The Right Thing

[poliphilo]

I believe it was the right thing to do to challenge Gaddafi.

When a murderous bully is gaining the upper hand- and you're bigger than he is and have a fair chance of stopping him, it's wrong to sit on your hands.

This intervention was possible. And the calculations suggest a fair outcome is likelier than a miserable one. 

I have, in the past, called myself a pacifist. Obviously this was a lie.

Comments

[endlessrarities.livejournal.com]

I just wish I wasn't going on holiday to the Mediterranean next month. The timing ain't good:-0

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Oh dear, no, it ain't.

[endlessrarities.livejournal.com]

And I was worried about Vesuvius...

Sod's law, isn't it??

And after us Scots had the decency to let Magrahi out to die in his home territory, too...

I've got a lot of respect for Messrs. Salmond and Mackaskill for making that decision and taking all the flak from a certain big bully-boy state which shall remain nameless.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

It's Weird how- only the other day- we were doing all we could to butter Gaddafi up.

[endlessrarities.livejournal.com]

And how states which have an equally dodgy human rights record are still getting buttered up...

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

...and some of them are joining us in the alliance against Libya.

[endlessrarities.livejournal.com]

And there was I worrying about Vesuvius.

Sod's law, isn't it?

That's gratitude for you. After we Scots had the decency to let Magrahi go home to end his days with his family, too...

I had a lot of respect for Messrs. Salmond and Mackaskill for that decision, which has brought a lot of flak from a certain big bully boy state which shall remain nameless.

[arielstarshadow.livejournal.com]

Realizing that it's time someone needs to step up and stop the violence and atrocity doesn't make you a liar. There are all sorts of "flavors" of pacifism, and not all of them mean no violence, ever, under any circumstances. I'd say that it's more that you've realized that your desire for a lack of violence has a limit, and that limit has been reached:

...the obliteration of force except in cases where it is absolutely necessary to advance the cause of peace

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Thank you.

I guess I'm one of the more nuanced kinds of pacifist.

[steepholm.livejournal.com]

But under that definition surely pretty much everyone's a pacifist who isn't a psychopath. Most people who go to (or favour) war are against violence in general, but think that there are circumstances that justify it. Are they all pacifists?

[calizen.livejournal.com]

Excellent point. Pacifism is not a blank check to do nothing. It's a choice, always a choice, in all different kinds of situations.

[pondhopper.livejournal.com]

I still think you're very much a pacifist but pacifism isn't always about sitting still and protesting. You're a pacifist who also believes in justice and fairness.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Sometimes war is the lesser evil...

[ron-broxted.livejournal.com]

Challenge the bastards in Burma, in Peking, in Uzbekistan, in North Korea, in Djakarta, oh wait, that does not suit US policy!

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Sadly not. There are several other Middle Eastern countries one could add to that list.

[algabal.livejournal.com]

Will you fight, then? What if you were a young man? Will you encourage your children to join and fight? Whose children do you desire to be sent to Libya?

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Our current wars are being fought by professional armies, so the question doesn't arise.

Had I been around in 1914 or 1939 I would almost certainly have volunteered and wound up in uniform. I can also imagine myself as a young man joining the International Brigade in Spain.

I had a son in the army. He served in Iraq. It was his choice to be in uniform- and I respected that- even though I disapproved of that particular war. If he were still a soldier- and deployed to Libya- he would go with my blessing.

[algabal.livejournal.com]

Then I'm sure you've thought of these questions many times.

My point is only that lending one's vocal support to a military conflict that one wouldn't directly contribute one's body to at this moment (if one were physically able) is basically cowardly. The fact that there are paid people willing to fight for you doesn't make the question irrelevant.

[steepholm.livejournal.com]

My point is only that lending one's vocal support to a military conflict that one wouldn't directly contribute one's body to at this moment (if one were physically able) is basically cowardly.

I'm having difficulty seeing why this follows. Can you expand on it?

[algabal.livejournal.com]

To support violence is a decision of enormous import. From then now, you become an advocate of violence, and there's a significant moral burden on you to justify and come to terms with your decision.

A really basic test of the rightness of this decision is to ask oneself whether the cause in question is of such gravity that you would give your own life to support it at this moment, if you were called to. That's precisely what you're asking the soldiers who have volunteered to defend you to do.

