|
« The Current Plan on Iran | Main | » November 22, 2005
New Game
Posted by Bill It's called "Andrew Sullivan or Kos:" Quote 1: Marty Lederman has some important background on what Geneva's Article 3 means, how, before Cheney-Rumsfeld, the United States had adhered to it strictly for fifty years, and how the 9/11 Commission specifically recommended that adherence be restored. Money quote:At page 380 of its Report, the Commission recommended that the United States "engage its friends to develop a common coalition approach toward the detention and humane treatment of captured terrorists," and expressly urged the U.S. to "draw upon Article 3 of the Geneva Conventions on the law of armed conflict," which was "specifically designed for those cases in which the usual laws of war did not apply." Common Article 3's minimum standards, reasoned the 9/11 Commission, "are generally accepted throughout the world as customary international law." Quote 2: Saddam tortured, we torture. Saddam used WP chemical weapons against insurgents and civilians, we use WP chemical weapons against insurgents and civilians. Getting tougher and tougher to tell them apart, isn't it? Related: Jeff Goldstein takes apart Kos's repellant moral equivalence: In Kos’s world, there is no difference between US military and the regime of Saddam Hussein—between humiliation and rape rooms ; between the sanctioned use of WP against entrenched terrorists and the use of nerve agents and WP on Kurdish civilians; between fighting to free a people and fighting to keep them subjugated. As does Dave Price: The kind of equivalence argument Kos is making should truly disturb people, because it not only trivializes real torture and real war crimes, but more insidiously also degrades and despoils the very process of debate that is the lifeblood of free democracy by blurring the definitions of the concepts the debate is built on. What is torture? What are chemical weapons? Why, they’re whatever we say they are, and we’ll say whatever benefits us politically. In some sense, this is what Orwell was trying to warn us against: the death of objective truth, and the terrible consequences that follow. Posted by Bill at November 22, 2005 10:18 AM | TrackBack (6) Trackback PingsTrackBack URL for this entry: CommentsAre you trying to say that Sully isn't a Bush-hater? Last I read him he claimed to be a conservative (or hawk or the like) but I never got that impression. I don't get it. Posted by: Tom_with_a_Dream at November 22, 2005 10:34 AM I'm not sure that I get your comment. Posted by: Bill from INDC at November 22, 2005 10:39 AM I was saying that, like Kos, Sullivan would be happy to see the Bush Administration go away (the last time I stopped in anyway, some time ago). To see that he is critical of the Administration, like Kos, is not a big surprise to me. Although, I'll admit that Sullivan's comments seem somewhat convoluted to me, going round and round. At least Kos' are to the point (of hating Bush et al). Posted by: Tom_with_a_Dream at November 22, 2005 10:49 AM Well sure. But what's remarkable to me is how hyperbolic Sullivan's comments have become, not just the fact that he's criticizing Bush. The shrill tone of his debate is remarkable. Posted by: Bill from INDC at November 22, 2005 10:51 AM Sully married yet? Just, y'know, askin'. Posted by: Farmer Joe at November 22, 2005 10:59 AM Sully said just yesterday he still doesn't *hate* Bush. That's some comfort I guess. But all other bets are off. Posted by: cassandra at November 22, 2005 11:14 AM Bill, is it time to start up the Sully Bush-Hate Watch yet? Posted by: Larry at November 22, 2005 11:34 AM Even though he believes Bush has turned America into a "....rogue state that refuse to abide by even minimal standards of decent treatment..." he still doesn't hate him? Posted by: B Moe at November 22, 2005 12:23 PM Except for rogue states that refuse to abide by even minimal standards of decent treatment. I.e. Bush's America Does this mean we're now part of the Axis of Evil? Posted by: beautifulatrocities at November 22, 2005 12:31 PM We'll always be able to identify Sully by his gob-smackingly obvious verbal tics. Posted by: Attila Girl at November 22, 2005 10:26 PM Bill, I don't really agree, unless your only point is the shrillness. Sullivan is extremely exercised over the torture issue and yes, I do agree that he has gotten a bit too shrill at times. His last line in that quote you cited is an unnecessary bit of hyperbole that will turn a lot of people off. But he really has made an effort to be fair on a number of his criticisms, and I think he's intellectually honest. He's always willing to field an argument against his views. It does him a tremendous disservice to compare him to Kos. Look at the quotes. It's obvious that Kos has done the bottom one. The conflating of "WP" and "chemical weapons" into "WP chemical weapons" as if they are the same thing. The simplification of the issue so that he can play the moral equivalence card. He isn't even slightly honest about the underlying arguments. He wants to create confusion just so he can score points. This sort of behavior is far beneath Sullivan. Posted by: Dave W at November 23, 2005 04:14 AM I don't really agree, unless your only point is the shrillness. Yes, the shrillness is the main thing. Also, I'd say that Sullivan IS honest, though often not intellectually - emotionally. Posted by: Bill from INDC at November 23, 2005 07:45 AM
