowledge only > grudgingly and with poorly concealed ill grace the > good that has been done by the US - then you start > to > wonder. Since that description fits the "war > protesters" - otherwise known as the "pro-Saddam > movement" - to a T, it's hardly unfair that they > face that criticism. Why equate "war protester" with "pro-Saddam?!" - again, the vast majority of those I know who "protest the war" do so _because they think an international coalition ought to be made_ to prosecute it (OK, one that involves the UN), not b/c they think SH is anything other than a slime-ball. > When people _always_ criticize the > US, and are so eager to do so, but turn a blind eye > to > the vastly larger faults of those who oppose her, > then > they should be prepared to be called on it. It's > not > censorship to be criticized, difficult as it is for > some people to understand the distinction. I am genuinely puzzled by the "but turn a blind eye > to the vastly larger faults of those who oppose her," Gautam, because I really don't know *anyone* who thinks that way. I am certainly among those _who expect America to hold to a higher moral standard_ because - well, because we're *supposed* to be morally superior to the nasty dictators of the world! Part of my dismay at the way this Administration has handled policy is that it *is not* behaving in what I consider a "grown-up" way, a sensible way, a way which considers the importance of America's world image, a way which acknowledges that 'reforming Iraq' will be a difficult task with uncertain choices. Instead they *treat American citizens as too stupid to understand* what's going on (or else undeserving of knowledge of the uncertainties ahead). To borrow a hip-hop term (I think :}), they are dissing not only allies and friends, but the American public. Why is this important? Because a sheriff, in the idealized Old West, is not only supposed to pack a gun and shoot well, but be honest and open: "It's gonna be a heck of a fight, and it'll mean each an' ev'ry one of you has to help; some of you will die. I said I was gonna help fix the livery stable an' improve the school an' get a clinic goin', but those things are gonna have to wait until this pack of bandits is dead or jailed..." [IOW, promising to cut taxes _and_ spend more on prescription drugs _and_ prosecute a war etc. is either hopelessly naive, or a pack of lies.] Debbi who is surprisingly not a Capricorn ;) __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, more http://taxes.yahoo.com/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
