This diary is directed at those who do oppose the war. If you support it, I’m sorry but I’m writing for someone else.
Assuming that you are opposed to the War in Iraq, what’s your reason?
I can think of several categories of reasons:
- Violates international law; respect for the law
- Was based on lies; respect for truth
- Kill innocents; respect for the life of innocents
- Makes America less safe; value domestic safety
- Kills American soldiers needlessly; respect for American soldiers & for essentiality of war
- Is too expensive; value other priorities for national resources
- Was poorly planned; value for effective warmaking
- We will most likely not “win”; value for meeting stated objectives of the war
This list is by no means complete, but I think it does illustrate that there are many reasons for opposing the war. I am curious as the reasons that others oppose the war, especially in term of the relative imporatance placed on each of the reasons.
Very simple reason: there’s no justification for it.
Asking “on what basis do you oppose the war?” is the wrong question. it assumes that the default is “to war”, and that we have to have a reason not to go to war. This is completely backwards. It’s up to the war’s proponents to justify their support for it, not for us to justify our opposition.
I was more curious about what it is that bothers people about the war, just to understand better what are the core values being violated by the war for those who oppose it.
I changed the title a bit, but I suspect it is still a bit backwards.
What “bothers” me about war is that it is horribly inefficient, harmful in the short (and possibly long) term to people, and causes incredible amounts of misery and suffering for little to no pay-off. It is sometimes necessary, but it always must be justified.
This war wasn’t.
I believe that this war is morally wrong.
But I do not oppose George Bush’s right to wage war if he feels that this war is moral.
That I assert that something is morally wrong does not mean that I am judging those who hold different views. I will remain fully aware that our morals differ. And that is how come I am not overcome with concern when I interact with people who do things that I find immoral. So long as they are acting according to their own moral code I can relate to them. I may oppose their political or cultural agenda, but I can relate and respect that they act according to their own morals.
But I don’t think that George Bush has right to wage war. To me, a war of aggression is cut and dry. It involves killing hundreds of thousands of people. It is essentially legalized mass murder. Moreover, the people who carry out the murder use lies and people’s fears and love of country to carry out the mass murder for them.
I believe that we all, all Americans that is, are morally responsible for our failure to prevent this war. It is tragic on many levels. Not only have men, women, children died from carpet bombing, fire bombing, chemical warfare and other acts of mass murder, but so have many good American soldiers been bought into a war built up on lies for partisan and ideological gain.
I can think of few other worse things to be even remotely a part. The pain and suffering of the war is so great that I not only don’t think that anyone has a right to wage wars of aggression, but I also think that such acts should be criminalized.
You are applying moral values to the issue of war.
Because I think that wars of aggression are immoral, I should do what I can do stop them from happening.
Secular values often trump moral values in a liberal democracy. This applies in this instance.
Each person holds themself to account for their own moral choices in relation to their own moral values.
And that is how come I am not overcome with concern when I interact with people who do things that I find immoral. So long as they [are] acting according to their own moral code I can relate to them. I may oppose their political or cultural agenda, but I can relate and respect that they act according to their own morals.
the moral values in war?
The rule of law? Poltical processes for resolving conflicts? Majority rule while protecting the rights of the minority? State soverienty?
There are some secular values that may justify war, such as providing for the common defense, or maintaing state monopoly on violence. But thes do not apply to the War with Iraq.
Under the Constitution, Congress reserves the right to declare war.
I believe that in secular democracy some issues are resolved through legal principle and not moral principle. Equality before the law trumps moral concerns.
Likewise, the fact that there is not consensus on the moral issues around war leads me to support the war. This contradicts my view that it is morally wrong – but I [can] live with that contradiction because I understand why war is called for – on secular and Constitutional grounds that trump my moral position in this instance.
duty to declare (and not) war. And the President has become an imperial president.
Additionally, the law has been violated by Bush – supporting my position on the war. Bush is not only going against my moral values, but also my civic and secular values for the rule of law.
Wars of aggression are cut and dry for me (unlike, for example, the issue of abortion which for me presents a more naunced moral question) and as such I believe that those in power who are engaged in wars of aggression should be treated as criminals. But since there are no secular values that trump my moral values with Bush’s war, I – once again – must disagree with your stance.
I am a secularist, and I think that there are civic values that trump almost all moral values. One is equality of the law.
Another is respect for the majority and respect for differences in moral outlook. That is one reason why I support the war, regardless of what I or others think about the war on moral terms. Equality before the law trumps moral concerns.
As for from where do morals come from with a sacred text or other religious form? We invent them. Human societies develop their own moral codes based on what works and what is valued by the members of that society. There are principles that are very widely accepted (murder is wrong) and ones that are not settled (killing in a war of aggression – moral or immoral).
I can’t determine the morality of anything. I have no absolute power to assert absolute morality. I am a secularist and think that any move from secularism is dangerous.
“I believe that we all, all Americans that is, are morally responsible for our failure to prevent this war.” So how do you hold yourself responsible for not stopping this war. What do you think you as one American Citizen could have done to stop it/
I personally do not take any responsibility for this war. I voted to get Bush out. I was lied to by the administration and for that I am to be held responsible for not stopping the war. I so totaly disagree on your point.
I think that I, we all, are to blame for this. And I don’t know what can be done at this point, but it sure seems like we are called to do something to get our republic back in order.
I know you think we are all to blame for this but why?
I probably won’t reply anymore Tom as I am going to Crawford tomorrow to join Cindy and the rest of the people that ARE trying to do something about George’s criminal and immoral actions. Good night.
on anti-poverty work, so I am glad that we can all work together and keep all of the bases covered
Chief Seattle “. . .I will fight no more again forever.”