Posted by aogSunday, 19 February 2006 at 11:36 TrackBack Ping URL

In too deep

As I read calls on the non-Left region of the blogosphere, I realize that the best argument for pressing the issue is the exact same one touted by many of the same writers for staying the course in Iraq. Regardless of the original merits, at this point, the cartoons have been published and republished, and the radicals have objected to them with violence, riots and threats of murder. Just as with the invasion of Iraq, those are now facts on the ground, not debatable hypotheticals. To pull out now would be to declare victory for the radicals / Caliphascists. If one believes that there is, in fact, a moderate majority, it would seem that it would be a very bad thing to prove to them that the radicals are right, that violence and murder are the way to respond successfully to Western “provocation”. Would it not, at this juncture, be better to provide the lesson that such as response just guarantees more, not less?

There is the argument against of collateral damage. But it seems a bit of an odd place to be to advocate retreat over offended sensibiities (much of which is in doubt) vs. staying the course in the face of killing innocent civilians, which always occurs in military operations. In the same way, if you have a open society, tastless people will write tasteless things. These are unavoidable collateral damage. Yet it seems there are people with those opposing points of view.