|
And that's what I'm talking about, moral opposition to this war. It is the rare person on the anti-war left that I've seen couch their opposition entirely on non-moral arguments (a lot of people on the right do arguing that while we were justified in taking out Saddam Hussein by force it was unwise to actually go that route).
On the infantilization issue: if ordered to torture are they absolved of any personal responsibility? If ordered to shoot into a crowd that they are pretty sure consists entirely of civilians (but their commanders insists is not)? How far up the chain does this absolution extend, because then it could be argued that no one in the military other than the president ever makes a moral decision for which they can be held responsible (other than the one to disobey an order).
If we invaded Canada because their new prime minister said our president has bad taste in ties, would the decision of Soldier A to follow orders and start killing resisting Canadians be morally equivelant to the decision of Soldier B to go to jail rather than follow orders?
|