December 2, 2015 19 Comments
So tonight Parliament will vote on joining us, the Russians, the French and some others in air attacks in Syria (they already are in Iraq). It’s a contentious issue, as you might imagine. Obama’s throwing away the belated victory that GEN Petraeus gave us left a foul taste in their mouth, as it did many of ours.
Jeremy Corbin is against it, of course. He is against it as near as I can tell because it might be good for western civilization. That said he may be right, even if for the wrong reasons. David Cameron claims to lead a Christian nation, and in fact, there are many exemplary Christians in the United Kingdom. But if he truly believes that, he should be able to justify intervention on Christian grounds. That is difficult.
When Christian nations go to war (and that is what this amounts to) they should be guided by the Just War Theory. This was mostly written by Thomas Aquinas, and later expanded by The School of Salamanca. For the most part, we all abide with the Roman Catholic Church’s Just War Doctrine which states:
- the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
- all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
- there must be serious prospects of success;
- the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated (the power of modern means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition).
And this is where the problem is. There is almost no chance of air strikes achieving peace if the they abide with proportionate force. Those are what in logic we call an “AND Statement”. They all have to be true, and that cannot happen. So Corbyn is arguably right, but because his premise is so wrong, he is essentially eliminated from the discussion.
I see the New York mob has told ISIS that they will protect New Yorkers as well. many are treating it as somewhat of a joke. That’s easy to do, but it’s not all together. If one were to look at World War Two, one would find that the mafia (under Lucky Luciano) had much to do with keeping the Port of New York working smoothly, they do have some power, and it’s not always used for evil. There’s also this, one of my nieces used to live in Brooklyn, in Gambino’s neighborhood, in fact, and during the days when New York was out of control. But not her neighborhood, she says she barely had to lock her car, security was so good, and no, it wasn’t the NYPD. Don’t look gift horses in the mouth, the Mob isn’t a bunch of do-gooders, but when our interests coincide, it’s better to have them on our side than not.
George Will writing in The Washington Post speaks of Hitler, not as a madman, but as the implementor of a coherent worldview. It is a far more scary view than as a madman, especially if we were to apply it to a nuclear Iran. Here’s a bit:
Snyder presents a Hitler more troubling than a madman, a Hitler implementing the logic of a coherent worldview. His life was a single-minded response to an idea so radical that it rejected not only the entire tradition of political philosophy but also the possibility of philosophy, which Hitler supplanted by zoology.
“In Hitler’s world,” Snyder writes, “the law of the jungle was the only law.” The immutable structure of life casts the various human races as separate species. Only races are real and they are locked in mutual and unassuageable enmity, in Hitler’s mind-set, because life is constant struggle over scarcities — of land, food and other necessities.
One group, however, poisoned the planet with another idea. To Hitler, says Snyder, “It was the Jew who told humans that they were above other animals, and had the capacity to decide their future for themselves.” To Hitler, “Ethics as such was the error; the only morality was fidelity to race.”
Hat tip and more from: Hitler’s worldview
I really meant to write today about the ridiculous crony-capitalist fraud-o-rama taking place in Paris this fortnight, but it will have to wait for another day. As long as India says go away, and China and the US are not willing to go back to the thirteenth century standard of living, it’ll be ignored, just as Kyoto was. Another good reason not to elect Hillary! though.