Progressive Nation

October 13th, 2005

Yes, it is theoretically possible: my response to Jeremy’s Oct.12 column

“Isn’t it theoretically possible that there are good reasons for continuing the fight in Iraq, even if the intelligence that led us to war was flawed?”

Yes, it is theoretically possible. On this, I disagree with Asheesh’s assertion that it is sacriligeous for Jeremy to assert these claims. I believe that Jeremey is entirely wrong in saying that WMDs are not one of the main concerns, or even unimportant, in affecting current debate on Iraq. But I do not fault him for bringing up these points.

RE: Asheesh:

“we should by this point have invaded Sudan, North Korea, Cuba, Azerbaijan, Turkey, Iran, Burma, Laos, Vietnam, and Saudi Arabia, at the very least.”

- Well, we have invaded North Korea, Cuba, Iran, and Vietnam (at the least). And do you really want to force this sort of consistency?

“This is moral relativism at its worse.”

- I agree with this, and believe Asheesh’s argument should have been kept within these bounds.

But on the other hand, Jeremy’s own description of “contemptuous self-righteousness” may not have considered the real cause of this contempt.

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 13th, 2005 at 1:12 am and is filed under Media. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.