posted
So I'm sitting here watching Alton Brown do his thing tonight, making a mouth-watering mackerel, wrapped in parchment paper, and I'm thinking how good it looks when my wife mutters, "This is making me sick."
She's not into fish.
And I realize we're both sitting there, seeing the same thing, but we're both referencing a bunch of different stuff in our brains while we're watching it, so even though we're seeing the same thing, it's like we're looking in two different directions.
And it makes me wonder, you know?
Because I realize it's the exact same way I feel with this Iraq situation, with the whole war on terror, with pretty much every single bit of politics I've ever dealt with.
It's like, there's all these people I love and care about and respect, people who I know are good, honest people who want what's best for me and you, and yet we look at the same exact thing, hear the same exact words, and it's still like we're looking in two different directions.
And part of what draws me to blogging, draws me to places like Hatrack, draws me to even want to be a writer, is the idea that I can maybe straighten out a head or two that's not on straight, maybe even get my own head on a little straighter as I talk and examine and logically discuss issues--
But then I think about that fish, and I realize that no explaining, no appeal to logic, no appeal to emotion, nothing I say is going to change the effect that fish has on my wife. She's already got the mental baggage necessary to make her reaction, just like I've got mine.
I admit I'm a one-issue voter this election. A one issue voter for the first time in my life. It's clouding everything I see all of the candidates doing, and it's affecting every judgment I make.
That issue is the war on Terror. As longtime posters may remember, my daughter was born that week. When I took pictures of the hospital to send to my wife's folks, the flags outside were flying half mast.
And as word started coming out about who had done this, and about the conditions the like-minded oppressors in Afghanistan were subjugating their people to, it was plain what had to be done.
My wife had been in the hospital for a staff infection when she went into labor--my daughter was born in the cardiac unit in a recovery room with the curtain half-open most of the time, instead of in a regular delivery room. Had we been in Afghanistan, my wife wouldn't have even been allowed in the hospital.
There were complications with the delivery, but the doctor who handled it was professional and made it look effortless. Had we been in Afghanistan, she wouldn't have been allowed to go to school.
My daughter had to spend a couple of hours in NICU. Not a big deal, here, but had we been in Afghanistan, who knows what the midwife could have done?
So we went to war there, we brought down a regime, and we freed a people.
And now I'm reading people questioning whether we did the right thing because it spread Al-Qaida out or made them harder to find or whatever, and I realize, we're looking at the same thing, but it's like we're looking in opposite directions.
So then we go to Iraq, talk of WMDs notwithstanding, with one grand and glorious vision in mind--the establishment of a bastion of democracy in the midst of oppression. To conduct a grand demonstration of the peace, joy, and prosperity that Muslims can experience under the rule of freedom. To let Muslims see that it is not freedom that is to be feared, not free people that need killed, but it is tyrants that need to be feared, it is dictatorships that need to be brought down, and that when you are free to go your way and I am free to go my way we can all find joy together.
It's an incredibly bold and noble plan--one of the grandest that has ever been undertaken. If it succeeds, it has the potential to transform a region of the world that has been war-torn since before our nation was born. If it fails, it dooms millions of middle-easterners to lifetimes of continued war and suffering.
We were content to let them have at it, when they were keeping to themselves. But once the bloodshed spilled to our shores, once we knew we were not safe, we were forced to attempt the grandest undertaking any President has undertaken in half a century. Introducing a contagious freedom.
But I look here on this board, and talk to other intelligent, caring people I know, and they don't see any of this. They look at this and see a petty, stupid man who's been manipulated into doing a favor for some oil buddies, and who's taking advantage of a chance to oppress and abuse while he's at it. A guy with no plan, no foresight to get him through the rest of the day, much less this thing in Iraq.
Looking at the same thing, but it's like we're looking in different directions.
So is it like the fish? Is this really all just a matter of taste, of opinion, and nobody's more right than anybody else?
Or is this about truth, right and wrong, good and evil, and there really is some plateau we can all reach through discourse and debate?
When the same people can vilify Clarence Thomas and make a hero out of his accuser while deifying Bill Clinton and demonizing his accusers?
Or when the same people can blow of the abuses inflicted on Iraqi prisoners as being somehow fine and dandy, because they think that's the only way to defend a President they love, when just a few years ago they were calling for the head of a President who had a consensual affair?
Will we ever grow up enough to stand by our principles instead of stading by our candidates?
posted
It's confusing to me, because nothing is ever cut and dried good and evil the way the President presents it. Though, more often than not it's both things at the same time... Perhaps he does mean well, perhaps he is trying to liberate Iraq... Or trying to present himself as a strong war president to get more votes. Or trying to get his hands on oil... i try to do research, reading the views of the right and the left. It's still unclear to me. I only have my belief that war is wrong. That a war on terror really cannot be fought with guns and bombs; to do so only makes the situation worse, confirming what the Middle East already believes about the US. That by fighting a war on Iraq, they are in the wrong place, aiming for the wrong target. For example, this latest scandel. It horrifies me. It's like saying, "Join Al Qaida because they Americans are a threat, lying hypocrites and here is the proof." If these people of the president's cabinet hold the lives of millions of Americans in their hands they cannot afford to make mistakes. They have to make sure every single crack and hole is covered. It seems like an impossible task, and it is, but there's no way they should have gone into war without a clear idea of what could go wrong or an exact plan besides, "This will be an easy operation.. a no brainer." It's hard to figure out what to think.. or even what the truth is...
posted
doc, perhaps the problem is that you seem to have an idealized perception of the reasons behind our military involvement AND our actions there that do not, unfortunately, match any of the observed facts. That, in other words, you are able to support our actions because they loosely parallel the direction YOU would like us to go, for reasons different from the ones we're actually using.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, perhaps the problem is that you seem to have a cynical perception of the reasons behind our military involvment AND our actions there that do not, unfortunately, match all of the obseved facts. That, in other words, you are able to critisize our actions (and our President) because they loosly parallel the cynical motives that you asign to our government.
