Conversation corner
-
Socialists and the Iraq War
Date2005/09/14 16:01 by: GermanInternationalistI'm a member of the Social democratic Party of Germany. Thus I am appalled by most of Bush's policies.
But I find the way socialists approach his foreign policy sometimes hypocritical.
As a socialist the values of freedom, justice and solidarity have always been dearest too me.
Where was the solidarity with the iraqi people during the 20 years of most brutal possible saddam dictatorship. The so-called peace activists have moved their asses exactly two times for their fellow humans in Iraq, namely every time to demonstrate against the “criminal Anti-Hussein coalition”. Where are the peace activists in Europe now to chain themselves to iraqi schools and facilities to demonstrate against terrorists. This is not an anti-war attitude often times here. What’s at work here is opposition to american intervention exclusively, even if it means continued terrorizing, torture, rape and enslavement of millions of people.
One can legitimately oppose the Bush war for the following reasons:
1. It’s not worth the lives of thousands of american soliders.
2. It’s not worth the lives of tens of thousands of iraqi civilians.
One can NOT oppose it cuz its about oil. Certainly the removal of saddam is more important to the everyday lives of Iraqis, than whether or not the US is gonna steal their oil.
I don’t blame Bush for the terrorism that’s happening in Iraq right now. I blame the terrorists.
I blame him for not putting enough troops down there.
I don’t blame Bush for the death of thousands of american soldiers. There is no draft. It’s a soldier’s JOB to go to war, not sit around in your barracks and get paid for training exercises. So if you join the US Army, you better don’t do it cuz you wanna go to college because, certainly being a soldier is not your ordinary profession, you better think twice before siging up.
I do blame Bush for making it look like Hussein was a threat to the United States, when clearly even if he had WMD, he’d never EVER dared to attack the USA.
I don’t blame Bush for the death of tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians, because I frankly deem it justified to end the enslavement and terrorizing of 20 Million people. Obviously the iraqi people would’ve never been able to topple Saddam themselves and if they tried, believe me, the carnage of millions of people rising up against their own army would’ve been much worse than what we’re seeing now.
I’m against removing the North korean or iranian dictatorships precisely because it would costs hundreds of thousands or even millions of civilian lives and both regimes simply arent as weak as saddam was in 2003.
I’m with Tony Blair on this one. -
Re:Socialists and the Iraq War
Date2005/09/14 17:35 by: Democratic SocialistThere is no terrorism in Iraq, there is a campaign of iraqi people for freedom and liberation.
You, as German, should know that the most important thing for a citizen is self-determination.
I don't support the Saddam Hussein, but I understand that the iraqi people are not better right now... Their oil is beeing stealed by the occupation forces and they don't have employment opportunities neither security. It's not for the anti-war movement to solve the structural problems of the iraqi people, it's for the Iraqi government to implement the right policies to that end.
Iran is not a dictatorship. You can say there is no individual and some political freedoms in Iran, but you should now that in the last election, the conservative candidate won the election, even the reformists were in power.
I think you like Blair have anything of socialist or left-wing. You think like Hitler!!! -
Re:Socialists and the Iraq War
Date2005/09/14 18:24 by: SocDemDemocratic Socialist, your rhetoric is a bit overheated. A Hitler comparison is not warranted in this situation, and the suicide bombers in Iraq are not demonstrating legitimate behavior (taking the lives of civilians is never warranted). And just because Iran has elections doesn't make it a democracy, after all the USSR had elections. German, as history has so often taught democracy can rarely be imposed, especially on people with little or no experience with it. My greatest fear always was that the removal of Saddam (a wicked man by any standards) would stir up terrible instability. We can see this in the bloody and continued insurgency. Rather than war I would have preferred diplomatic (heavy-handed if needed) solutions. With all the eyes of the world on Saddam (or any other dictator for that matter) it would be much harder to commit atrocities. Sanctions (a fine line between hurting a regime and its people) sometimes work with a little forethought. I believe that in many ways this war has been detrimental to the Iraqi people. Constant fear, random explosions, assassinations, kidnappings, unreliable utilities, etc. Jalil Talibani's cozy past with Iran is discomforting as well. Should the Iraqi government ever get control over its own country who's to say a worse dictator won't appear. Just look at the new constitution: "No law may conflict with the teachings of Islam". We must never forget that our meddling (mostly US admittedly) produced Saddam in the first place as a buffer to the Ayatollah controlled Iran. Also, as an American I'm not willing to waste American, as well as Iraqi, lives for what in all likelihood will at best end in a draw. That is another Iraqi dictator. Besides I'm still steamed that Bush lied about WMD and the threat posed to America. Lastly, isn't it hypocritical to give humanitarian reasons for the Iraq war when we ignore the abuses of so many other countries (esp. China) and ignore the issue of poverty which can be just as destructive as a totalitarian regime.
-
Re:Socialists and the Iraq War
Date2005/09/14 19:26 by: Democratic SocialistTO SOCDEM:
Democracy?
Yes, you are right, elections does not mean democracy. There is democracy in America? NO. Democracy in the USA means a defeated candidate can win elections (it happen in 2000 when Al Gore had more votes that Bush). Furthermore in USA only 2 political parties are allowed to contest elections. And these two parties are based in lobbies, corporations and are led by oligarchies of money, power, and economic interests.
Human rights?
The America has the worst record about human rights, just look about what happened in Abu Graib, and in the Guantanamo.
Poverty?
There is no poverty in the USA? I think you should go New Orleans and Chicago to see the gap of rich and poor.
WMD?
As far as I know the countries which have WMD are: United States, Israel, China, India, Pakistan, France, Russia, UK, and maybe some others.
And of all these countries, the only one to use against people was the USA!!! America is the worst threat for the world security. America is not interested in the iraqi people neither in democracy... It's interested in the iraqi oil, and it made the war because of economic reasons.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS ABOUT YOUR COMMENT:
You should also know that Talal Talabani is a kurd and a socialist. He has never had relations with the regime in Iran because Kurds don't like the human rights record in the Iranian Kurdistan. Talal Talabani is the leader of the Socialist International member party in Iraq.
It's for the iraqi people to decide its future, if they don't democracy, you cannot impose it to them, and if the constitution is based in islam that it's not a matter any foreign has to interfer because the constitution was drafted by the representatives of the iraqi people.
