Printer friendly version

October 18, 2004

Career Options: Terrorist or Puppy-Loving Philanthropist

Dennis Prager makes well a point that bears making and remaking:

[The Democrats] say this: There are far more terrorists in Iraq since the invasion, and, therefore, the invasion was a mistake.

Yet, in order to believe that the greater number of terrorists in Iraq means the invasion was a mistake, you have to believe one or both of the following -- that were it not for the invasion, the terrorists who are in Iraq would have been engaged in some peaceful work in some other country, or that they are newly minted terrorists who were perhaps selling shoes prior to the war in Iraq.

Posted by Justin Katz at October 18, 2004 10:56 PM
Middle East
Comments

This kind of confused moral thinking is deeply embedded in the liberal worldview. If you are poor, it's natural that you would resort to crime. If you are an oppressed Palestinian, it's natural that you would resort to suicide bombing. If you are an oppressed Muslim in Chechnya, it's natural that you would resort to murdering children in school. Either the liberal making such statements thinks it is literally OK to murder innocent people in exchange for political oppression, or they are condescending and saying that there are different moral standards for other people.

They don't conceive of people as moral agents, but merely as automatons controlled by their environment.

Posted by: Mike S. at October 19, 2004 9:35 AM