Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/09/13
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Speaking of oil there is another necessity called water. A photographer friend did a story for NatGeo about 8 years ago on Israel from the perspective of water. It seemed the flash point was over something as basic as thirst. Ray Johnny Deadman wrote: > > on 9/13/01 10:47 AM, B. D. Colen at bdcolen2001@yahoo.ca wrote: > > > Come on, JD, The War with Mexico, as utterly > > unjustifiable as it is by today's standards of > > international behavior, was pretty much typical for > > its time. > > I was just supplying an example of a largely economic war, not saying > anything about whether it was typical or atypical. > > You want a more recent example? The Gulf War was clearly motivated by the > need for the West to safeguard its oil supplies. While the overt moral > justification of coming the the aid of 'little Kuwait' certainly had > content, does anyone really believe that if oil supplies had not been at > stake that such a huge campaign would have been mounted? I can think of a > dozen similar invasions around the world where the US did nothing. > > I do not believe this makes the war 'wrong', any more than it was > 'justified' by the plight of Kuwait, whose own rulers are hardly paragons of > democratic virtue. It was a war. War is not about right and wrong. It is > about realpolitik... the struggle for power in the world. If you wish to > defend a way of life, sometimes you have to defend economic interests. And > despite the propaganda war is very seldom about morality. Even WWII, which > clearly had an enormous moral justification, was entered with enormous > reluctance by the Allies. A rump of conservatives in the British government > continued to think that peace could be reached with Hitler for months if not > years after the conflict began, as did the Archbishop of Canterbury. And the > US joined only when its own interests were directly harmed at Pearl Harbour. > > Thank God they did. Realpolitik. > > Bin Laden and his crew wish to increase their power over the world. I > personally think they should be stopped and if force is the way to do it, so > be it. Their acts two days ago made 'war' with them politically possible and > probably essential in a way that it had not been previously (it would have > upset too many nations the US didn't want to upset - Russia, China, > Pakistan, Saudi Arabia). In a sense it was a huge own goal by the > extremists, because it finally mobilized world opinion against them, > something the Allies had failed to do for a decade. > > But everyone should realise that arguing that God is on our side, or that > Bin Laden or Sadaam Hussein are crazed madmen is simply rhetoric. God > doesn't vote, period. > > In the end it all comes down to imposing political will by force. > -- > John Brownlow > > http://www.pinkheadedbug.com