humanities.philosophy.objectivism

On Mar 15, 1:42 pm, Mark Sieving wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 09:45:31 -0700, Potroast
> wrote:
>
> > You also skirted around my other point about Bush. Mark himself said
> >Bush didn't make this distinction. Why didn't he then? Surely it would
> >have been to his advantage to not associate himself with
> >"preventative" wars right?
>
> I think you misunderstood. Bush failed to make the distinction in the
> sense that he wanted to *engage* in preventive war but he wanted to
> *call it* preemptive war. He did not make the distinction between
> preventive war and preemptive war, because by calling his action
> preemptive, he gained the moral legitimacy that preemption carries.
>
> You, on the other hand, don't want to make the distinction because you
> want to tag preemption with the moral prohibition associated with
> preventive war.

On Mar 15, 1:42 pm, Mark Sieving wrote:
> On Sat, 15 Mar 2008 09:45:31 -0700, Potroast
> wrote:
>
> > You also skirted around my other point about Bush. Mark himself said
> >Bush didn't make this distinction. Why didn't he then? Surely it would
> >have been to his advantage to not associate himself with
> >"preventative" wars right?
>
> I think you misunderstood. Bush failed to make the distinction in the
> sense that he wanted to *engage* in preventive war but he wanted to
> *call it* preemptive war. He did not make the distinction between
> preventive war and preemptive war, because by calling his action
> preemptive, he gained the moral legitimacy that preemption carries.

We seems to have gone full circle to where I originally suggested
Bush made the distinction with his repeated use of "preemption". To
rephrase again (to hopefully get get us into sync this time :) what
you seem to be saying is while Bush did make that distinction.... he
got it wrong (either intentionally or accidentally). Great.... we are
in agreement.

What I'm saying different than you though is that on a practical
level it really didn't make any sort of difference making that
distinction, (and why I really don't really care if Bush did or didn't
make it)

Bush was voted in by the American public wasn't he? (twice). He
also initially enjoyed 70% support for the Iraq war and the support of
nearly every lawmaker in Washington. Was Saddam anywhere close to
having WMDs? Did he have dealings with Al Qaeda? Was he involved with
9/11? Was he planning an attack US soil? (and to make matters worse
there is all sorts of peripheral evidence to support the case Bush
cooked the books intentionally as part of a larger plan to attack
other parts of the middle east)

In retrospect the threat wasn't even close to being imminent. You
acknowledge in practice it turned out to be a "preventative"
war....which you defined as immoral (because it essentially amounts to
an attack)

Where we seem to have some friction is I am saying put aside
theory of what "ought" to have been the case and think about this from
a strictly "what is" standpoint. Forget how they described their
actions and consider how lawmakers behind the world's most powerful
military disregarded the distinction in practice. I'd say that
observation alone is strong proof the "premptive" versus
"preventative" distinction is (or has become) largely moot in
practice.

Given that recent history.... is it so absurd to suggest continuing
repeat that behavior by allowing future politicians to use "premptive"
war as justification to start a war ......is to risk getting Americans
into the business of more preventative wars. Not only is not in the
interests of the world... it's not in the interests of Americans
because eventually someone is going to have a preventative war back.

> You, on the other hand, don't want to make the distinction because you
> want to tag preemption with the moral prohibition associated with
> preventive war.

True that. I'd even go further. I want to see that all wars are
eventually made illegal. We're not there yet (and there may be a few
more wars brewing) but given nuclear realities I think it wise
humanity keep moving in that direction until we get it right.