Well, that was definitely an interesting documentary...
But I think I'm going to have to do the unprecedented for me:
Disagree with Hitchens and agree instead with Putin.
He certainly seems culpable in what might be considered war crimes in Vietnam, Cambodia--the death toll there as a result of those bombings is STAGGERING, I knew they occured, but never knew the death toll was that high--Indonesia and then that assination in Chile...
But when you get down to it, it seems more like those are crimes of the STATE--if they are even to be called crimes at all.
Hitchens seems to be trying to have his cake and eat it too with his argument...it's roughly the same one he uses in his debates when someone asks what the harm of praciticing religion personally and not publically might be.
In THEORY, he says, that might be true, but in practice, we all know religion has a way of spreading into the social mainframe, and so it becomes embedded and so because crimes are committed in the name of God/Jesus/A Holy Book, said Holy Book becomes something to be crusaded against for Hitchens (that's just one of his reasons.)
And for religion, that might work...
But the same problem with this example follows true for states and people--
If you DON'T seperate intention or ideal from action, than you condemn the ideal itself should teh action be negative, ie, you make Christianity a negative thing in your mind because of negative things--wars, conquests, conversions, the attacks on science adn knowledge--that are attributable to some followers of Christianity, eVEN if said followers aren't really following the faith--though Hitchen would argue they are--or if they are a minority.
And, again, for religion, that argument certainly has problems, but it's at least thinkable.
For STATES and POLITICS, however, it doesn't seem workable to me, because a Machivellian, "ends justifies the means," "lesser of two evils" approach is sometimes necessary in international dealings or, more likely, are THOUGHT to be necessary by the big players of the game, and so, in the same way a steroid user might argue they "had" to use steroids in order to keep up in the game, lest they be ousted, nations and their prospective leaders might feel compelled to resort to shady and even duplicitous dealings in order to keep up with other shady leaders.
Religion is idealized, so Hitchen's idealized argument can apply there.
In the starkly-realist world of international politics, however, it's not so clear cut as he'd like it to be for his argument to succeed.
What's more, Kissinger is one of SEVERAL people involved in ONE OF SEVERAL major powers in the world, ALL doing Machiavellian, secret crimes to try adn stay on top.
When you set a standard like that, internationally, it seems something of a fallacy to hold people up to idealized standards when the reality is quite different and the blame in so many more hands than a war criminals trial can possibly lay...where does THAT end? With Kissinger? What about his aides, who had information and hands in the dealings--are they criminals as well? The assistants of the aides? The other departments, who might ahve been associated on the fringe? The media, if they had uncovered anything and kept it under wraps by order of the government? And what of those who committ crimes in response to crimes--THEY would argue they're responding in self-defense, are they, too, to be considered criminals?
It's just too slippery a slope in too ill-defined a world with an amoral, Machiavellian, murky political and moral compass.
Does Henry Kissinger deserve criticism for his actions?
Oh, yes.
Does he deserve the Nobel Peace Prize he received?
Oh, no.
Does he deserve to be a war criminal?
No--there are not enough nooses and not enough moral groundings to do justice to ALL who have eVER done something harmful internationally...it seems--pardon the pun--criminal, thus, to make a special case of someone when the facts and circumstances are as murky as they are.
No Auschwitz, or Kurddish Massacre, no war crimes...
That we can successfully try in court, anyway.
)
When will Webdiplomacy move to dedicated hosting?
)
)
)
)