been dyin' to say that for such a long time. in light of what happened last night, I feel no qualms whatsoever. BBC (you can hear it on NPR after midnight) sparked a discussion with my medic in which I amazingly maintained a restrained tone of voice.
highlights include:
-the solution to the Darfur issue is to let them kill each other. there are too many bleeding heart compassionate people in the world.
But, sir, women and children are being massacred by government-armed, American-oil-company-backed militias. American corporations actively destabilize, subvert, and aid in the corruption of weak governments in order to exploit such situations.
-it's not my problem.
But, sir, the price of oil would go up.
-then we should just go in and take it. we're the most powerful nation on the globe. why should their problems interfere with our economy?
Umm...remember Vietnam? you know, how completely impossible it is to invade and control a country that doesn't want you there? besides, isn't that robbery? we're having a pretty damn difficult time just maintaining stability in Iraq right now. We're stretched really thin. I don't think you can really manage that.
-we should have just nuked 'em.
What?!!
-yeah. nuked 'em and taken the oil. problem solved. situation stable.
Nuclear warfare? Aren't you worried about fallout, nuclear winter, radiation contamination?
-nope. I'll be dead before that's a problem.
Right. Ok. what about our relationships with other countries around the world? Wouldn't that jeopardize our economic ties, peace treaties, etc?
-we're America. we don't need them.
Hmmm. Ok. what about terrorism? That would probably get a huge boost from nuking an Islamic country in the name of exploiting their natural resources?
-Terrorism? there'll always be terrorists. Tell you what would make it a lot better though. We should just find the terrorists, haul them out in the street, and shoot 'em right in the heads.
I think that would make the problem worse.
-No. Not if you take them and their families out into the street and just execute 'em all. That would take the wind out of a lot of their sails.
Okay. So. Let's recap. Nuclear genocide, international armed robbery, subversion of foreign governments, and execution squads. Not to mention the military takeover of other countries. "Might makes right?" I ask him.
He agreed.
"Is this what you teach your children?"
Yep.
-----
Damn.
The world's greatest democracy is wasted on f****** g**d*** idiots. peevishly self-involved ones to boot.
--the previous conversation has been neither embellished nor exaggerated in the slightest, nor did the interviewer employ leading questions or excite exaggerated reactions. somehow the interviewer managed to remain calm and conversational throughout. he remains as flabbergasted as you no doubt are.
Dan Perrine...now I understand you. now I understand.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I have no idea whether your fellow conversationalist is really such a mental and moral idiot as you think. He could be exasperated at apparent non-solutions offered by bleeding-hearts (like more UN presence, along the lines of Hotel Rwanda).
I also doubt whether anyone--you and I included--can escape the label of "peevishly self-involved".
For comparison, this gentleman has a very different opinion than you do about the situation in Iraq.
Of course, one of his fellow bloggers offered an opinion about what to do in Darfur, and produced an interesting comments-thread.
Just a few thoughts.
(brother Steve)
One more thought:
where, morally, does an atrocity have to fall to before the only response is to kill all the belligerent genocidists?
Even though your conversation partner didn't explore that very carefully, the case of Darfur might indeed fall into the category where the best response is armed might.
After all, the best way to convince a bad guy to negotiate is being victorious over him on the battlefield. If the bad guy is not responsive to the bad opinions of the world community, then no alternative but force is left.
Your conversation partner may have thought this, but not had to chance to elucidate it. Or he may be the moral idiot you describe him to be.
Either way, the fact that he holds this opinion does not denigrate the opinion itself--it is perfectly possible for a moral ignoramus to happen upon the right answer without knowing why it is the right answer.
(Steve)
(grrr...mad at self)
I feel like I'm really cluttering up the comment-thread tonight.
I don't agree with nuclear genocide, but I do agree that if we wish to stop a genocide-in-the-making, then military force may be the best option. On the other hand, it may not be a good idea to tie down our military trying to solve other people's problems.
So, back to square one in Darfur: what is happening? is it a strong government force beating down on unarmed villagers? Is it two approximately-equal armies picking on each other? If the first, I would recommend sending in mercenaries, men who could train and supply a militia, or the Marines. If the second, let them kill each other.
They are, after all, not little kids. They are adults who have chosen the path of violence (which will hurt many) rather than the path of negotiations.
(Steve)
Armed might is one thing, bombing the heck out of the attackers AND the attacked is an entirely different story. And as is the case in EVERY war, bad evil corrupt people fighting each other will NOT only kill themselves-they will also kill the innocent men, women and children who just want to raise their cows and their families in peace.
And while yes Steve, both sides are fighting, the Africans (in the case of Darfur) are fighting to stay alive from the militant racism of the Arabs. Nobody in the States seems to mind when we defend ourselves against terrorism...
And while it seems Steve's comments are of a not very informed nature, the comments of Dan's medic are just blatantly ignorant, ethnocentric and unloving/uncaring/unfeeling.
Note: Sudan's warfare is of a twofold nature-that between the Muslim central gvt of the North and the SPLA of the South and that of the government sponsored Arab janjaweed set on killing/evicting all of Darfurian black Africa (and who knows what beyond that).
Although, if you really want to talk about "the path of negotiations" and the moral highground, let's talk about America's own personal history including to the present. Pah!
And Dan, kudos on our stoicism during said conversation! I'd 'a pepper-sprayed him. (Probably unlovingly)
In my opinion both you and the medic over-simplified things . . . .
But since neither one of you have the power to implement your specific policies, I don't care. . . .
I'm glad you tried to get him thinking though.
David
Rubbing shoulders with provincial idiots is a wearisome task, eh? Kudos on the restraint. I wish more could see beyond the borders of the US with their own eyes. It might change the "Well, let them die, and decrease the surplus population..." Scrooge attitude. I found this with many colleagues in the US - when they couldn't understand / solve an issue, they resort to "Let's nuke the whole Middle East and make it a parking lot." Sad and confused.
But if I lay aside my Christian morals, what can I really fault him with? Being unloving / uncaring about others? Big whoop. Everywhere I've been on this globe has provincial idiots, self-interested, with similar attitudes. It's just they have no world power to act on in their self interest... so nobody cares.
If American oil is backing this... I guess the only moral highground is to walk. But actually American companies are out as of 1997 (Clinton declared Sudan a terrorist state - it's illegal to do business there.) Actually the recent oil contracts have been with China, India, Japan and Britain! (Including one guy who changed his citizenship - American to British just before signing an oil deal, to avoid prosecution :) Where's the outcry against the evil governments of Japan, India, China and Britain for financing a genocide? Can't hear it...
Oh - and kudos to the American el presidente who has used the bully pulpit of the presidency to make it an issue from early on in his first administration, before this became a popular chic celeb cause. And the American Congress who have repeatedly, in stronger terms than other governments, condemned the genocide. A nod to America's present personal history.
Pole. Let's buy the medic a ticket (one way - oops, did I say that?) to Darfur for an up close and personal look. They could use him there... might change (or end) his life. It'd be fun anyway... :)
Cheers -
Jeff
Post a Comment