Grayhawk says these posts really brought out the trolls, and scrolling through the comments, I can see that they did. There are reasonable opponents of the war in Iraq, but few of them seem to comment in the blogs I read. Predictably, one of these trolls brought out this tired, silly, and extremely irritating argument,
"I've got a question for all of you who have yet to turn 40.
If you're so fired up about this war, why don't you join the army reserves?
I've got another question for all of you who have chilldren between the ages of 18 and 40. Are your children enlisted in the military?
If not, why not?"
The implication, of course, is that you are a hypocrite if you are a civilian with no children in the military but you are not opposed to the war.
This argument is so illogical that it ought to embarrass those who make it.
Think of other noble professions- is it hypocritical to be proud of and impressed by firefighters even though you are not one and you'd rather your kids chose a safer line of work?
Is it hypocritical to be proud of and impressed by police officers even though you are not one and you'd rather your kids chose a safer line of work?
Is it hypocritical to be proud of and impressed by the bomb squad, people who clear fields of old mines, or any other hazardous line of work even though you aren't one and you'd rather your kids chose a safer career?
No, it's not, and it's unspeakably silly to suggest otherwise.
I tend to disagree with your assertion that, "There are reasonable opponents of the war in Iraq." I'm starting to see a little bit of evidence that such people might be out there, but I am skeptical.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm a pacifist.
Almost everybody who opposes the war does so for one of two very, very irrational reasons (usually both): the belief that George W. Bush is an imperialist, and the belief that George W. Bush is an idiot. Both of these impressions are so disconnected from reality that it's hardly worth taking the time to attempt to correct such a person's view on the war.
I would've appreciated any serious opposing points about the war if I could have found some by people who would affirm their belief in George W. Bush's intelligence and his motives. I would have thought that such people would have wanted to distance themselves from the irrational hysteria, but apparently most people can't see beyond the concept that everyone who is for the war must think the same thing, and everyone who is opposed to the war must think the same thing.
Here's what I wrote about this subject shortly before the war began (this was also more or less my first time to announce to the world that I was a pacifist): http://use.perl.org/~jdavidb/journal/10862
I concede your point- although, aren't you a reasonable opponent?
ReplyDeleteNo, because I consider myself an opponent of Christians using lethal force, not an opponent of secular societies enforcing secular justice.
ReplyDeleteThe war on Iraq is, as I see it, pretty much completely rational. I just couldn't participate. (And I'd have to accept the consequences if noone participated.)
I can't think of a single time I've argued against the war in Iraq, specifically.
David, my apologies. I committed an assumption. I knew you were a pacifist, and I knew you to be a rational human in spite of that, and I just jumped to an unwarranted conclusion.
ReplyDeleteI think that I have seen some respectable reasoning against the Iraq war, though- mostly from libertarians.
No apology needed. It certainly makes since to assume a pacifist is against a war.
ReplyDeleteThe libertarians are the only reason I put "I'm starting to see a little bit of evidence that such people might be out there," in my first post. But I still haven't heard a completely coherent case.
Ironically, Eric Raymond, one of the two people responsible for my being a libertarian, is pro-Iraq war. Google for his name and "anti-Idiotarian manifesto" to read his position. He obviously doesn't hold a very high view of the anti-war folks. ;)