Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Iraq Casualties

Rate this topic


Marc K.

Recommended Posts

I am interested in a topic I heard raised in Dr. Peikoff’s Ford Hall speech about the war in Iraq. It was also referred to in another thread here though I can’t seem to locate it.

Namely:

Who allows a tyranny to exist? Who is responsible for its actions? Are there really any “innocents” in a justified conflict?

I am under the impression that citizens who continue to live under a tyranny sanction its existence. That it is the right of these people to alter or abolish such government when it becomes destructive of their natural rights. That they sanction its existence by not abolishing it. That they are ultimately responsible for the government they allow to rule them. And that they are perfectly justified in suffering while evils are sufferable.

But when another nation is threatened by such a government, and goes to war with it, that it is these same people who must bear the moral weight of every casualty on both sides of the conflict.

In his Ford Hall lecture I think Dr. Peikoff was essentially saying the same thing. He complained about how in Iraq we had lawyers along with each platoon. How we allowed terrorists to escape by using human shields. How the only way to really fight a war was demonstrated by the bombing and subsequent firestorms of Tokyo in WWII. That usually it is a small faction of zealots who take over a country because they are very dedicated and vocal about their philosophy. But that the sheep who say “who am I to know what is right”, by pleading ignorance, must accept the consequences of what comes.

Yet I was sure I saw someone here write, unchallenged, something to the effect of: citizens living under tyranny cannot be held responsible for their government's actions since they have no rights under that govt.

I agree with Dr. Peikoff.

Am I understanding him correctly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am under the impression that citizens who continue to live under a tyranny sanction its existence. That it is the right of these people to alter or abolish such government when it becomes destructive of their natural rights. That they sanction its existence by not abolishing it. That they are ultimately responsible for the government they allow to rule them. And that they are perfectly justified in suffering while evils are sufferable.

In another thread about the morality of paying taxes, someone mentioned that paying taxes cannot be morally judged since it is being done at the point of a gun. The moral choice lies with those who initiate force, not with those who exist under it.

The Iraqi people quite simply were incapable of bringing Saddam's regime down by themselves. They existed at the point of a gun, and the vast exapnses of desert and authortarian government made escape all but impossible. Therefore, I do not see how their lack of action can be morally judged any more than American Objectivists filling out a 1040 can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Marc

You ask numerous questions. While they are all related, it would be difficult to answer them every one of them here. I'll give you a bit of a helping hand though, and see if that lets you resolve them on your own.

AR has said that, while she was living in Russia, had the US attacked it (as it would have been morally justified in doing), and had she been killed in such an attack, her death, while certainly lamentable, would definitely have been morally justified. Yet obviously AR was not a moral supporter of the Soviet Union.

So - do you think she offered her moral sanction to its government, even while under its bootheel?

As an unwilling citizen, did she still contribute to the continued existence of that nation?

If you percieve a contradiction in the answers to these two question, check your premises. If you have no contradiction, you should be able to answer your own questions. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the help. Relating it back to AR definitely makes it easier to answer.

So, if our attack was morally justified, then Saddam Hussein and those who support him are morally responsible for every death on our side and theirs.

But something is still eating at me.

AR escaped the USSR. What about those who don't escape or those who don't try to change things? (I wouldn't blame those in Iran who fight for change). I agree, they can't be held responsible for the evils of the governments they live under but aren't they responsible for their own situation?

Is it the right of all people, whether living under democracy or tyranny, to alter or abolish any govt that is destructive of their rights?

In my paragraph describing Dr. Peikoff's lecture, did I interpret him correctly?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some that remain do bear moral responsibility for the continued survival of the Dictator and his regime. These are the ones who actually believe in and support dictatorship. Then there are others who, while perhaps not providing their moral support to the govt, nonetheless provide support for it physically - either in production, or taxes, or conscription, or via any other number of means or methods.

In other words, be it moral or physical - be it willing or unwilling - those who remain DO support the dictatorship. And that makes them enemies.

(Im not sure the above addresses your question exactly. Are you asking about those who live under, but refuse to pass moral judgement on the dictatorship one way or the other? In other words, are you asking about "the sheep who say “who am I to know what is right”?" To whom is it their moral authority is abdicated? Why to the dictator who DOES claim to know what is right." As such, they supply their tacit moral support to the dictatorship - and indeed bear the moral resonsibility for the consequences of that abdication. If you need an example of this, just remember the soldier who stands in Dagny's way when she is trying to rescue John Galt near the end of Atlas Shrugged. She shoots him with no remorse whatsoever. It is worth rereading that section to grasp the principle employed here.)

As to your question of rights - it is indeed the RIGHT of each individual to try to stop the initiation of force from occuring against them or others. I'm not sure what you intend to learn from this question because I believe you already know and understand that fact. Do you perhaps mean 'duty' instead of 'right' in this instance - ie it is the duty of those living under a dictatorship to try to change it?

Since I have not heard Dr. Peikoff's Ford Hall lecture, I cannot speak to the accuracy of your paraphrasing. Perhaps someone else can - or is able to provide a transcript of the lecture (if they exist for distribution) for comparison.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
Iraq Casualties, Who's responsible?

Saddam Hussein and his illegitimate government.

Those who defend, support, and enable such government.

Legitimate governments seek to help to protect international trade, not try to control and monopolize it by force. That was one of two major reasons Iraq conquered Kuwait. The other reason was that Iraq owed Kuwait, a small, very weathy nation, lots of money. And Kuwait refused to defer such debt.

Hussein clearly wanted to monopolize and control by force the Persian Gulf and its oil shipping routes. His doing so made him a profound international threat. That in itself justified the Gulf War, although I disagree with the decision not to take Hussein out back then.

That America went to war against this international threat was solely Hussein's undoing. He and his followers and enablers are 100% responsible for the casualties in Iraq on both sides, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...