Licensed to Kill

[Plaid Adder]

The past couple days there has been a lot of foofaraw over some GD threads supporting the Iraqis' "right to resist" the occupation by killing American soldiers. Now apparently Andrew Sullivan, the man who was so much in love with the "flypaper strategy" (which posits that the major purpose of the war was to put American soldiers in Iraq *so that terrorists would attack them there* instead of attacking Israelis or American civilians), has cited a couple of these threads as proof of how depraved we all are. I don't give a hoot what Andrew Sullivan thinks of me. But the threads themselves disturb me enough I felt like I needed to say this:

Nobody has the right to take human life. Period.

I went through all of this a long time ago regarding the death penalty, and if you care you can read all about that here:

http://www.plaidder.com/deathpen.htm

This is just the way it is with me. Life is the most precious thing in the universe. Taking it is always going to be wrong. You can argue about whether it is necessary, expedient, or even 'just' according to the eye-for-an-eye code that America seems to be wedded to; but it is never, ever, *right.* Your mileage may vary, of course; but that's where I stand on it.

Now. That position would imply that the people who are attacking civilians and US soldiers in Iraq do not have the right to do that. It would also imply that *our soldiers do not have the right to take Iraqi life either.* And yet, our government has sent them over there and told them to do it.

There is not ever going to be anything 'right' about what is going on over there, at least not until we get the hell out. We turned the entire situation into one big, huge, honking WRONG by invading the country in the first place. Whether the violence comes from us or from the people attacking us, it spells more loss, pain, bloodshed and grief for ordinary Iraqis, who are as traumatized by the campaign of resistance being organized agianst the interim government as they are by the pre-dawn raids and checkpoint massacres that have become part of the Army's standing operating procedure.

I am an American. I am also a citizen of the world and a human being. My allegiance is to humanity. I feel the same nausea and grief reading about the crash of a U.S. army helicopter that I feel reading about the killing of an Iraqi family at a checkpoint. My horror of suffering and death is not contained within national boundaries. I don't want *anyone* to die. Not another American soldier, not another Iraqi civilian. That's why I didn't want the war. That's why I want the troops out.

But who cares what I want? We all know what we're getting, as long as this war goes on: more death for everyone.

Does that make me a traitor, Andy? You ask me whose side I'm on? Fine, I'll tell you whose side I'm on. *My* side wins when *nobody* is dying in Iraq. Us *or* them. And I'll tell you know, it sucks to be on my side, because I will probably be long dead of natural causes before we ever see victory.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

[La_Serpiente]

1. Awesome letter Adder

:hi: We luv ya :loveya:

[Beetwasher]

2. Mutual Exclusivity

The idea that the Iraqi's have a right to defend themselves and the idea that you don't want our soldiers to come to harm are NOT mutually exclusive. I think this is a point many fail to grasp.

On the one hand, I understand that the Iraqi's are defending their country against a foreign invader but on the other hand I don't want our young men (and Iraqi's or anyone for that matter) slaughtered. It's possible to hold those two concepts at the same time.