Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
Now that I live in Canada, I have no sense of humour.
An example of how terrible things must be done to defeat insurgencies is the Boer War at the turn of the 20th century. Faced with a large rural Dutch settler population that was supporting the Boer rebels, the British Empire simply set up concentration camps to hold the populations of the rebel regions.
With their support base safely held in concentration camps, the rebels couldn't go on and the insurgency was defeated.
As I mentioned though, terrible things had to be done. The concentration camp policy led to the deaths of nearly 25,000 children, 50% of the child population of the Boer people. On the other hand, it successfully crushed the insurgency and the Boers ever since only used peaceful means to regain their independence.
Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
Actually, another example of a successful counter-insurgency using Boer-War type tactics is how Britain defeated communist insurgents in Malaysia. The communists drew their support from the ethnic Chinese population... so Britain simply forcefully relocated nearly half a million Chinese civilians and forced them to live in tightly guarded zones.
Again... this type of behaviour is difficult for a democracy to do, because that is at least half a million lost votes. Only an autocratic regime can do such acts.
Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
question is, why should it? no cause is worth that sort of murderousness. kill one person you're a murderer, kill thousands and you're just an autocratic regime conducing a successful counter-insurgency operation.
Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
I doubt Maddie is advocating killing thousands of people, but this sure as heck appears from his posts. Plus, I just can't fathom this bizzare desire to crush insurgencies and murder people. I guess the idea is that people are so married to the concept of one homeland that they can not bear to see it broken up. Even if it means they kill half the people. It just sounds incredibly misjudged.
Anyway, Iraq is in a state of transition. No one can deny it. If as part of this process, its boundaries must be re-defined (like they were done in early 20th century, when the last time it was in a big state of transition), so be it. Iraq's neighbors and its citizens will just have to deal with the change. Why must US kill so many more innocent people to help one faction keep power and keep the country together. This country (Iraq) presently is unnatural. It has three groups of people, all with sizable population, who just want to kill each other, or so it seems. Why not give them all a separate country to ruin, I mean "run", by themselves.
Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
question is, why should it? no cause is worth that sort of murderousness. kill one person you're a murderer, kill thousands and you're just an autocratic regime conducing a successful counter-insurgency operation.
Is no cause worth it? If you can save 5 lives by killing one, is it not worth it? if you can save 50,000 by persecuting 1,000?
Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
I doubt Maddie is advocating killing thousands of people, but this sure as heck appears from his posts. Plus, I just can't fathom this bizzare desire to crush insurgencies and murder people. I guess the idea is that people are so married to the concept of one homeland that they can not bear to see it broken up. Even if it means they kill half the people. It just sounds incredibly misjudged.
Anyway, Iraq is in a state of transition. No one can deny it. If as part of this process, its boundaries must be re-defined (like they were done in early 20th century, when the last time it was in a big state of transition), so be it. Iraq's neighbors and its citizens will just have to deal with the change.
You make it sound like splitting the country will be bloodless and simple. Have the lessons of 1947 been forgotten so fast?
People will be killed to keep the country together, people will be killed if it splits apart.
Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
there is the question of responsibility. killing innocents, no matter what your motives are, is evil. This utilitarian view of killing is ultimately completely soulless and immoral.
if your world is not muddied up with governments that kill for political expedience, then those doing the killing of civilians are the criminals and you are there to provide order and curb them. ofcourse you cant engineer the world of your liking this way but you give up some things for others.
there almost always are political solutions that can be reached that dont involve that kind of bloodshed.
Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
You make it sound like splitting the country will be bloodless and simple. Have the lessons of 1947 been forgotten so fast?
People will be killed to keep the country together, people will be killed if it splits apart.
I am questioning the wisdom of killing half the population to make sure the population does not form a separate homeland. I am questioning this strategy in the 21st century of mercilessly murdering, gassing and ruining lives to preserve artificial boundaries encompassing disparate groups of people, who have pretty much nothing in common. The word "insurgent" is randomly thrown around like a scarlet letter. Who are these insurgents, and what do they want. Are they trying to occupy another country, are they doing something illegal, or are they just defending their own home turf against invaders and foreigners?
There is no carte blanche here. Everything should be looked at on its merit. I am not convinced that the present boundaries of Iraq suggest a long term peaceful coexistance. I do not believe US should be adding to the problem by keeping its military there. Whether now or 10 years from now, Iraqis have to figure out a solution themselves. If the solution involves breaking up into three parts, so be it. US can not apply a military band-aid to limbs that are already broken.
Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
I am questioning the wisdom of killing half the population to make sure the population does not form a separate homeland.
In which case you are asking the wrong question. The issue at hand is killing or persecuting a small fraction of the population because the proven alternative is even more massive bloodshed and chaos. No one ever mentioned killing half.
Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
In which case you are asking the wrong question. The issue at hand is killing or persecuting a small fraction of the population because the proven alternative is even more massive bloodshed and chaos. No one ever mentioned killing half.
You mentioned 50% of all children were killed, in your earlier example about UK's massacre of Dutch settlers in Boer-war.
Anyway, I don't think there is any "proven alternative" of "more massive bloodshed". This is just a BS argument to support killing more and more people indiscriminately. When can we, as a species, grow up and mature to accept, that people should have a right of self-determination. Killing/silencing big groups of people who want a separate homeland, to keep artificial geographic boundaries is not the right answer.
This is a moral question, we are discussing. Is mankind maturing or not? Do we still believe the bloodshed of middle ages, and as late as 20th century continues to be our ONLY answer, when we disagree? Kill more people? Brutal dictatorship?
Re: McCain on Iraq - Withdrawl will lead to civil war
You can justify anything with the kill a thousand to 'save' three thousand. Yes hitler killed ten million civilians but he was just saving a hundred million europeans and got interrupted. Group morality is as simple as personal morality. I would not kill one innocent person to save three. I might save one person and be witness to the killing of three by another