thehappycon
I watched the whole debate. A couple of things stick out for me:
- Buckley clearly wins.
- Chomsky cherry-picks his history.
- It’s a disinterested act if: “my attempt to help or your attempt to help a particular nation is in order to spare you a great ordeal in the future which will harm you, your family, etc.”
- “There is an observable distinction by intelligent men between a country that reaches out and interferes which the affairs of another country because it has reason to believe that a failure to do so will result in universal misery and that country that reaches out and interferes with another country because it wants to establish Coca-Cola plants and Chase National Banks and the like.”
- “A soldier can be as useful as a bushel of wheat.”
This is all very relevant for today’s war debate. Do you believe that without American interference, the situation in Iraq would have led to universal misery?
Part I:
Part II:
Filed under: Uncategorized | Tagged: american imperialism, Chomsky, conservative, Iraq War, William F. Buckley