And all this time, I was told you're either honest or you're not. Posted by: rabit at November 23, 2005 11:32 AM Well rabit, apparently you're immune to nuance. First of all, I didn't call Sullivan a "traitor." Second, emotional honesty would involve honestly feeling/believing your argument in the heat of the moment. Intellectual honesty would involve that argument also fulfilling a pattern of logical and intellectual consistency within the context of your previous arguments. People can be one and not the other (emotionally but not intellectually), and are all the time, in fact. For example: I'm fairly certain that you wholeheartedly believe in that critique you just wrote about my comment - however, I'm also relatively certain that you have no idea how shallow it was, being as it was designed to attack my comment from an ideological perspective, rather than fully understand and effectively rebut it with substance. Posted by: Bill from INDC at November 23, 2005 11:57 AM I didn't say you specifically. Sorry if it sounded that way, my fault. Second, emotional honesty would involve honestly feeling/believing your argument in the heat of the moment. No, I prefer to look at purely what someone says. By your definition, a serial-murderer could be "emotionally honest" when he states the voices in his head told him to do it. I don't buy that. For example: I'm fairly certain that you wholeheartedly believe in that critique you just wrote about my comment... No, you're perfectly correct that Andrew Sullivan sounds a lot like KOS these days. But, among the small handful of conservative blogs that I read regularly, his is not among them. How can I write a substantive rebut to a non-substantive argument in the first place? You say nothing of the (pun-unintended) meat of Andrew Sullivan's argument, only that it sounds like KOS. Therefore, by implication, Sullivan is wrong? Or perhaps both are right? I bet he secretly works for the Democratic Underground, too. :) Posted by: rabit at November 23, 2005 01:11 PM Nope, rabit, he openly works for Time. Posted by: Matt Moore at November 23, 2005 08:06 PM By your definition, a serial-murderer could be "emotionally honest" when he states the voices in his head told him to do it. I don't buy that. But that could be exactly correct - a schizophrenic serial murderer that hears voices in his head IS emotionally honest. The phenomenon of schizophrenia creating incessant auditory hallucinations that sound literally as if someone is whispering in your ear exists. Posted by: Bill from INDC at November 23, 2005 08:39 PM I guess if someone is hearing voices, then it's no more 'emotional' than 'intellectual' honesty. They simply are hearing voices. I would not call a sociopathic liar 'emotionally honest' by any stretch, even if they 'honestly' believe their own lies. I always thought the word 'honesty' meant being objectively truthful, regardless of one's emotional/intellectual state. Maybe that's just oversimplification. :) That's really all I was curious about. Posted by: rabit at November 24, 2005 12:04 AM Are you trying to say that Sully isn't a Bush-hater? Last I read him he claimed to be a conservative (or hawk or the like) but I never got that impression. Posted by: warsaw apartments at October 10, 2006 06:55 AM ionolsen26 Hello Jane, great site! www_4_2 Posted by: karel at October 22, 2006 09:26 PM viagra . Posted by: viagra viagra at November 14, 2006 10:48 AM b9fe38db58a3 Hi short url short url Posted by: short url at December 20, 2006 06:31 AM opexvfszm qfjmcib qhribzavw vdtzly ufrx soldkzub hemdytpl Posted by: tlsq sgzb at March 9, 2007 09:00 AM Nice resource, very interesting reading. http://s1u.net/inob Posted by: Cellphone at April 12, 2007 06:36 AM Classical singer Russell Watson postpones his forthcoming UK tour after undergoing brain surgery... Posted by: Alexander Haggerty at April 16, 2007 07:39 AM Classical singer Russell Watson postpones his forthcoming UK tour after undergoing brain surgery... Posted by: Alexander Haggerty at April 16, 2007 07:41 AM The first stage of a £150m investment in regional museums is praised for boosting visitor numbers... Posted by: Giovanny Valle at April 17, 2007 03:14 AM |
Feed Me, Seymour
bill *at* indcjournal *dot* com
Support Our Advertisers
Search
Archives
June 2008May 2008 April 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004
Extras
PDARSD Atom RSS 2.0 RSS 1.0
Credits
Our Blogroll
|