Florida Marlins
OF ARMS AND THE ANTI-CHRIST
Or, Fish-Wrap in the War Zone
No, this is not an essay about Iraq, despite what the title apparently implies. [Jackson Lears, in his March 11th essay in the New York Times, is the best read on the religious underpinnings of that impending "war."] This is, instead, a glimpse at the latest incarnation of the Florida Marlins, a team whose infamous fire sale five years ago produced as much saber-rattling in the stathead community as the marathon dancing partnership of Rumsfeld and Powell have done in the halls of international "diplomacy." The Fish have an owner, Jeffrey Loria, who is just begging to be invaded, trussed up like a turkey, and sent to Guantanamo for an extended Caribbean "vacation." Loria was not around when the Fish first self-unraveled, but his pasty presence here in the present simply makes everyone who’d pinned their hopes on the Marlins feel unbearably bellicose.
It’s hard to be sanguine about a team when one suspects the owner of being ready to commit roster hara-kiri at the drop of a hat, and many of you have long since dumped the Fish out of your aquarium. This was the team that was supposed to prove how a brilliant GM could trade established talent for prospects and build a championship team. Some smooth talk, a snap of the fingers, and—voila! Instant pennant (just add water).
What happened? The brilliant GM (Dave Dombrowski) left when the ownership changed hands, and the Fish remained stalled just below the .500 mark. Interestingly, however, Florida managed to improve over its 2001 record despite losing two-fifths of its starting rotation (Matt Clement and Ryan Dempster) and their best hitter (Cliff Floyd).
So what did the Fish do in the off-season? They sent two more starters, center fielder Preston Wilson and catcher Charles Johnson, to Colorado, winding up with speed-and-defense (center fielder Juan Pierre) and a potential closer candidate (Tim Spooneybarger). That move saved them enough green stuff to sign Ivan Rodriguez and absorb an arbitration loss to lefty Mark Redman, acquired from Detroit for two pitching prospects.
Their strangest move of the off-season was to unload one of their better remaining hitters, left fielder Kevin Millar, in a bizarre two-step transaction that eventually sent him to the Boston Red Sox
So are the Fish still sizzling themselves to a blackened crisp in the frying pan, or is this the year in which the three pitchers they’ve kept to anchor their rotation (A.J. Burnett, Brad Penny and Josh Beckett) take a cue from the golden trio of the Oakland A’s and start burning down the house? Let’s follow the form of most of our fellow travelers in prognostication and take a look at the Marlins’ roster position by position.
Catcher
The big question: how will Pudge adjust to the NL, and playing half his games in a pitcher’s park? Ivan Rodriguez used to hit better on the road than at home, but that hasn’t been the case for three years, and since 2000 he hit almost two-thirds of his homers at the hitter-friendly Ballpark in Arlington.
The answer: if he slugs .500, it’ll be a good deal for the Fish, who’ve only committed one year to him. Florida has been controlling the running game pretty well over the past couple of years; while Pudge will continue that, he won’t make a dramatic difference in it for them.
Backup Mike Redmond is a solid .300-with-singles hitter, which means that when/if Pudge gets hurt, the Fish will not find themselves flopping around on dry land.
First Base
Derrek Lee is 27 this year, and it would be providential if he could step up to a peak season in 2003. What appears to be holding him back is his penchant for starting slow:
When AB R H D T HR RBI BB SO BA OBP SLG
April-May 510 64 119 22 5 21 60 51 144 .233 .303 .420
June-Sept 1109 184 330 68 9 55 171 160 269 .298 .386 .524
That’s for the last three years. If Derrek, who’s slated to the Marlins’ cleanup hitter, can break out of his early-season malaise, he just might put up the monster season that the Fish need in order to make a race of it. The power and the strike-zone judgment are there; all that’s needed is that Derrek bring his entire game with him in the first sixty days of the season.
Second Base
Luis Castillo is a throwback to the classic leadoff man—a singles hitter who hits .300, takes walks and steals bases at a rate that is above the break-even point. He’s hit over .300 in three of the past four seasons, but he appears to be giving ground in terms of walks (only 55 in more than 600 PA last year).
The Marlins’ chances of contending revolve as much around Luis getting his OBP back up around .400 as they revolve around Derrek Lee’s ability to slug somewhere between .550-.600. If both can achieve those goals, the result will be enough extra runs to give them a shot at Cinderella status.
Shortstop
Florida is going to give enigmatic Alex Gonzalez another shot at holding the shortstop job in 2003. After a marginally promising season in 1999, Alex has fallen on hard times, hitting just .228 over the last three years. He does appear to have figured out that a strike zone, in fact, exists; this means that there’s an outside chance he’ll develop a second act to his offensive production. The Fish would probably settle for something like his 2001 season, but they’ll need more in order to really contend.
As a defender, