What kind of philosophy...
...allows people to believe:
It's okay to falsely accuse an entire country, try it and convict it.
But causes the same people to get up in arms when three college boys are (possibly) falsely accused of sexual assault?
Is it really just garden-variety racism?
It's okay to falsely accuse an entire country, try it and convict it.
But causes the same people to get up in arms when three college boys are (possibly) falsely accused of sexual assault?
Is it really just garden-variety racism?
posted by alphie at 1:48 PM
5 Comments:
Nobody believes that it is OK to falsely accuse an entire country. You may believe that the country has been falsely accused, but war supporters (I'm assuming you're talking about Iraq and/or iran) don't view our actions in that frame.
I was indeed talking about Iraq (and Iran).
The upcoming trial of Scooter Libby will shed some more light on this topic.
It will be interesting to see what VP Cheney says during his testimony. I can't help but think this trial will be used as a platform to defend the administration's case for going to war.
"Nobody believes that it is OK to falsely accuse an entire country."
Nor has anyone falsely (or otherwise) accused an entire country of anything. You would prefer that Hussein were still murdering and torturing (that's the real thing, not putting panties on anybody's heads) his citizenry, no doubt. And all for "peace."
The charge of racism would imply that the only reason we had for invading Iraq and for threatening Iran is the color of their skin, and that three men who didn't commit a crime ought not have their lives destroyed solely because the false accuser is black.
It is far more racist, I would think, to assume that three white men ought to be convicted of a crime that never occurred out of some sense of "delayed racial justice" than to take down a nation-state (or two) that have been furthering a proxy war against us for thirty-odd years.
rightwingpof,
I haven't followed the Duke case too closely, but I get the impression that a lot of people feel that even if the students didn't actually rape the girl, they should still be tried because they're generally of low moral character (underage drinking, hiring strippers, etc.).
I see no difference between that faulty line of reasoning and, well Saddam may not have had any nukes or ties to al Qeada, but he was generally a bad guy, so our invasion was still justified.
Post a Comment
<< Home