Read other letters about this article

• Thursday, January 8, 2009 02:24 PM

  RMP, if you're still here

  Maybe I was rash, but think about it. A significant portion of Iraqis wanted us to invade and throw out Saddam. Our aerial attacks were far less careless in “collateral damage.” We didn’t have a confined, starving population where we used woman and children and the Red Cross for shooting practice. True the end result was far more devasting in Iraq and the Middle East. For true senseless savagery, the Israelis top the Busheviks. Maybe I hate them equally and my congress for supporting them.

  I see your point, and I agree wholeheartedly with your last sentence. The difference to me may be in the long-term review of both countries. For me, what Bush and tribe have done in Iraq is an anathema to what the United States stands for and what, for the most part, our history shows. The war on Iraq (yes, on) was based on a ruse so complex and convincing that those of us who saw through it were silenced by the deafening support that ruse received. And the espoused reasons for attacking Iraq had nothing whatsoever to do with Iraq presenting a threat to us.

  Israel's latest invasion of Gaza is predictable. That kind of revenge defense policy is what Israel has always done. It's not based on a lie to Israeli citizens, and it really doesn't seem any more inhumane than we've come to expect from the IDF. While it is reprehensible and indefensible, it's not anathema to Israel or Israeli foreign policy. I suppose that is why I find the current invasion of Gaza not on par with our invasion of Iraq.

  And now, I must but on my kevlar vest and seek shelter.

  —ethics_professor Read ethics_professor's other letters
  Permalink
  Flag
  Click "Submit Flag" if you feel this post is inappropriate. Explain why below if you wish.

  Cancel