Because it needs it, I pit The War in Iraq

The BBQ Pit
121

You cannot find such a standard. You can only make up such a standard. And in the end those with the power will decided if they want to live up to such a standard. And if they truly have the power, nobody can stop them. Power is the ultimate arbitrator.

122

By that sort of “reasoning,” the U.S. has no moral or ethical justification for being in Iraq, such considerations being irrelevant; and no practical justification either, since our presence there has served only to diminish our power and help our enemies win recruits; and we have no reason not to pull out, since any resulting bloodbath will not be our problem.

123

Pulling out could increase the influence of Iran in the region, which can be reasonably viewed as being bad for the US. Also, a failed state in Iraq could increase instability in the region.

Why do you put reasoning in quotes? Can you provide a standard that is not made up and that will trump power?

124

You know, 2.5, you say your not a troll and yet you go around making bold proclamations like you have balls of steel. I’m starting to think you’re nothing more than a punk. Classic definition of course. I’ll bet you’de wiggle around like a little worm at the sight of a picture of the boys undergarments section in a Sears catalog, wouldn’t you now. :smiley: :smiley: :smiley:

You get three smiley faces for that one, funboy!!

125

According to a recent CNN report, Pentagon and UN experts have estimated that US-led military forces used between 1,100 and 2,200 tonnes of depleted uranium during the invasion of Iraq. The amount far exceeds the 300 tonnes of depleted uranium used in the 1991 Gulf War and the 10 tonnes used by NATO forces during the bombing of Serbia in 1999.

Better? Point being, anyway you look at it, it’s criminal. By Law.

126

BTW, from the original cite, it appears to me that the man knows quite well what he is talking about:

127

Your asservation is not reasoning. As for standards of judgment, all of which including yours are “made up” by definition, there are several.

An interesting discussion of the ethics of war is to be found in From [url=]Vietnam: The Necessary War, by Michael Lind – Chapter 7, “Was the Vietnam War Unjust?”:

However, to be truly comprehensive, we should add a fifth, the “imperialist” or “piratical” argument:

(e) War is not necessarily desirable or glorious in and of itself. It is, however, a perfect legitimate means for a nation or state to win territory, resources, power, or anything else that might serve its national interests. Independent sovereign states, even if internally ordered by laws and social and moral norms, exist in a perpetual state of nature in relation to one another, because “international law” is an oxymoronic and meaningless concept in the absence of any international government with the power to enforce it. A perpetual competition for power and wealth is therefore inevitable, and any nation too scrupulous to participate will fall prey to other states with less tender consciences. Now lie down on the floor and remain calm.

I venture to suggest that theory (e) has played a more important role in influencing the actual behavior of states and leaders throughout history than the other four combined. I even see it, in effect, occasionally defended in this Forum.

And several times in this thread.

I hope I do not need to explain why (e), while less insane than (d), is no more defensible.

128

It appears that oldmanfromnh@yahoo.com is extrapolating from his ass. While my earlier calcs. did NOT include other types of DU munitions (I solely focused on tank munitions), you can easily replicate the math yourself and see that claims of “thousands of tons” of spent DU particulate matter floating around Iraq is at best specious, at worst a flat out lie.

129

What law?

Again, you are assuming that all of the DU used in any given munition is entirely converted (resuspended) into the dangerous particulate matter so hazardous to people. Spent DU that is not resuspended is of no particular health hazard.

Here’s a helpful pamphlet put out by the U.N.

Here’s another study on the aerosolization effects of DU tank rounds, which indicates that on average, about 18% of the mass of a DU munition is converted to particualte DU dust.

130

You really should read what I posted a little closer. Hint: Post #108.

131

Nothing in post #108 constitutes an ethical argument in justification; nor offer any way around the limited-resource problem.

Your argument – or, rather, unstated assumption – seems to be that any one-sided war of aggression is justified if it will replace a dictatorship with democratic rule; at any rate, that appears to be a basic neocon argument. Please consider that this is merely a variation of the (Marxist) theory (c) listed in post #127.

132

Except for the fact that I am talking about we (the western world) not we (the USA). You, and I and everyone else posting to this board live safe, comfortable lives, with food, shelter, medical care, protection of the rule of law and ample leisure time. When something happens like Burma, hell yes we should go in, en mass, execute the junta, rebuild the country, jump start the economy, establish a framework of laws that apply to everyone and guide the citizens in creating a stable government that derives it’s authority from the just consent of the governed. This will probably take a couple of decades. When we’re done, we should do the same in Sudan. And so forth. People will die in this process. It’s unfortunate but inevitable, however more people will be able to live fuller, richer lives when we’re done as opposed to simply existing, which is what they do now.

133

Mecht macht Recht. A quite ancient fallacy. I direct your attention to Plato’s Republic, Book I, the dialogue between Socrates and Thrasymachus. (Thrasymachus gets his ass kicked.)

134

Thank you, Ex-Tank, for after reading your UN pamphlet I feel that the US is absolutely justified in using DU.

From you link:

Hell’s bells, ping-pong appears to be an extreme sport compared to DU.

Thank Og the US of A is on top of such thing. Surely Iraqui civilians are well-versed on all the particulars. :rolleyes:

135

It would take “a couple of decades” just to get the whole West on board with the program; and the U.S. can’t and won’t do it alone.

And, you keep saying “hell, yes we should” as if that were self-evident. Again, what gives us (the U.S. or the West as a whole) the right?

Here’s a way to achieve substantially the same result in a process that would take even longer but without force or bloodshed.

136

You should read Plato’s Republic , Thrasymachus.

137

Except by your own argument the US and every other country is a cold amoral machine that would never, ever do any such thing, and would only invade Burma in order to exploit it.

138

‘Please be specific’? How about the president pretty much deciding that he may sign away any rights of people, citizens or otherwise, that he pleases, and call it all on the case of the terrorists / war? How about laws like habeus corpus (sp?) being suspended for many?

And before you shout ‘cite’, let me remind you; this is global perception. People see it in the news and hear about it a lot. This is what’s making a shame of our country.

Oh, and on further reading, from your quotes about power, I can see you’re a neitzchian (if that’s the correct spelling / term) at heart. Somehow doesn’t surprise me much. Power equals goodness in your mind, I take it?

I get this feeling from reading your words that arguing perception, both global and local, of personal rights will be an exercise in futility.

139

Red, your selective reading skills are phenomenal. But first, let us dispense with your strawman: I never said there weren’t any negative health effects associated with DU. My contention was the good Doctor’s claim of hundreds or thousands of tons of DU material falling on Iraq “as we speak.” I also did some elementary math to show the number of munitions that would have to be used to come up with her figures.

Again, let me spell this out for you in plain, moron-level English: a 1,000 pound DU-enhanced projectile does NOT have 1,000 pounds of depleted uranium in it. The M-829 APFSDS-T (Armor Piercing Fin Stabilized Discarding Sabot, T[ul]
[/ul] racer) is a 40 pound round, consisting of a self-consuming cartridge case, propellant, plastic sabot, and DU penetrator. It looks like this in cross-section.

And here’s a few selected quotes for you:

140

Nietzsche on morality.

Flashing on an old Gahan Wilson cartoon: A nerdy professor type is sitting in a bar next to a huge android robot. Professor to bartender: “He’s programmed to take me home the moment I start quoting Nietzsche!”