The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
In message <002901c2d609$4ca16310$cf18bd50@Laptop>, Glenn Bassett <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes >I know everyone's knackered but... > >I've spoken to a couple of non-activist people who were quite impressed with >Blair's rhetoric on Saturday (getting rid of Saddam would be a humanitarian >act etc). This is the argument he has resorted to and the one that it seems >convinces most people: he's nasty, therefore get rid of him; simple. > >That's the line I think we, as activists, need to be addressing most >urgently. > >Blair seems to be trying to ignore the many complicated consequences of war >(I think he knows he's lost those arguments now) and to reduce the issue in >people's minds to a simple black and white choice: get rid of Saddam or >leave him. In my view we should be responding quickly and in numbers to this >argument by pointing out the assumptions in this line, and all the points it >leaves unanswered. > Tony Blair and the British government are playing the moral, either/or card, ie: 'if we don't topple Saddam, we have failed his people.' BUT - is it moral to intervene only in oppressed countries which are strategically important to Britain/the West? what about all the other dictators around the world? - why now? was it moral to turn a blind eye to earlier atrocities such as Halabja when Saddam was a friend of the West? Blair and co are also playing the 'threat to ourselves' card, ie: 'if we don't disarm Saddam, we leave ourselves under threat from his weapons of mass destruction.' BUT - who is really under threat? - if it's a country in the region, eg. Israel, be honest and just say so. Others are playing the numbers game, ie: 'yes, some will die during a war, but Saddam is already/has already been killing equal numbers of people in Iraq and neighbouring countries such as Iran and Kuwait.' BUT - does war with one country in order to liberate its people justify the destabilisation of a whole region, maybe even of the whole world? Cathy -- Cathy Aitchison _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email email@example.com All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk