The US, UN & Iraq II

http://www.uclick.com/client/wpc/db/2003/04/14/index.html

Now that the liberation of Iraq is complete with the taking of Tikrit I personally feel vindicated in my absolute belief that our mission was justified. My belief is further strengthened by the recent evidence that Kim Jong iL has noted the swift US victory by the now willingness to enter into multilateral discussions(instead of insisting on bilateral talks just with the US). I also restate a comment by the new head of South Korea that Kim was "petrified" by the decisive victory. This "message" was a strong secondary objective of the action in Iraq.

My feeling of vindication is dampened by the exhibition of nihilism displayed by the more fanatical negative participants of this thread.
The potential destructiveness of this nihilism presents just as real a threat to the future of this country as does global terrorism. Below is a short statement concerning "political" nihilism which will clarify my concern.
Political Nihilism, as noted, is associated with the belief that the destruction of all existing political, social, and religious order is a prerequisite for any future improvement............

Anyone desiring more detailed information about this potential force refer to this link:

http://www.utm.edu/research/iep/n/nihilism.htm

It is my belief that Timber is deserving of the order of Sainthood to be bestowed upon his head for his valiant effort to carry on a reasoned discourse with a very undeserving mob of twisted minds.

Steve, that is my take as well, on the Bush-Blair fandango. If Blair holds GWB's feet to the fire on the Israel-Palestine issue, TB can run for US prez in 2004, for my money. He always seems to uncover the gold nugget hiding in the pile of smelly stuff.

Timber, I wouldn't mind seeing a bit of official regret expressed in our media over tragedies such as the National Museum in Baghdad that was looted. That occurence can hardly be filed under "untidiness." Museum officials had been promised that the museum would be protected, and the employees personally begged US Army officials to protect the building when it became apparent that they could not stop looters.

I'm off to enjoy a beautiful day here. Nice thing to say about timber; totally uncalled-for editorial comment about others. Please refrain from such comments. Thank you.

The idea that our mission, unjustified and horrific as it was, is somehow "justified" because the mission is "over" strained credibility! As for the destruction of all existing political, social and religious order being destroyed by political nihilists, that could well be true, if you just get the point that the nihilists are the Bushies, not the humble (if burdensomely intelligent) liberals in this forum!

Timber is currently in Purgatory, enjoying the party with the rest of us I hope!

After we've been exposed to all the death and destruction of the past several weeks, I think we all need a break, and the following link will provide a little respite. c.i.
http://www.wtv-zone.com/cal555/dd/framespg.html

I had not intended to reply to the mistaken allegation of nihilism as misapplied to those of my philosophical bent, but the error is so grievous as to demand an answer. The patriots who opposed this war as being unjust, unnecessary, and wrong-headed are in every way the opposite of nihilists. When a person sees ill-considered, badly reasoned, and poorly justified actions -- in fact, immoral actions -- being taken by her head of state, she would be a nihilist only if she said nothing and denied the fact that there is right and wrong, and that wrong is being done and must be protested.

Hi Ci

Hope things are going well in sunny California. [Believe it or not it is almost too hot here].

I'm glad Powell is supportive of the UN. The US can afford to be magnanimous. I just wish America would see itself as an important member of the UN team instead of seeing itself as something apart from and often in opposition to the UN.

Steve, You and me, both. c.i.

Thanks for the education on nihilism Perc. But if nihilism is characterised by a rejection of belief systems, then that should include nihilism. Sounds like the intellectual equivalent of disappearing up one's own bottom if you ask me. No thanks I'm not a nihilist.

Thanks for the pretty pics ci.

We all need reminding there is a beautiful world out there.

Interesting.

This is from the link you gave:

"Political Nihilism, as noted, is associated with the belief that the destruction of all existing political, social, and religious order is a prerequisite for any future improvement."

So let us look at the existing political, social, and religious order before this war erupted. There was a totalitarian dictatorship in Iraq. It possibly had WMD, though there was no proof of that. The regime had been curtailed by US and UN as no-fly zones were imposed and Kurds got their autonomy. On the international level, the world had gotten to the point where any country aiming for a military intervention would be expected to seek authorisation from the UN. The UN, with its veto-wielding permanent SC members, was a bit of a hybrid mix of idealism and realpolitik, and had achieved, let's say, mixed results. In case of Iraq, too: the regime had been contained and largely disarmed, but it hadnt been incapacitated and was still able to commit harm against its own citizens and possibly, though there was no conclusive proof of it yet, those of other countries.

We agree on that summary, mostly, I think?

