All opinions posted. None too pathetic or contrived. Everyone gets their say.

"...even the wicked get worse than they deserve." - Willa Cather, One of Ours

Friday, May 21, 2004

Pacifism as Policy


In reply to the Wellington quote below, Anonymous wrote a comment saying:
Only those who have no experience with war, such as George Bush, would use war as an insturament [sic] of foreign policy.
That is definitely a bit extreme, and it is a misconstruction of Wellington’s quote.

Certainly you don’t mean to say that FDR had no right to take America to war in 1941? He had no military experience (less even than GW Bush) and less government national security experience than Cheney.

How about Wilson? He was an academic and one-term governor with absolutely no military experience. He went to war in Europe for even less reason than Bush. Perhaps it can be argued that doing so was very unwise. But did he have no right to go to war becuse he had never gone himself?

And how about Lincoln? He had never been to war, and he himself said later on, that at the war’s beginning he had no true understanding of what the war would cost. He only knew that whatever the cost, the Union would have to pay it.

As to the Wellington quote: The 'Iron Duke' fought in 4 wars over 3 decades on 3 continents, resulting in the permanent distruction of several countries and the death of hundreds of thousands.

It would be completely wrong to say that he was opposed to war. What he was saying - is that it is members of the warrior class, like himself, that wish most fervently that war should be avoided. He was clearly not saying that war should always be avoided.

Pacifists discussing foreign policy are like atheists discussing theology; their ideology makes their opinions irrelevant to all of those who do not share it.

Choosing pacifism as a foreign policy means that others get to decide for you on these important issues.
Posted by: Zayphar / 5/21/2004 12:25:00 PM
Comments: Post a Comment

<< Home