tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post8137926253148437857..comments2023-10-31T03:18:26.963-07:00Comments on Great Guys Weblog: Where the Well-Regulated Economy EndsBrethttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15063508651955739056noreply@blogger.comBlogger201125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-5408821050281783822013-08-02T17:49:52.234-07:002013-08-02T17:49:52.234-07:00Like I said, you are doing an excellent job of pro...Like I said, you are doing an excellent job of proving that there wasn't any moral difference.<br /><br />Anything goes. <br /><br />And, yes, let's do ask about the utility of the policy.<br /><br />As for subverting members of the UN, I recall that we did that back in '63.<br /><br /><br /><br />Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-47801798997167307152013-08-01T10:02:18.961-07:002013-08-01T10:02:18.961-07:00[Harry:] Including the deliberate genocide of Camb...<i>[Harry:] Including the deliberate genocide of Cambodians. </i><br /><br />This is where you leave all reason behind.<br /><br />The <i>only</i> reason the US bombed Cambodia was because the NVA was grossly violating Cambodian neutrality, using the country as a sanctuary (NB -- North Vietnam was counting on the US to conform with the same international law that NV was trampling upon) from which to rest, resupply, and launch attacks on South Vietnam.<br /><br />Getting you even close to this inescapable point has been the intellectual equivalent of pulling teeth without the benefit of adequate anesthesia.<br /><br />Now, it is possible to discuss whether the US response was the best possible. But ignoring the cause, which you have assiduously done (for at least the fourth time in this thread) is courting intellectual vacuity. Beyond that, as with the terms <a href="http://restatingtheobviousmaui.blogspot.com/2013/05/racism-found-in-rightwing-who-knew.html" rel="nofollow">racism</a> and <a href="http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=5806884&postID=5817289378716317733" rel="nofollow">delusional</a>, you have proven yourself incapable of using words with any fidelity towards their actual meaning.<br /><br />Similarly, collectivists are perfectly happy with North Vietnam's eventually successful drive to eliminate a member of the United Nations, yet excoriate the US's attempts to defend that country.<br /><br />Here, as elsewhere, collectivists reflexive alliance with predators is on display.<br /><br />As for the rest of us, cause and effect are easily discerned.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-38225631084201270932013-07-31T13:23:17.949-07:002013-07-31T13:23:17.949-07:00No, we think if it's wrong the the USA to do X...No, we think if it's wrong the the USA to do X, it's also wrong for the NV to do it, and which ever country does it first bears the far greater moral burden of the action. As far as I can tell from your writing, you believe that only the USA has moral agency and therefore only the USA can bear a moral stain from its actions. It's a very dehumanizing point of view to deny foreigners moral agency, to refust to hold them responsible for their own actions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-35577605488075000862013-07-31T12:50:23.948-07:002013-07-31T12:50:23.948-07:00The US is responsible for its actions, not for Nor...The US is responsible for its actions, not for North Vietnam's actions.<br /><br />I gather you contend that since NV did X, then any and every Y response was justified.<br /><br />Including the deliberate genocide of Cambodians.<br /><br />Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-61900446144043194152013-07-30T19:07:49.968-07:002013-07-30T19:07:49.968-07:00You still don't get it.
Above, you accused th...You still don't get it.<br /><br />Above, you accused the US of engaging in Cambodian genocide. As with every other accusation you have made in this thread, it amounted to an uncaused effect.<br /><br />The reason is obvious: you have either failed to take on board, or refuse to accommodate the fact that North Vietnam had invaded a neutral country in order to stage attacks on another country. <br /><br />Since you have excluded that little detail, you relieved yourself of the burden of explaining how that just might sit so well with international law or the UN charter.<br /><br />And while you are relieving yourself of explanatory burdens, you have also sidestepped a far more central issue: North Vietnam's goal, eventually achieved, was to eliminate a member of the United Nations. <br /><br />Since I can't accuse you of ignorance, how is it you justify that?<br /><br />I already know the answer to that question. There is no justification.<br /><br />However, there is a pattern. Leftists have a soft spot for predators.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-40462138917981165252013-07-30T13:16:00.922-07:002013-07-30T13:16:00.922-07:00So, what about the NVA in Cambodia?