Posts: 181 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
We're so conditioned to take sides, to pick a person and stick behind them. The other side smears, our side propagandizes. Honestly, at times one wonders where the real truth lies.
It just seems there is no longer any way politically to plainly say "Here is what we are doing and why we are doing it." Anyone who ventures that out into the public arena is savaged by their loyal opposition. Then they retreat and have to play their cards close to the vest.
It doesn't even matter whether the action begins on the left or the right, whatever it is the opposition seizes on it and worries it like a pitbull on a poodle.
And can we turn to the media anymore for a neutral look? Not really. There are factions in the media and so much has been done to degrade the media in the eyes of the public (some done by the media's own actions) that we can't allow ourselves to really trust any of them.
So what can we do? Who can we trust? How can a person pull themself away from a candidate/political agenda and view what is really, really happening?
I've swung back and forth over the Iraq debate. And here of late I can't seem to tell the smoke from the mirrors.
Posts: 2848 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
"That, in other words, you are able to critisize our actions (and our President) because they loosly parallel the cynical motives that you assign to our government."
That's probably the case. When examining the actions of our government, I freely admit that the first question I always ask myself is "who benefits from this?" In the rare event that someone is actually acting out of consistent scruple, this probably prevents me from seeing it for some time.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
OSC once said something along the lines of "I'd rather be around a bunch of hypocrites who say a bunch of bad things but do a bunch of good things than a bunch of hypocrites who say a bunch of good things but do a bunch of bad things."
Okay, what OSC actually said was way more eloquent than that and I should be shot for putting such and akwardly worded paraphrase in quotes, but I really should get to work.
But the point is, I think Bush is doing the right thing in Iraq. Whatever his real motivation is (he really, really hated this cartoon a six-year-old Iraqi boy did of him, and this was the only way he could think of to get it) it's still the right thing.
When you're in a political climate where people do things based not on what's right or wrong, but what will distinguish it from the opposition, sometimes the best you can hope for is somebody doing the right things for the wrong reason.
That said, I do think motivations matter, and I do think Bush is there for the right reasons.
But I just like fish.
Posts: 1894 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
What road was that which was paved with good intentions?
I believe that 99% of existance is a combination of logical deduction, sensory confusion, assumption, prejudice, guesswork, expectations, and personal bias. Only that last 1% is in fact, real. And I'm not to sure about that last 1%.
President Bush has a great place to make his defence. He points out all the good things that can happen in Iraq, all the things that must happen in Iraq, and all that should happen in Iraq, and if anyone questions his policy on Iraq he insists that they are questioning all these things as well.
Yet great intentions do not make up for poor planning or execution.
Yes, there are those who see what gains we have made in the lives of ordinary Afghans, and applaude. There are others who see what damage we've done to many of them and recoil. They believe that those same changed could have been accomplished without resorting to violence because they want to believe violence accomplishes nothing.
I believe they are wrong. I believe history proves me right.
Yet when we see the same images on the tv, we are seeing different things. That is a shame.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:"Yet when we see the same images on the tv, we are seeing different things. That is a shame."
Seeing things differently is not shame, it is strength. The shame is when people don't realize others see things differently, refuse to seek to see things from other's perspective, don't weigh what others see against what they see, and won't alter their opinion because they are too caught up in being "right".
posted
PV you are correct. I just found myself going off in 19 different tangents with my response, and decided to cut it back and put it out of its misery.
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:So is it like the fish? Is this really all just a matter of taste, of opinion, and nobody's more right than anybody else?
Or is this about truth, right and wrong, good and evil, and there really is some plateau we can all reach through discourse and debate?
I think it's both. Say you want a grill in your backyard, you've been wanting some fine steaks or something. So you look through the store and pick out a grill. Now from this point there will be one absolutley best way to get the grill home and assembeled. Of course one way may be 2 seconds faster than another, but it is techincally, still the faster route. So in this case, it's posible (theoritically) lgically discover the asbolute best course of action for getting the thing home and put together.
But then part 1 comes back into play again, before you even go out and buy the grill. You need to decide what you want, do you want a big grill in case you cook for a party, and one that can be shown off to visitng friends? Or do you want to spend less money and get the thing for just little stuff? Well fo course figuring this out does still ise logic, but now try and add up values. How much is real wood on the outside worth compared to no wood but cheaper? There's really no way to figure that out with logic, it like the fish now, to you the real wood on the side of the grill may be really important, but when you bring it home your wife demands to know why you paid so much more money for that tacky wood.
If we can agree on what is good and how good it is (and how bad something is) then I think we should theoritically be able to come to a perfect consenses on the war in Iraq. But try and figure out the numerical importance of freedom in Iraq and compare that to the deaths that brought it about and you'll have a fish phenomena.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
