Comments on: No such thing as “National Interest” http://www.yazadjal.com/2003/06/28/no-such-thing-as-national-interest/ Tue, 02 Dec 2008 19:41:52 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.1 by: Ravikiran http://www.yazadjal.com/2003/06/28/no-such-thing-as-national-interest/#comment-61 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2003/06/28/no-such-thing-as-national-interest/#comment-61 The example he gives at the end is a non-sequitor... The example he gives at the end is a non-sequitor…

]]> by: Ravikiran http://www.yazadjal.com/2003/06/28/no-such-thing-as-national-interest/#comment-62 Tue, 30 Nov 1999 00:00:00 +0000 http://www.yazadjal.com/2003/06/28/no-such-thing-as-national-interest/#comment-62 well because 1) He claims that there is no such thing as national interest because most of the time the interests of citizens conflict with one another 2) The example he gives puts the family in the <i>wrong </i> for other reasons, not because the action is not in the family interest. It is wrong for the family to go and burn down another family's house, but the action may still be in the first family's interest (depending on how it turns out) So finally he ends up making the point that the Iraq war may have benefitted the Americans (i.e the first family) but is still wrong because it hurt the Iraqis. Even if this were true, it has nothing to do with his point that there is no such thing as <i>national interest</i> well because
1) He claims that there is no such thing as national interest because most of the time the interests of citizens conflict with one another
2) The example he gives puts the family in the wrong for other reasons, not because the action is not in the family interest. It is wrong for the family to go and burn down another family’s house, but the action may still be in the first family’s interest (depending on how it turns out)

So finally he ends up making the point that the Iraq war may have benefitted the Americans (i.e the first family) but is still wrong because it hurt the Iraqis. Even if this were true, it has nothing to do with his point that there is no such thing as national interest

]]>