Bombing did n...So, what about the NVA in Cambodia?<br /><br />Bombing did not disrupt their activities, nor, once bombing failed, did a ground invasion.<br /><br />Remember?<br /><br />Lawfare was not so entrenched then as it is today, but even then there were international obligations about cross-border aggression.<br /><br />Apart from the law, which the US never paid much attention to, there were the questions of moral justification and practical utility.<br /><br />Bombing villages required a whole lot of moral justification, and practical utility is the sort of thing that really can only be judged after the attempt, although by 1970 we had the experience of free fire zones and how well they did not work.<br /><br />Incidentally, we used free fire zones again in Iraq in 2003 -- but were not honest enough to call them that -- and the results were all bad, no surprise there.<br /><br />If you are trying to make an argument that the US policy was even worse than the communists', you are on the way.Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-68688554255902064082013-07-30T09:40:25.002-07:002013-07-30T09:40:25.002-07:00The problem here is not only that, in fact, you di...The problem here is not only that, in fact, you did mention what you mentioned you didn't mention. <br /><br />It goes beyond that to what you didn't mention you didn't mention.<br /><br />If you are going to make a factually based argument, then you have to use them all, not just the ones that are convenient to you, while ignoring the rest.<br /><br />Until you discuss the presence of NVA units in Cambodia, then you very much give the impression of someone blinded by religion.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-9068052307855891122013-07-28T12:38:07.587-07:002013-07-28T12:38:07.587-07:00I didn't say anything about guerrillas, becaus...I didn't say anything about guerrillas, because the point is, they could not bomb without hitting a village.<br /><br />It is not clear the bombs ever hit any guerrillas, while it is certain they always hit villages.<br /><br />Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-25836840366953930892013-07-21T14:17:13.288-07:002013-07-21T14:17:13.288-07:00Who said anything about a few guerrillas? I didn&#...Who said anything about a few guerrillas? I didn't say anything about guerrillas at all. <br /><br />Bollocks. <br /><br /><i>[Harry 2:04 PM:] Because they did not aim, they hit a guerrilla concentration only by accident, if ever. </i><br /><br />(Why, oh why, does blogger measure time to the minute, but cares not about the date?)<br /><br />Once we get that straight, then we can discuss what point the villages are, and whether there is any limit to your torturing of clear meaning of words.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-54806665738432286142013-07-21T14:14:39.211-07:002013-07-21T14:14:39.211-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-21916831236724625162013-07-21T12:07:34.735-07:002013-07-21T12:07:34.735-07:00Who said anything about a few guerrillas? I didn&#...Who said anything about a few guerrillas? I didn't say anything about guerrillas at all.<br /><br />I mentioned villages.<br /><br />Villages are the point.<br /><br />That and target acquisition.Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-83788271890301046662013-07-09T09:40:40.552-07:002013-07-09T09:40:40.552-07:00[Harry:] Skipper, we bombed Laos, too. Fat lot of ...<i>[Harry:] Skipper, we bombed Laos, too. Fat lot of good that did anybody. </i><br /><br />That's as may be. I'm still trying to get the history of Cambodia straight.<br /><br />A few guerillas, or infestation by the NVA?<br /><br />Of course, it might also be said that the triumph of North Vietnam didn't do anybody a fat lot of good, either.<br /><br />But then there are apparently certain tyrannies you are perfectly happy with.Hey Skipperhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10798930502187234974noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-21394716175693367292013-07-08T04:44:05.897-07:002013-07-08T04:44:05.897-07:00Hey guys, I think we did teach an old dog a new tr...Hey guys, I think we did teach an old dog a new trick. Harry has learned not to use the word, fascist, to describe socialists he doesn't like (Nixon) or any capitalist. <br /><br />Yeah us!<br /><br />aog, we sure could a guy like old Cal right now.erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09826044412670324694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-26523062888207013442013-07-08T02:41:50.183-07:002013-07-08T02:41:50.183-07:00Bret;
Eagar's in his own little world. The on...Bret;<br /><br />Eagar's in his own little world. The only eyes that turned to Pinochet here were his. Eagar brings up Pinochet and then when we respond, accuses us of doing so. He asks a question, gets huffy when we don't answer, then gets huffy when we do because we answered what he wrote, not what he meant.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-76750571363021152592013-07-07T22:09:38.934-07:002013-07-07T22:09:38.934-07:00Harry Eagar asks for : "a capitalist successo...Harry Eagar asks for : "<i>a capitalist successor of a foul tyrant who was not a sadistic murderer himself.</i>"<br /><br />I could put forward someone like Heuss (1st Pres. of West Germany after WWII), but I don't get the point you're trying to make.Brethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15063508651955739056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-9802345064522940702013-07-07T21:56:54.076-07:002013-07-07T21:56:54.076-07:00I thought we were talking about capitalist leaders...I thought we were talking about capitalist leaders who followed dictators -- you know, Pinochet/Allende or Somebody/Morsi/Mubarek.<br /><br />I hardly think the WSJ was thinking about who succeeded Herbert Hoover.