“Steven” posted a lengthy number on my message board the other day, criticising my views on the war; so it’s nice that I’m revamping the board - all previous messages will be wiped… you can read the near-sadist’s comments and my earful of retalliation below.
Steven says:
Oh dear Mr ‘Drama Queen’ Kinley! Looks like the world is coming round to war! 54%-pro to 46% anti in the UK alone! What will you do? Im afraid these figures are going to get worse (from your perspective). More problems! Don’t your fellow ‘protestors’ (”Hippie wannabee” students who dont know the first thing about the world, and school kids who usually just want a day off and a chance to rebel) embarrass you? If they were on my side, they certainly wouldnt fill me with pride!
When will you wake up and smell the murderous dictator?? War IS NOT nice, but sometimes it has to be done. What is your alternative? Wait for another Pearl Harbour? Another September 11th? Wait for Saddam and Bin Laden to team up? No one wants to see innocent people die. But again, WAKE UP. Its happening already, you just havent been exposed to it. The one thing that is slightly strange is the “Give up your weapons, or we will attack you with our weapons” philosphy, but honestly, who is more likely to be a threat with these weapons? Brutal, murderous dictator.. or Bush…. Brutal murderous dictator… or Bush… hmmmm. Sure, the man isnt very bright, but I have come round to the idea of his presidency just recently.
It may not sound fair, but I would rather people/places like the Bush administration/USA have access to weapons like these than Saddam. This isnt Eastenders, Bush isnt suddenly going to decide hes a bad guy, follow his ex-wife to Portugal, and kill her…. (off topic). The good guys stay good, and the the bad guys stay bad. Changes in leader affect this (ie Mugabe in Zimbabwe), but like I say it is the people that fundamentally stay on their side of the line. Good Vs Evil.
Finally, I return to the “who would you rather have weapons” argument. Compare it to children Vs Adults. Would you let a five year old drive a car? It may seem like a trite analogy, but it works in principle. Saddam is in essence a child. He will do whatever it takes to get what he wants. He ignores consequences. And for this he must be “disiplined”. Of course, Im not saying you would kill a child for attacking the neighbours ferret, but hey Im sure you get my drift.
In conclusion, please stop being a stereotype teenage… “Woah man… whats all this talk with war, cant we just love each other and get along?” You may think you’re making a stand, but its just soooo clichéd, like a few of those films that bottom your list. In order to “love each other and get along”, people like Saddam have to be wiped out.
Steven,
It doesn’t matter which people are on “my side”, whether they’re school children, everyday schmos or incarcerated criminals; what’s important is the principals that they are fighting for, and I am proud to be opposing the war in Iraq. I don’t believe that the students protesting across the country and overseas are doing so to satisfy a long-unfulfilled desire to be hippies, and I don’t believe that school children up and down the UK are primarily interested in taking a day off school. Indeed, most of the instances I have heard of regarding the many protests have occured at weekends or out of school hours. I am sure that the prospect of spending hours walking through a crowded London does not appeal at all to today’s apathetic youths. This is about stopping a war.
Right now, I don’t believe that war is either nice nor necessary. My alternative is to dispose of Saddam and his associates, many of whom, it has become clear, would willingly abandon their leader at the drop of a bomb, in the most peaceful way possible. Of course force is necessary, of course some people will come off worse, but there are far better ways to deal with the problem, ways that greatly reduce the harm to civilians, the “collateral damage”, as it’s so brusquely named. I know that war is already in motion; this is why hindering it from going any further is vital, so much loss can be prevented. It is gradually becoming more and more clear that President Bush is likely to be the more dangerous leader; he has control of a third of the world [ed: my geo-political knowledge was clearly not outstanding in 2003], he has a strong determination for war that overrules the UN and the worldwide public opinon, and he’s spreading. This man is trying to prevent war by waging war.
Rather than asking whose side the good and the bad are on, perhaps you should ask who the good and the bad actually are. Saddam Hussein certainly isn’t our hero, our saviour, but George Bush is hardly saving the world with his actions. He’s destroying a small part of it, and however small that may be, he is killing innocent people unnecessarily.
As for your child/parent/car analogy, the situation should not and cannot easily be so tritely simplified (and don’t forget that a parent should be on the same side as their child; they are there to look after them). However, to counter the statement: if you don’t want a child driving your car, by all means, hide the keys, destroy the car (this metaphor is rather flawed, you can see) and/or remove the child from any opportunity he has to reach said vehicle. There’s no need to drive through the neighbour’s flower garden or, indeed, run the neighbours themselves over in the process of getting the car away. And, as it is, we have no secure reason to believe that Saddam even wants to get near the car. He has complied completely with the UN, he’s handed them his keys, and the UN have asked the parents to exercise caution and patience. Bush, it seems, has something against the neighbours. Perhaps he thinks there’s an oil-well beneath that flowerbed…
I’m perfectly happy to be a stereotype teenager. I think we stereotype teenagers have got it right. If there being a better solution to the problems in Iraq than war is what stereotypical teenagers believe, then categorize me, exclude me, put me in a box marked “cliché”. If your problem is with my being a stereotype then you have a great priority problem - there is a war on, you know. I would like everybody to love each other and get along, but this is something of an unfulfillable dream; there will always be people with issues that counter peace, and they need removing. The problem is that as Bush rampages through Iraq in the search for Saddam, he’s killing a lot of other people, too; and we can’t all love each other and get along once we’re dead.