In the rathouse 'o interpretation (WAS Re: politics and religion...)

[Mutualcode at aol.com]

In a message dated 2/23/2003 4:29:28 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
jbor at bigpond.com writes:


> As a "peace" (i.e. do nothing) advocate, you are tacitly condoning Saddam's
> barbarism, past and future. Fortunately, there are many, even amongst the
> anti-war lobby, who have a more rational perspective, and who will support 
> a
> UN-backed intervention

I am not advocating doing nothing. Nor am I advocating trying to bully or
bride the Security Council into rubberstamping Bush''s misguided and hasty
call for military intervention, as his administration seems bent on doing.

I'm pretty much in line with the majority of nations that make up the U.N.,
which favor peaceful diplomatic pressure- difficult, prolonged, often 
frustrating;
requiring strength, patience and perseverence- but, I believe, having a
better chance of succeeding.

The tacit support for Saddam's past barbarism ironically came from the
very same camp that is now so vehemently calling for military intervention
in Iraq, not me. As for any future barbarism, I believe that can be avoided
best by peaceful diplomatic means, at this stage. However, if, as in Bosnia
and Kosovo, organized crimes against humanity start recurring, I would
be supportive of military intervention to save innocents.

I do not believe that deception about cannisters of chemical weapons or
biological agents rise to that level, or require war. Unsubtantiated claims
of connection with those responsible for September 11th are, to my mind,
on a par with the Gulf of Tonkin fiasco and smack of attempts to manipulate
public opinion in favor of an unnecessary war.

respectfully
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20030223/610a8af7/attachment.html>