[steepholm.livejournal.com]

No problem with the first paragraph, but the second I'd take some issue with, if only because risking one's life isn't the same as giving it, and it's the former that the soldiers are being asked to do. But then there are plenty of occupations that involve risking one's life - being a firefighter, for example - and I don't think it's immoral or even necessarily cowardly to say both that one supports the work of firefighters and that one wouldn't want to be a firefighter oneself.

The fundamental moral question in this situation is surely whether one's prepared to take life, rather than to give it.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I believe I disagree.

The war is already in progress. The purpose of the intervention is to stop a crazy dictator from killing his own people. I think I am allowed to approve of this without being obliged to take up arms and rush to the front.

[daisytells.livejournal.com]

But isnt that what we said about Saddam Hussein? And what happened AFTER we succeeded? I cannot help wondering how many of our - and your - young soldiers will have to die, along with how many Libyan civilians, in order to achieve the goal. I also wonder whether if we accomplish this put down of a dictator, will all of us then have the good sense to go home and let the people of Libya work out their system for themselves?

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

No. What was said about Hussein was that he was a terrible person with weapons of mass destruction, not that he was about to shell a city of 600,000 into rubble.

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

Yes, indeed.

If you want to compare Libya to Iraq, compare how Poppy Bush encouraged the Shiites to rise up against Saddam Hussein and then stood by idly while they were summarily slaughtered. That, I think, is a similar situation.

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

That's precisely correct and there is a special circle in hell reserved for Bush I.

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

I believe so, yes.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

There are differences. The allies went out of their way to pick a fight with Saddam. With Gaddafi they're intervening in a civil war.

I agree there's a chance it'll all end horribly. But it would certainly have ended horribly if we hadn't gone in.

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

First, I'm so glad France and Britain took the lead here, not us.

Second, I think the major differences are diplomatic and strategic. Everyone but Gaddafi himself is against him. Even his ambassadors and UN representative defected. From a strategic perspective, Libya is literally right over there. There's no need to occupy the country or rely heavily on permanent infrastructure of any kind. No "ongoing commitment" needs to be made through encampments.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

I hope you're right about the "ongoing commitment", but I don't suppose anyone has much idea what will happen once Gaddafi is overthrown. Is there a government in waiting? Probably not.

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

There is a provisional government already in place in Benghazi, one that was given official diplomatic recognition by France, just a few days ago. They have been begging for a no-fly zone from day one.

I freely admit that seeing poor mad Tony and Hillary Clinton and Mean Old Man McCain and the rest of the usual suspects baying for blood should give anyone pause. I still think this is the right course to take, though. The clincher was the Arab League. A more dysfunctional deliberative body it is difficult to imagine, yet they got their act together, in record time, and presented a case for intervention to the Security Council. I was shocked.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

But can the provisional government in Benghazi claim to represent the whole country?

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

That is the proverbial $10,000 question, I fear.

I strongly suspect that the provisional government in Benghazi speaks for the oil-producing East and hopes to speak for the refineries and ports of the coast. That much is certain.

I think the provisional government probably speaks for at least 80% of Libya, reckoned by land mass, since that is about what the rebels held, before Gaddafi's kids tried to re-take the coastal towns from Sirt to Benghazi. What that translates to, in number of heads, I have no idea. I suspect that it still means that the provisional government enjoys majority support, at least for now.

How much hard support Gaddafi has among the populace is difficult to say. I suspect that he's down to a fanatical few, at this point. It is likely that at least some of his officer corp will happily throw the family under the bus, when the opportunity to do so arrives. Strongmen rule through fear and largess. Gaddafi's power to use either has been severely downgraded. We shall just have to see.

[michaleen.livejournal.com]

For news and analysis of what's up, in the Arab world, I rely on this fellow:

http://www.juancole.com/

If Prof Cole has ever led me wrong, I have no recollection of it.

[poliphilo.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the tip...

[airstrip.livejournal.com]

Yeah, there's one forming in Benghazi.

[calizen.livejournal.com]

Fascinating opinions on all shades of pacifistic thoughts here. You can see that Monsieur Bush has really made an impact on lots and lots of people, but obviously not in the way he intended.

[chochiyo-sama.livejournal.com]

Even a pacifist will put down a rabid animal.

The guy is a mad dog, a danger to every living creature in his country. It's time to put him down.

[steepholm.livejournal.com]

Arguments that someone should be killed because they're less than human always make me uneasy.