> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Behalf Of Erik Reuter
...
> Can we please, here at least, talk about reality instead of an ivory
> tower fantasy land?
I don't see anything there but an ad hominem.
> Do you claim regime change in
> Iraq is a mistake?
I'm not sure how you missed it, but I have said otherwise.
> ("we're really just lining our own pockets, or
> we're just plain afraid"?) I don't think you do, but when you make
> comments like this, it just sounds like you are living in wishy-washy
> wring-my-hands-and-cry-can't-we-all-just-get-along fantasy land.
That's the opposite of my intention.
> Or you could accept that there are other things that divide us than
> polarizing rhetoric, and instead concentrate on accomplishing something
> practical and good.
Of course there are other things. I'm focused on what I understand best,
what I care about. Please don't assume that I think it is the most
important thing in the world. It will hardly matter if we're all dead from
anthrax, or whatever.
> > When we allow winning the disputes to become more important than
> > making the best choices, we've abandoned a foundation of our freedom.
>
> False dichotomy. When the debate is about practical choices and reality
> and responsibility, then truly winning the debate will point out the
> best choice.
So it doesn't matter how the debate is carried out? I woudl hazard that
most of us think it that the more unity behind the U.S. decision on war is
better than less unity. Doesn't the manner in which we talk about the issue
have everything to do with that?
> > That's what I hear in the "Everybody who disagrees with me is wrong"
> > talk from far too many advocates of war and peace. They've left
> > advocacy in the dust.
>
> Interesting. I hear exactly that from you, and not from Gautam.
I don't think I've called people jackasses and anti-American for their
positions on this war. I hope I've refrained entirely from name-calling.
I'm trying to hang onto respect when people who are pro and anti war seem to
demand that each of us disrepect their opponents.
> > No, we won't. Only in fiction do we know how things would have turned
> > out if we acted differently; we will only see the consequences of
> > what we choose. Any evaluation of the alternatives will be pure
> > speculation. "History will prove me right and you wrong" is a refuge
> > of the insecure partisan.
>
> And your statement is the refuge of a paranoid delusional.
I'd appreciate if you'd try harder to refrain from name-calling.
> Of course we
> can never have complete certainty, but we can have high probability of
> being right, which is what is important. Was World War II wrong?
That's not the issue at hand. The parallel question is, did we intervene at
the right time? Did we hold back our troops too long; did we go to war too
soon? It certainly seems like it would have been better to have attacked
the Nazis sooner, but we don't know what would have happened. If that's
true, that we should have, then we failed to make the best decision. And
I'm sure there are plenty of examples in which it seems fairly clear that
waiting would have been better. And many where it is impossible to know.
Putting this into terms of right and wrong, rather than what is best, is
what polarizes the debate.
> So we are immoral for advocating a cause we think is best
Of course not.
> and pointing
> out the consequences of choices that people make?
Failing to respect those who disagree is not pointing out consequences.
> "I say I don't like it but I don't propose any viable solution
Solution to what? Are you saying that the only thing that matters is a
"solution" to the Iraqis, and how we arrive at that solution matters not?
That's the end justifying the means, which I reject. I am proposing what I
believe is a far more viable way to make decisions about how to deal with
the threat posed by Iraq.
> I can see that. I consider it a failing. I take some liberal positions
> sometimes, but I also try to be goal-oriented and realistic. It is hard
> to do, and I don't always succeed, but I haven't given up on decisions
> and accomplishing goals.
Neither have I. I'm simply aware we're all somewhat narrow-minded, but
together, we can do far more than we can as a house divided.
> > Leave me to myself and I'll brainstorm all day, but I might not ever
> > ship a product or close a sale. Leave my typical partner alone and
> > he'll never come up with an innovative product or strategy.
>
> And some people can be creative AND accomplish goals. Perhaps you should
> brainstorm a little on how to do that?
That's exactly what I'm talking about. And take a look at my bio if you
imagine that I haven't accomplished quite a few goals. But I never
accomplished much of anything lasting by being divisive.
> > Somewhere in the compromise between us arises the creativity that
> > drives success. We need each other to succeed.
>
> I don't see you brainstorming creative ideas on how to deal with
> Saddam. Did I miss it?
And who has? The whole debate has become about whether to go to war now or
continue inspections.
> You make this cute argument about creativity and
> goal-seeking complementing each other, but I see very little creativity
> from the peaceniks and "undecideds", just a lot of criticism and
> name-calling.
And just exactly how is that different from those who support war now?
> And this is exactly what your rant sounds like. Why not keep the
> discussion about how to deal with Saddam, choices and likely
> consequences, instead of attacking those of us who are trying to
> accomplish something by discussing those things?
Because the end does not justify the means.
> > Where is *your* true, strong voice, the one that says, "Here is what
> > I believe in," with the courage to let your words stand on their own,
> > the man know knows that contempt for those who disagree weakens you?
>
> Where is yours? You keep changing the subject away from how to deal with
> Saddam and instead attacking those who are discussing how to deal with
> him.
I'm trying to attack the people who are *failing* to discuss how to deal
with him.
Nick
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