<br /><br />Come now, all I want -- and it should be easy as pie -- is a capitalist successor of a foul tyrant who was not a sadistic murderer himself.<br /><br />I know of some. Do you? Does the Journal? Why do all eyes turn to Pinochet?Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-48461641427241546842013-07-07T21:08:28.921-07:002013-07-07T21:08:28.921-07:00Harry Eagar asked: "Is there no other example...Harry Eagar asked: "<i>Is there no other example of a capitalist leader that you can think of who was less of a monster than Pinochet?</i>"<br /><br />I'm lost as to the context in which you're asking this question. I'm every president of the U.S., every PM of England, every PM of Japan since WWII, etc. But that can't be the answer you're looking for.Brethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15063508651955739056noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-26026298230102215032013-07-07T16:23:50.821-07:002013-07-07T16:23:50.821-07:00"Is there no other example of a capitalist le..."Is there no other example of a capitalist leader that you can think of who was less of a monster than Pinochet?"<br /><br />US President Calvin Coolidge.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-66795956307887614892013-07-07T14:38:14.547-07:002013-07-07T14:38:14.547-07:00I have no idea what your definition of tyranny is...I have no idea what your definition of tyranny is, Harry. Why not name a socialist leader who isn't a tyrant and who hasn't murdered anyone? That way we'll get an idea what you're talking about.erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09826044412670324694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-52719930740265010482013-07-07T14:01:48.266-07:002013-07-07T14:01:48.266-07:00In reality, erp, as I have said more than once, I ...In reality, erp, as I have said more than once, I reprehend all forms of tyranny. <br /><br />Not only do I reprehend it, I can recognize it. <br /><br />But be my guest. Is there no other example of a capitalist leader that you can think of who was less of a monster than Pinochet? Even a tiny bit less? Pinochet is the best we can hope for?<br /><br />Sad.Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-23090075324347598472013-07-07T13:50:15.178-07:002013-07-07T13:50:15.178-07:00"Can I take it, given this vigorous defense o..."Can I take it, given this vigorous defense of Pinochet"<br /><br />No, because there hasn't been a vigorous defense of Pinochet. That's like saying "the doctor made vigorous defense of amputation when I got gangrene". We have pointed out, in theory, predictions, and very relevant parallels, what the alternatives were and how they were clearly worse. You refuse to discuss them because, I suspect, you realize how devastating they are to whatever case you think you're making.<br /><br />"where were the democrats?"<br /><br />Same place they've been in Egypt and Syria?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-72025750170508778072013-07-07T12:08:37.024-07:002013-07-07T12:08:37.024-07:00Compare and contrast Cuba and Chile and you'll...Compare and contrast Cuba and Chile and you'll get your answer. BTW -- do you still admire Che as the poster boy of non-fascism?erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09826044412670324694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-76738812195911364202013-07-07T11:19:50.823-07:002013-07-07T11:19:50.823-07:00Hmmm. Can I take it, given this vigorous defense o...Hmmm. Can I take it, given this vigorous defense of Pinochet, that the defenders of (whatever the hell Pinochet is admired for) cannot think of an equivalent who was not also a perverted sadist murderer? <br /><br />Pinochet is the top, and every other possibility is even worse?<br /><br />As for South Korea (and just about every other country on my list), where were the democrats? Why weren't we supporting them? When it comes to US meddling in the affairs of other countries, why is our default choice always a fascist murderer?<br /><br />(I know the answer. But I wonder what you guys will propose.)<br /><br />Skipper, we bombed Laos, too. Fat lot of good that did anybody.<br /><br />Our policy in Indochina overall was genocidal. Free fire zones. There was an admirable concept.<br /><br /> Harry Eagarhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04196202758858876402noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-36631706122315662742013-07-07T09:25:31.174-07:002013-07-07T09:25:31.174-07:00Skipper, I read the entire "City Journal"...Skipper, I read the entire "City Journal" article and still found no definition of social justice, so I surmise it's just another semantic construct designed to obscure the real intent which is complete "fairness of outcome."<br /><br />Students should be forced to read Vonnegut's, http://www.nexuslearning.net/books/holt_elementsoflit-3/Collection%204/Collection%202/Harrison%20Bergeron%20p1.htm, Harrison Bergeron before they sign on to Ayers vision.<br /><br />BTW Ayers comes from. 1% er background, but his Internet persona is strangely silent on this.erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09826044412670324694noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5806884.post-90181667318501601572013-07-07T06:12:14.950-07:002013-07-07T06:12:14.950-07:00Speaking of mass murderers, I wouldn't be at a...Speaking of mass murderers, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Harry had one of <a href="https://www.google.com/search?q=poster+of+che+guevara&hl=en&rlz=1Q1GGLD_enUS371US371&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=6WfZUaLSEPTE4APnpIHICQ&ved=0CFkQsAQ&biw=652&bih=345" rel="nofollow">these</a>in his office.erphttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09826044412670324694noreply@blogger.com