Now a nihilist would look at that existing order and see nothing of hope or value. He would be convinced that things were not just bad - "things" represented a social order that was so corrupted or worthless that only its total destruction would bring any hope of improvement.

Going back to before the war. The multilateralists argued that, though Saddam was bad, he was negotiating, that there was hope for a diplomatic solution. That the UN was perhaps not perfect, but in all its weakness still the closest this world had come to a civilised manner of conflict-resolution. That the current reality was flawed, but that there was enough worth preserving in it - that any course for destruction would risk just that - the destruction of the fragile results achieved thus far. They were idealist - naively idealist even, perhaps, in thinking that with the baby steps of diplomacy peace and freedom could eventually both be achieved; or they were of the realist kind, that would argue that we just had to take the bad (Saddam) with the good (partial disarmament, regional stability, a functioning UN) if the alternative seemed to involve the destruction of most of the latter. Those supporting the UN course were the ones pleading for little steps, caution, consensus ... whether they were right or wrong to argue so, revolutionaries they were not. No destruction of all order for them.

The true revolutionaries of the story, I am increasingly convinced, are Rumsfeld c.s. Now here are people who looked at "existing political, social, and religious order" and said - this is no good, we're gonna change all of that. No patience. They argued war could be defended because the havoc it would wreck would be made up for by the fresh start in true freedom after the war had ended. Kind of a rebirth in fire. Now there's an attitude reminiscent of, say, Bakunin (anarchist of nihilist origins). You've got to tear it all down first, for subsequent freedom to really be true. The UN was imperfect - could it be gradually improved on? No, is what Rumsfeld c.s. seem to say - it should be torn apart and reinvented from scratch. Same with the Middle East. No more tortuous peace processes. Reinvention of the region.

It's in their world that there are no "greys". Iran fits in the same category as Iraq. All those in the world who refuse to be "with us" are thus "against us", whether they're rogue states or trusted allies. There is no hope of improving on the weak little bit by little bit, no reason to go out of one's way to protect the historically grown - the world's only hope is an all-out offensive, rooting out the existent for something all new - something rather ill-defined for now, but by its very nature of being all new by definition also all good. Tear down all the corrupted constructions from the now and build these countries - this world! - up from the ground again, with a new plan! For better or for worse, we won't know for a while to come ...

<grins>

Your nihilism connotation is in fact an extremely productive metaphor. You just got the sides mixed up.

nimh, The primary question is, who has the authority to decide whether 1000's must give up their lives for the remaining? Are the sacrificed lives worth the benefit? Is it really a benefit? For whom? c.i.

nimh, you point out something that has always troubled me: why was our administration in such an all-fired hurry to go to war? By not giving diplomacy and containment a chance, we proved to the world that our real intention was to recreate the Middle East in our own image and run it to suit our purposes.

c.i., thanks for the photo-tour. That tropical isle looks mighty pleasant right now.

I have to go with Kara on that one.
Many disliked Clinton, but he did a lot of work for peace negotiations in the middle east and public opinion toward the US was lightening. Suddenly GWB came to power, withdrew from ALL US peace talks, broke geneva conventions and treaties, and then bwham, two planes him the world trade center. Rather than own up to his mistakes, he mislead the population (of the west generally) into thinking that this action was the start of the mistakes, and not just one other repurcussion of everything leading up to it.

The notion of invading Iraq for a regimee change to reduce the threat of further terrorist attacks is cakc-handed. If anything, the US is more exposed than ever, and with international relations at an all time low. Personally I love the US and hate what he's doing to the place. If someone doesn't get rid of him soon he's going to have every armed man, woman and child in the world taking pot shots.

If he handles the Israel issue properly though, there is still some chance things will go back the way they were, but the truth is that the guy has left deep, itchy scars that'll take decades to heal.

"Personally I love the US and hate what he's doing to the place. If someone doesn't get rid of him soon he's going to have every armed man, woman and child in the world taking pot shots."

Yes to both, Daf! I'm armed only with cow pies and I can't WAIT for him to pass by within range.

One advantage: if we survive him and get a decent, genuine, uncrazy president in place, the smiles and gratitude will travel faster than SARS. Big worldwide party as a little humility (or better, a lot!) returns to the American character.

Actually that's a very good point! By contrast, whoever follows him will be the best president ever and the global opinion of the US will sky rocket.

The crucial assumption though: "If we survive him..."

It's very tempting to reply to the "intellectual" responses but Jespah put the "mouthcuffs" on me. Perhaps it's just as well----my response would probably be unprintable.