Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
You are talking like a member of the indoctrinated right that first believed Stalin was the embodiment of Capital C Communism that had to be defeated as an all-encompassing ideology and to be justified required subservience by the masses to the works of Karl Marx but also ignores the possibility that much of the people's subservience was possibly obtained not so much by ideology as by the crushing rule of a totalitarian regime focused on preserving its existence, which may be analogous in some ways to Baathist rule, which we'll leave aside for the moment because of potentially uncomfortable parallells to finding yourself arguing that some Iraqis actually bought in to Baathist ideology, such as it was, and didn't actually starve from the thirst for freedom that they would've seized years ago but for the iron hand of the Evil Fucker Saddam.
|
I don't think that's an entirely fair characterization of Spanky's ideology. If I read him correctly, I believe he would assert that we were morally compelled to attack Iraq and occupy it against the will of the Iraqi people so that we could bring them liberty and democracy whether they wanted it or not. He also apparently believes that it's okay to kill them until they do want democracy.
I hope this helps straighten things up.
