Jun 28, 2009

If W. were still the president ...

Perhaps there is a place for violence in the world. If Bush were still the president, might we use our military might to make a few suffer, but liberate many more? WSJ 6/30/09 article describes the plight of general populace of Myanmar, while its military junta benefit from trade with Asia. What would happen if a bomber were to fly over the junta residence city of Naypyitaw and wipe it off the map overnight? Would the democratic elements rise up and elect Suu Kyi as its head? Would the country be delivered from misery and poverty?

It is inherently unfair what the junta is doing. They suppress democracy in order that they may rule and hold power. But, how can one group of human beings live in luxury knowing that they do so at the misery of another group? It is no different from the slave owners who exploited an underclass that they treated as sub-humans. It is a twisted way of thinking. In my mind, they should be educated on the sin of their ways, and if they do not repent and change their ways, they deserve to be exterminated.

There is a scene from Star Trek ... the good of the many outweigh the good of the few, or the one. Is this such a scenario? Why can't we launch a few missiles and wipe off the junta? Send in commando teams to assassinate the rest of the military leadership? If doing so would launch the nation into disarray and chaos, how is that different from what exists today?

Then again, there is also the saying ... Love your neighbors as you love yourself. Do you love even though neighbors who are hypocrites and do not love their neighbors? Or do you ruthless put them out, and while the act of snuffing them out is no noble enterprise, the end result would be the liberation of a larger group. If not for this, why do we spend $600 billion a year in defense spending?

No comments: