Help me figure this out. In this post I observed (among other things) that some people who take offence at the suggestion that "America had it coming" when it came to the 9-11 attacks, don't have any problem whatsoever with the idea that "Afghanistan had it coming" when it comes to explaining the US invasion following 9-11.
For some reason or other, commenter "fergusrush" (who I don't have a lot of respect for) says that it appears that I have a double standard when it comes to the USA's actions in the world and those of other actors in the world.
I don't see it. I don't see where he got that at all. Now either I'm missing something, or "fergusrush" is as crazy as I've accused him of being. If any of my readers (I honestly estimate I have around FIVE a day) could please check out that post and help me figure out if I've genuinely missed something, I'd appreciate it.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
fergusrush reads to me like a bit of a condescending twit -- he thinks he's clever to be playing the Socratic schoolmaster with you, which takes a lot of presumption in the first place.
He might have been waiting for you to pin down a specific driver or two of U.S. foreign policy -- all your oil are belong to us, eg. And he might have been ready to argue against you had you done that. If you'd said (as I would) that there was reason to believe that the Taliban were prepared to negotiate over bin Laden but BushCo blew them off, he probably would have gone rhetorical/ideological, but we can't tell.
He is trolling you.
Thanks skdadl. I was trying to keep my description neutral to illustrate a point. I didn't think anything had intruded.
As I was engaged in that discussion though, the enormity of the disconnect became even greater to me. Not only do people who object o any sort of discussion about how the USA "had it coming" while having no problem with blaming Afghanistan for its own problems, they actively support the assault on Afghanistan. But, if they say it's "immoral" to blame the USA for its problems, they think it's positively EVIL to have supported the 9-11 assault.
I used to argue this - that if it is ok to bomb the shit out of Afghanistan for once having harboured criminals who we believe harmed 'us', then it was ok for the Saudis to bomb the WTO for harbouring criminals who they believed harmed them. It's apparently a toxic argument. A Green Party candidate in Vancouver lost his nomination when it was discovered he had once used it.
Rock, scissors, loyalty to your tribe.
Yep. Tribalism. A justification for hypocrisy.
Re-reading "fergusrush's" posts, I'm almost interested in asking him what his larger point was supposed to be.
If every action has a cause, including US actions, on backward to infinity, ... SO WHAT?
As i said, I'm almost interested, but it's like pulling teeth to find out what his smallest points are, so fuggit.
Post a Comment