Grotesque over-simplification

Submitted by David Quin (Sweden), Feb 4, 2003 at 04:08

What is the point of a pseudo-discussion in which most contributors offer nothing but facile, glib, aggressive over-simplifications about European stances on Iraq? Play up Bush's stance and actions in the best possible light -- the US as a heroic defender of good against evil -- while caricaturing various European positions in the worst possible light as cowardly appeasement by accomplices of evil. It is the oldest trick in polemics and reveals merely the effort to win an argument rather than advance understanding.

No doubt the US media in general encourages this, with its astonishing inability to question US attitudes and policies and its sound-bite approach to international affairs. But Americans as a whole are not quite so simple-minded and want to be convinced that war is necessary.

Does that mean that they too are appeasers?

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".