It is not an exaggeration to say that had McCain’s foreign policy not prevailed, literally hundreds of thousands and possibly more human beings around the globe would have been spared the incalculable suffering that they in fact were made to endure. A substantial number of these people would not have lost their lives.
. . .
For the better part of the last 2,000 years of Christian (Western) morality, it was understood that the goodness of an act is not determined by a person’s subjective intention. Even if he desired to produce a wonderful or utopian state of affairs, the means by which he pursues that end may still be immoral.
To paraphrase St. Paul’s memorable remark, we must never do evil—even if good may come from it.
To put it another way, the ends never justify the means.
Yet if the only factor that is of moral relevance in judging a person’s conduct is his intention to produce a desirable outcome, then the ends do indeed justify the means. In fact, the ends always justify the means.
. . .
Morally good ends can never justify immoral deeds. This most people and all good Christians have always known. However, even on the assumption that the ends do justify the means, the argument in McCain’s defense still fails. It fails on its own terms.
There isn’t a single war for which McCain has advocated that has come remotely close to making the lives of the oppressed any better. Just the opposite, in fact, is the case. Iraq is the classic textbook illustration of how McCain-style American interventionism plucks the oppressed from the proverbial frying pan and hurls them into a raging fire.
GrumpyCatFace wrote:Dumb slut partied too hard and woke up in a weird house. Ran out the door, weeping for her failed life choices, concerned townsfolk notes her appearance and alerted the fuzz.
There isn’t a single war for which McCain has advocated that has come remotely close to making the lives of the oppressed any better.
Bullshit.
Kuwaiti's are happy for not living under Saddam Hussein and being part of Iraq now.
So little people remember (or care). Of course then McCain was not on any leadership position, but was a senator. Yet he wasn't against Desert Shield/Desert Storm. And how conveniently people forgot that McCain wasn't part of the Dubya neocons. McCain is rather in line with the old Reagan-era Republican hawks, not the neocons.
I have no problem with the Reagan era Republicans.
McCain's political record is a stain that Annapolis will never be able to wash away....
The long term damage to the country he has wrought is unforgivable. Did he really think he was "doing the right thing?" Or is he really just a hack at heart?
Zlaxer wrote:McCain's political record is a stain that Annapolis will never be able to wash away....
The long term damage to the country he has wrought is unforgivable. Did he really think he was "doing the right thing?" Or is he really just a hack at heart?
You hate Ronald Reagan too?
I thought you guys were right-wingers. But perhaps I've got that wrong.
There isn’t a single war for which McCain has advocated that has come remotely close to making the lives of the oppressed any better.
Bullshit.
Kuwaiti's are happy for not living under Saddam Hussein and being part of Iraq now.
So little people remember (or care). Of course then McCain was not on any leadership position, but was a senator. Yet he wasn't against Desert Shield/Desert Storm. And how conveniently people forgot that McCain wasn't part of the Dubya neocons. McCain is rather in line with the old Reagan-era Republican hawks, not the neocons.
I have no problem with the Reagan era Republicans.
Reagan Era Republicans are one thing... McCain is in a world of his own.
