552 Years ago, today, Gutenberg began printing the bible. This was the beginning of a process of technical innovation that led to the point where any moron can spew opinion and invective for large audiences to read :-) (Well, audiences, anyway. All three of you or so.)
Iran recently said that they would stop their uranium enrichment if the western nations did likewise. What could be wrong with that proposal? Moral equivalence suggests that all nations should have equal rights, right? How could anyone in this country that continues to produce enriched uranium rationally deny that right from anyone else. How about the simple case of us versus them. Ahmadinejad has led his people with nationalistic fervor in chants of "Death to America". How hard is this decision?
As long as nations still practice nationalism we can not drop our guard for however peaceful and egalitarian we may wish to be, they indicate that they do not feel the same way. I just can not imagine handing a gun to someone who has said that they intend me imminent harm.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Fortunately, there's no real moral dilemma since it's not the US government that decides who can and can't produce enriched uranium - it's the UN Security Council, who represent society as a whole.
Nothing makes me feel so secure as Americans being happy about turning their sovereignty over to a foreign power.
Post a Comment