It’s called a straw man and, if I recall correctly, it’s not the first time it’s been employed on Hard News:
I have no patience for the “war is hell” walk-away argument.
Well that’s great Russ but this is not the argument put forward by those serious about ending U.S. and British crimes in Iraq.
If you want a serious argument to throw around in your musings on Western crimes in Iraq can I suggest this response on the question of withdrawl from Noam Chomsky:
There is a certain principle that we should adhere to. The principle is that invading armies have no rights whatsoever. They have responsibilities. The prime responsibility is to heed the will of the victims and to pay massive reparations to the victims for the crimes they’ve committed. In this case, the crimes go back through the sanctions which were a monstrous crime, through the support for Saddam Hussein, right through his worst atrocities, but particularly, those of the invasion. Those are the two responsibilities of an occupying army.
Well, you know, the population has made it pretty clear. Even U.S. and British polls make that clear. Overwhelming majorities want the U.S. to set a timetable to withdraw and adhere to it. Britain and the United States refuse. Reparations, we can’t even talk about; that’s so far from consciousness in the doctrinal system. Well, I think that answers the question. Doesn’t really matter what I think. What matters is what Iraqis think, and I think we know that pretty well. The reason the U.S. and Britain aren’t withdrawing are those I mentioned. You know, the consequences of independence for Iraq would be an ultimate nightmare for them. And they’re going to try to do anything they can to prevent Iraqi democracy, as they’ve been trying in the past.
Update: Turns out I misunderstood Russell’s musings. See comments for clarification.
Aarrggh! Not what I meant at all.
Perhaps I could have been clearer, and called it the “‘war is hell’ argument”. Or the “shit happens” argument.
What I meant was that I’m over being told by people that this sort of stuff just happens in wars, nothing to see here, move along, etc …
FWIW, I don’t think things can begin to improve in Iraq until the occupying forces depart (perhaps - seriously - with some civil infrastructure tasks being taking up by a UN-mandated force). That said, I fear that that just means handing things over to a hardline Shia political majority. It’s a mess.
Cheers,
RB
So it didn’t go terribly terribly wrong after all, well not at your end anyway! My apologies Russell. Should have known better than to try and cram a post in before work.
It didn’t help that I had one of your previous comments in mind:
It also didn’t help that I do believe war is hell and that the sorts crimes taking place in Iraq do happen and were predicted; the very reason the Nuremburg Tribunal concluded:
Anyway, once again, apologies Russell.
P.S. for anyone interested here’s a good essay on immediate withdrawal by Michael Schwartz.