The Restorationists series by Carolyn Leiloglou
-
I read Beneath the Swirling Sky last year when it came out—and failed to
write a review. Now, I just finished the second book in what is slated to
be a tri...
20 hours ago
4 comments:
Funny how "American Future" claims to be anti-war for only supporting American wars.
Well, some people have to make themselves feel better.
Mark, I don't think that's the case at all. I think it's more a case of trying to separate just wars from unjust ones, and noting that we didn't start this awful mess and aren't the only ones at war.
Besides, Marc Schulman, who writes American Future, has featured guest opinions from people who disagree with him. This is not a guy, as far as I can tell, who stays inside a comfort zone or uses his blog to make himself feel better. You're underestimating the man, at a guess, if not actually wronging him.
And shall I ask the several dozen coutries also under attack by Islamic convert-or-die factions what they think of you categorizing the present struggles as "American" wars? Were the London bombings aimed at us? Bali is American? Australia is a puppet of some sort? We're the only country on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq? Even France is cooperating, in its own ways, despite all its anti-American sputtering.
I have mixed feelings about the present situation and our responses to it, but I think it's fair to point out that opposing your country's war efforts while blithely excusing the folks who slaughtered their neighbors before turning their suicide squads on us isn't quite, uhm, entirely intellectually honest, shall we say?
Oh, I'm not excusing anybody. You can count on the fact that I am across the board against unjust wars and violence! But I must say I do find it particularly troublesome when it's my own country engaging in them.
Also, the post you linked to didn't give me much to go on. I couldn't even be sure if by doing so you were making a statement for or against it. So, thanks for the clarification.
Peace,
Mark
Mark,
Oops. My face is red. I didn't mean to imply that I thought you, personally, were blithely excusing any guilty parties. I apologize if it came off that way.
But I do see a lot of that in the so-called anti-war crowd, many of whom seem to be on an anti-USA jag, no matter the circumstances. I think the linked post calls their bluff, which I think is good. And I thought it made it clear that the distinction being made is betweeen wars waged by tyrants against civilians, and wars waged against tyrants with the goal of rescuing civilians crushed by oppression, regardless of who the combatants are.
I'm proud of the fact that my country is willing to help total strangers even at great cost to ourselves. I'm just as proud of the goal of stepping back out of the picture as soon as they're back on their feet. I think both facts show a commitment to higher duties that the typical atheist couldn't understand (this from a person raised by a rabid atheist, by the way.)
Obviously you have a different view of the wars and what they mean and what the goals are. I assure you that I worry that we'll fall off the path, or overshoot our intentions, and wind up where we shouldn't be. At a guess, from what you've written, you think we're already mucking around in the wilderness of immorality and unjustness - while I think we're occasionally straying perilously close to the border, but still have our bearings for the most part.
Admittedly, much of my stance is built on a foundation of faith in the people conducting the war. I suspect we don't share that particular faith, which I guess would make all the difference in the world.
With respect,
Kathryn
Post a Comment