BCT Editorial – 5/15/08

This page was last updated on May 15, 2008.

Relative reality; Editorial; Beaver County Times; May 15, 2008.

An editorial defending moral relativism. Who didn’t see this one coming?

The editorial leads off with, “From time to time, anyone who says ‘yes, but’ to the absolutes of right-wing moralists is condemned as a moral relativist.” Conspicuous by its absence is an example. I guess there are so many examples it must have been too hard to choose just one. <g> No mention is made of left-wing moralists.

Anyway, onto not destroying poppy fields in Afghanistan. I’m no expert on the situation, but I suspect the decision has to do with picking your battles on your own timeline DURING A WAR. The primary objective is eliminating the Taliban. As bad as opiate trafficking may be, that’s not why we’re in Afghanistan. We can deal with the poppy fields after we and the Afghans eliminate the Taliban. Without saying it was right or wrong, isn’t that what we did with the Soviet Union during World War II?

The editorial says, “This editorial is not meant as criticism of the Marines or the military. They are carrying out policy, not creating it.” Of course it’s meant as criticism, but that’s not the primary point I want to make. The editorial gives the impression the “Marines or the military” have no role in determining battlefield policy. This is absurd. If the “Marines or the military” believed zapping the poppy fields as they ran across them had more benefits than costs, I’d bet we’d be destroying the fields.