SPORK: About 'peace' people being supporters of SH.

JS Kelly JS Kelly <jskelly@jskelly.com>
Sun, 23 Mar 2003 00:10:19 -0800 (PST)



and have you, mr hall, given any serious consideration to the cost of
intervention, the likelihood of success, and the risk of bad side effects
in our involvement in iraq? i would be very curious to hear your analysis
of these.
regards,
-jsk



On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, johnhall wrote:

> 
> > From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com] On Behalf Of JS
> > Kelly
> 
> > On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, johnhall wrote:
> > 
> > > Yes, it might be OK not to stop the woman from being raped.
> > 
> > under what circumstances would that be OK?
> 
> In the context of the discussion, which you clipped out, that question
> is more appropriately addressed to Mr. Bone.
> 
> In the context of Iraq, the answer might be 'because the effort would be
> futile and would also get your entire family killed'.
> 
> Mr. Bone was making the point that non-intervention did not make one
> morally liable.  I heavily sympathize with the point in the abstract.
> Such a person isn't morally liable, _for the crime_.  In concrete
> personal terms I'd consider non-intervention to be an act of moral
> cowardice at the very least.
> 
> In other words, the cost of intervention, the likelihood of success, and
> the risk of bad side effects should be considered in addition to the
> moral good of stopping the atrocity.
> 
> 
>