Noam Chomsky versus young conservative

A young conservative accuses Chomsky of hating America, and is promptly refuted.

From Chomsky's book, "9-11."

"When countries are attacked they try to defend themselves, if they can. According to the doctrine proposed, Nicaragua, South Vietnam, Cuba, and numerous others should have been setting off bombs in Washington and other U.S. cities, Palestinians should be applauded for bombings in Tel Aviv, and on and on.

"It is because such doctrines had brought Europe to virtual self-annihilation after hundreds of years of savagery that the nations of the world forged a different compact after World War II, establishing - at least formally - the principle that the resort to force is barred except in the case of self-defense against armed attack until the Security Council acts to protect international peace and security.

"Specifically, retaliation is barred. Since the U.S. is not under armed attack, in the sense of Article 51 of the UN Charter, these considerations are irrelevant - at least, if we agree that the fundamental principles of international law should apply to ourselves, not only to those we dislike." Chomsky, 9-11, p.66

He also points out that Bush rejected the offer by the Taliban to turn over bin Laden:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/bush-rejects-taliban-offer-to-su...

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• Chomsky
• conservative
• war
• against
• terror
• terrorism
• in
• Afghanistan
• refuted
• humilated
• speech
• lecture

[SFOtter]

What I find impressive about Chomsky, aside from his humanist viewpoint and mastery of facts, is that he never loses his temper in debate, maintaining civil discourse throughout, despite whatever challenges his opponents toss his way. You hear no inflammatory rhetoric, no name-calling. When he states that the U.S. acts as a rogue nation, he uses our own govt.'s very criterion and facts to substantiate.

[PrometheanRunGood]

Patriotism... it's a helluva a drug.

[chris99103]

@halflifeproductionz and btw who are you that you feel qualified to determine if Chomsky failed or not? The list of books this man has written is longer than the list of all class essays you ever have written in your entire school careers you idiot..hes awared a dozen international awards, he developed the propaganda model which describes modern media.Whats on your side after 26 years..oh I see..a Razor1911 cracktro...respect bro..you are really in some real important shit

[chris99103]

@halflifeproductionz conservatives love war ?..you did realized that any administration since decades promoted war no matter if democratic or conservative do you? there is no difference in the partys anymore...the US society is heading straight into a cooporative fascist system and the PatrioAct,NDAA2012 and the Military Commissions Act2006 are effectively converting the US into a military dictatorship no yet officially declared but wait until people stand up..then you see

[calum66]

@rouzbehazshab Because he reads deeply , writes , and speaks with great authority and he appears to have a highly developed moral conscience. -- and a great many, intelligent and influential people listen to him ( although clearly nothing like enough ).

[halflifeproductionz]

why is he a young conservative? conservative pricks just love war. the person was probably a leftist who supports the war. wrong title. and noam chomsky fucking fail yet again!

[rouzbehazshab]

why not stick to linguistics, really?

[artist4africa]

Get em Noam!  You're killing him.

[rickbar123]

Noam is a God. Young Con = just another hand job.

[iiwatcher]

When Chomsky is right, does that make him some kind of flawless god? This is such an elementary matter, as to almost be a waste of time. Instead of attacking the man, he would have done better to address the issues, and present better arguments and proposals. All in all, not very impressive.

[iiwatcher]

Basically a very long Op Ed piece, attacking Chomsky's character. The first consideration would be whether or not the quotes used would uphold Windschuttle's assertions in context. The second, is how much relevance his argument even has. Of course, it would be quite a remarkable thing to agree with everything a person says, unless we're ready to engage in personality worship. If there is hypocrisy in Chomsky, does that render everything he says wrong, of no value, or not useful? cont