----- Original Message ----- From: "Gautam Mukunda" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2005 11:16 AM Subject: RE: Br!n: Re: more neocons
>Maybe you think removing Saddam isn't > worth the cost. But you can't say that opposing the > invasion wasn't functionally a stand in favor of > Saddam remaining in power, _because it was_. I think that overstates the case a bit. I'll agree that anyone who was opposed to the invasion, including me, would have to accept that his remaining in power was a highly probable outcome...so it should be accepted as the price of not invading. But, by the same token, people for invasion needed to accept the very good chance of other significant negative outcomes, including the tens of thosands who have died during the occupation. I know you agree with that. I wouldn't state that your stand was functionally in favor of these deaths, because I saw you guessing, at the time, that the total number of deaths in Iraq would be lower with the invasion than without. I guessed that the total cost of invading was higher than the total cost of containment. I'd rather say that both of us need to accept the costs as well as the benefits of our stands, then say we were in favor of the costs. Dan M. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
