home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!paladin.american.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!usenet
- From: HADCRJAM@admin.uh.edu (MILLER, JIMMY A.)
- Newsgroups: alt.desert-storm
- Subject: Re: Raid Started
- Date: 25 Jan 1993 18:41:43 GMT
- Organization: University of Houston Administrative Computing
- Lines: 55
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <1k1c99INNfg1@menudo.uh.edu>
- References: <1juu0nINNm1n@morrow.stanford.edu>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: uhad2.admin.uh.edu
- X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.20
- In-Reply-To: BL.JYC@forsythe.stanford.edu's message of 24 Jan 1993 12:25:59 -0800
-
- In <1juu0nINNm1n@morrow.stanford.edu> BL.JYC@forsythe.stanford.edu writes:
-
- > In article <727731421.AA08134@csource.oz.au>,
- > I think it's an index of how really indefensible our armed forces'
- > actions in Iraq are that the only way people can figure out how to
- > defend them is by coming up with two classic statements of moral
- > cowardice: we're helpless not to kill innocent people because the other
- > side won't do what we say, and besides even if we're murderers we're
- > nearly not so big murderers as our opponent.
-
- Well actually, I can think of a couple of others: Saddam has been shown
- to consistently act against the terms of the UN resolutions and the
- cease-fire accords. The only things that have made him obey have been
- force or the threat of force. When military actions are taken, people
- tend to die in any number of messy ways. All too often, these people are
- civilians are otherwise not really involved. The only sure way to prevent
- these deaths is to do nothing. Doing nothing may well result in even
- more deaths and unpleasantness further down the road.
-
- > I'm not a pacifist. There is legitimate need for waging war some
- > times, but this is not one of them. And there is a morally respectable
- > defense for inflicting civilian casualties in time of necessary war.
- > That defense is: civilian deaths are regrettable and should be
- > minimized, but they are acceptable and justifiable because they are an
- > unavoidable consequence of military action which we must undertake to
- > prevent our country from being ... [supporters of the current vicious
- > insanity are invited to try to complete this sentence for the present
- > case in some way that makes convincing sense.]
-
- I will not, because your statement is so limited as to be frightful. It
- refuses to take into account actions such as the invasion of Kuwait. The
- danger to the US was somewhat peripheral, IMO (Saddam still had to sell his
- oil), but ONLY military action, vigorously pursued, would have removed
- Saddam from the country. So far only military force has had any effect on
- him and his actions. I believe that is the only thing that will work. Saddam
- is a brutal dictator and a semi-sophisticted bully -- such creatures are
- rarely affected by moral suasion.
-
- I challenge you to develop a workable way of forcing recalcitrant leaders
- to not throw their weight around that does not include recourse to military
- action. I doubt you will find one (note, sanctions have STILL not produced
- the desired effects, even after all this time (only food and medicine are al-
- lowed into Iraq).
-
-
- semper fi,
-
- Jammer Jim Miller
- Texas A&M University '89 and '91
- ********************************************************************************
- * Speak for my employers? They don't even know I exist! *
- *"Become one with the Student Billing System. *BE* the Student Billing System."*
- * "Power finds its way to those who take a stand. Stand up, Ordinary Man." *
- * ---Rik Emmet, Gil Moore, Mike Levine: Triumph *
- ********************************************************************************
-