Letters to the Editor
macgupta
Published Letters: 386
-
@shooter242
[Read the article: War advocates like Anne-Marie Slaughter demand that you forget the past]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Better yet how about someone providing a comprehensive list of all the people who were wrong about the war so we can persecute, possibly prosecute, and generally denigrate them until the end of time.
No, all it means is that all those who were wrong about the war ought to have to make a really strong case about why their input should be taken on what to do next with respect to the war; they have to clearly state their premises on which they base their reasoning and to validate those premises.
-
Truth and Reconciliation Commission
[Read the article: One of Instapundit's favorite blogs speaks on race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]We perhaps need one of those Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, probably modelled after the one in South Africa, where people like Instapunk can speak and then we all examine the consequences of those errors, and then perhaps people leave feeling less fearful and less racist.
This, however, requires the faith that people can stare down their own prejudices and bigotry and change.
-
@ondelette
[Read the article: One of Instapundit's favorite blogs speaks on race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]It is not as though what has happened in Pakistan hasn't happened previously; anyone aware of history should be a little jaded by now. For those that aren't, browsing through some of the books on line here - (this links to a specific chapter in a book http://ghazali.net/book3/ch3/ch3.html ) - may be useful.
Allah, Army and America have been the arbiters of Pakistani destiny for the past sixty years; how does an election, that does not challenge the fundamental premises on which the Pakistani state is based, change that?
However, in Tibet, we have the first significant stirrings in the last fifty years, and so it is significant.
-
@ondelette
[Read the article: One of Instapundit's favorite blogs speaks on race]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]There is no special significance to the recently concluded Pakistani elections - it has not shifted the ideological basis of the Pakistani state, and it is therefore going to continue going around in the circles of elections that seem to restore democracy, but it is only a temporary retreat into the barracks for the army. This is not one of those pastel revolutions that some countries in East Europe have had that changed the structure of governance in a significant way.
I say this with the authority of a inveterate Pakistan watcher, and the backing of an indefinite number of others like me, who have a special interest in Pakistan because we are of Indian origin or are Indians; and where at any time some one we know may be called upon to combat the Jihad that emanates from Pakistan.
As to Tibet, if I missed something, do tell me what it is.
-
@Update II - we protest in vain?
[Read the article: The ongoing exclusion of war opponents from the Iraq debate]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]But how can someone who is never invited to and never pushes him/herself to be featured in the Main Stream Media be considered serious, no matter what credentials he has, no matter where he works, and no matter how expert he actually is? Don't you see, one is not serious unless one is featured in the press, and the press does a great job of not featuring anyone who is not serious.
:)
-
Update II - another take on "serious"
[Read the article: The ongoing exclusion of war opponents from the Iraq debate]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Some pair of professors found out a while ago that the number of Olympic medals won by a country is very strong predicted by two things -
1. How many medals the country won in previous olympics
2. the per capita income of the country.
I think something like 95% of the variance is accounted for by these two factors alone, if I remember correctly.
Similarly, there is are two criteria that predict if a commentator is "serious".
1. Have they featured in the press before as a a serious commentator?
2. At some point in time were they a strong supporter of some establishment point of view? (doesn't matter if they later turn into critics, as long as the criticism doesn't get too pointed).
-
@Obi Wan Liberali
[Read the article: The ongoing exclusion of war opponents from the Iraq debate]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]If someone correctly predicted pre-invasion, what would happen post-invasion, then at least one should ask them, - what do you think will happen if the US withdraws? What do you think is a viable way forward? What do you think is the least damaging way forward?
I don't think GG is asking that someone who only opposes the war on general grounds but has no expertise should be at the table. I think GG is saying that people who have been able to predict the course of events should be at the table; from the track record, they have the best chance of being right on what we should do next, and what the consequences of what we do will be.
-
"you can't tell me our intentions aren't honorable"
[Read the article: What can and cannot be spoken on television]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
-
We must be better than Saddam!
[Read the article: What can and cannot be spoken on television]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Who knew there were so many avid supporters of tyranny and totalitarianism?
How hard is it to comprehend that what the US has brought to Iraq has left it worse off than it was under Saddam's tyranny and totalitarianism and **after** a decade of economic sanctions?
I think even that possibility is inadmissible to some people because it shakes their foundations of their world.
It is even more horrible to contemplate that this war was not forced on the US by stern necessity, it was entirely a war of choice. We chose this destiny and reelected it in 2004.
-
@Shooter242
[Read the article: What can and cannot be spoken on television]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The surgeon protested to the deceased's relatives - "you'd rather that he live with a brain tumor?!"; they were in an uproar over the patient's beheading in the operation theater.
-
@shooter242
[Read the article: What can and cannot be spoken on television]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Shooter242, I did not mention in the analogy, but it should be obvious - nobody asked the surgeon to intervene, he "volunteered".
And there is no problem with the "patient's will to survive". The various Sunni, Shia and Kurd factions in Iraq are all doing their best to survive. They're all trying very hard. The problem is not the will to survive, it is the belief that the others are a threat to survival.
And that is why in the analogy, the patient is dead.
I repeat an earlier question - why is it so hard for you even admit the possibility, let alone admit the reality, that what the US has wrought in Iraq is worse than Saddam and after a decade of sanctions?