Re: Anti-Militarism Posters?
George J. Lee (gjlee@uclink4.berkeley.edu)
14 Feb 1998 21:30:01 -0800
"Daniel C. Burton" <dan@antispam.autobahn.org> writes:
> Kevin Dempsey Peterson <peterson@ocf.Berkeley.EDU> wrote in article
> <Pine.SOL.3.96.980213221132.22260A-100000@apocalypse>...
>
> > Well, yes, it needs some brushing up, but I think the "War is for
> > children who can't negociate; isn't it time we grew up (as a
> > civilization)" argument is the most emotionally appealling argument from
> > the libertarian point of view.
>
> Alright, so let's go ahead with that.
Yes, I agree. Too many people think it's okay for millions of people
to unite and attack millions of other people using tanks and bombs,
yet everyone agrees it's wrong for someone to stab another person to
death over a disagreement. The two differ only in scale.
Some people think that by attacking Iraq, we're punishing Saddam. As
we learned from the Gulf war, Saddam retained his power despite the
utter defeat of his army; Saddam does not care about his country's
citizens. By waging war on Iraq, we only hurt the civilians while
Saddam Hussein lives in luxury inside his palace.
Regarding the economic aspects, Dan has made many good
points. Economic sanctions do nothing but breed resentment from the
people. The Iraqi people have done nothing to the U.S., and yet we
punish them for having a bad leader. Free trade would both lessen the
hostility between the two countries and increase the standard of
living.
If we want to make this a topic for the meeting after Wednesday, we
should start making flyers and we'll need someone to prepare a speech.
George