Monday, December 01, 2008
The Problem with Non-Generalized Principles
After 9/11, this nation strongly articulated a directive principle: When a nation suffers a terrorist attack, it may then justifiably invade the nation which harbored those terrorists. The Bush doctrine was clear and principled, and (in relation to Afghanistan) made sense to most people.
Now we most fervently are against this principle being followed. It is becoming clear that the attack on Mombai may have originated in Pakistan. We do not want a war between India and Pakistan for two principle reasons. First, both have nuclear weapons, and the war would likely be incredibly destructive. Second, even the threat of war would pull Pakistani troops from the Afghan border, where we need them to be.
This seems to be a pretty good illustration of the problems with clearly articulating for the world a principle which you do not want to have generalized.
Now we most fervently are against this principle being followed. It is becoming clear that the attack on Mombai may have originated in Pakistan. We do not want a war between India and Pakistan for two principle reasons. First, both have nuclear weapons, and the war would likely be incredibly destructive. Second, even the threat of war would pull Pakistani troops from the Afghan border, where we need them to be.
This seems to be a pretty good illustration of the problems with clearly articulating for the world a principle which you do not want to have generalized.
Comments:
<< Home
I think they need to know more about who really launched the attack in Mumbai before anyone acts. India, NATO, the UN. It just goes to show that one principle does can not be applied to every situation.
Although the US news media made it sound like Americans were the target, it is apparent we were not since only 6 US citizens lost their lives. The Indian people are mad and there will be governmental shifts to watch for in the aftermath.
Who did it????
Was it Bin Laden and his crew?
The people who dispute the Kashmir region?
A bunch of Pakistani tech guys who are upset that India is getting all of the outsourced US jobs?
Although the US news media made it sound like Americans were the target, it is apparent we were not since only 6 US citizens lost their lives. The Indian people are mad and there will be governmental shifts to watch for in the aftermath.
Who did it????
Was it Bin Laden and his crew?
The people who dispute the Kashmir region?
A bunch of Pakistani tech guys who are upset that India is getting all of the outsourced US jobs?
It is all so stupid and horrible. What I was most thanksful for on Thanksgiving is that I do not have to live in one of these countries that are so violent and such a mess like The Congo or Darfur, or Mumbai or Pakistan. I can express my opinion without fear of death.
Scary
Scary
Well, it just means that the justifications for war are always murky and often suspect . . . and also that terrorism is kind of hard to counter with war.
# posted by 
: 10:07 PM
: 10:07 PM
It certainly undermines the concept of the nation-state generally, and especially in the postcolonial world. That silly idea never should have been imposed onto the colonies in the first place! It wasn't working in Europe (see Minority Treaties post WWI) in the first place, and then someone took a wholly European idea and slammed it into wholly different contexts. (To articulate another generalized point, that is...)
Post a Comment
# posted by : 8:29 AM
: 8:29 AM << Home
