Skip to main content

View Diary: What would it mean if Daily Kos is consistently anti-war? (29 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Being anti-war is a fraught position (4+ / 0-)

    The situation in Ukraine points this out rather the situation in Syria before it. What good does it do anyone to be "anti-war" in a world where there are those who have no qualms about using the force of arms to have conquer or oppress?

    I am "anti-war," Really. But, sometimes the way to avoid war is to be strident and willing to go to war. Being "anti-war" isn't necessarily a value, or at least an especially principled one. If being anti-war means that the pro-war forces in the world have their way, then it is worse than being agnostic on the question.

    Moreover, saying we could have headed off past wars by better supporting democratic forces seems rather naive to me. Saying we must be committed to a course of action in supporting those opposed to war doesn't address the concerns above -- and doesn't account for what's politically possible. What happens when the anti-war sentiment doesn't result in greater or sufficient international support for whatever it is you think will head off a war? What happens down the road? Do you throw up your hands and say we missed our chance to head off the war and now we have to sit back and watch people get crushed and killed?

    I had dreams of advancing an effort at a global cease-fire to commemorate the one that ended the first world war. But, what do you do when one side is all too willing and able to wage war on those who have more peaceful aims in mind? Further -- is avoiding war at all costs undoubtedly the highest value -- or, could there be greater value in avoiding all costs?

    Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you:

    by FischFry on Wed Apr 16, 2014 at 03:07:47 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site