Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollections

Genocide in Iraq

July 29, 2007

Re "Green light to genocide," Opinion, July 24

I agree in part with Jonah Goldberg's assessment that the Democrats appear inconsistent in their position regarding America's responsibilities to prevent genocide abroad.

However, it can also be argued that, unlike Darfur, genocide in Iraq is a prediction, not a reality. This prediction is based on the current unilateral military and diplomatic strategies.

When the Democrats pull our troops out of Iraq, they will succeed in preventing genocide largely through multilateral diplomatic strategies that promote peace.

If the Republicans succeed, they will spend billions of taxpayer dollars and sacrifice countless American lives. This will serve only to prevent them from having to admit that they failed and to reduce their dissonance over getting us into this mess in the first place.

Michael P. Marshal

Pittsburgh

--

Of all the justifications for our continued presence in Iraq, Goldberg deploys one of the most artful. If our presence there is now a relief mission designed to prevent a genocide, this is the most expensive and least successful relief mission in history, with thousands of our soldiers dead and so many more of the "relieved" dead. After billions have been spent with no particular definition of victory or the discipline of self-limitation, our president won't walk away from the blackjack table until he gets his "political capital" back. This is a moral failure of liberals?

This is an amazing time in the history of logic.

Walid Persen

Dunedin, Fla.

--

Goldberg commits a classic "straw man" fallacy by taking a wide range of positions and labeling them as "liberal." His points concerning President Clinton's lack of response to the Rwanda genocide are telling, and I applaud him for taking Clinton to task for his lack of honesty. However, Clinton is a conservative Democrat who took strong positions on issues such as the death penalty that were anathema to most liberals.

Goldberg should have remained focused on Sen. Barack Obama, who clearly views himself in the tradition of liberalism. However, Obama's position on withdrawing troops is not shared by many other liberals, most of whom, I believe, support a reduced but sustained troop presence. Thus, the core of Goldberg's complaint is the position of Obama, not that of liberals.

Franklin Cox

Baltimore

--

What tortured reasoning Goldberg enlists as a reason to stay in Iraq. Genocide? And what exactly does he think is happening now? Genocide, only our troops are involved and paying the price.

Get our troops out of there and the prime motive for violence will be removed. The Iraqis will figure things out for themselves much faster than if we stay, because as long as we stay, they'll be trying to kill us. Hard to blame them, really, when President Bush invaded their country to steal their oil.

Only Republican apologists like Goldberg still maintain we are there to bring democracy. But hey, let's blame the liberals; it's worked up until now.

Susan McCabe

Valley Village

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|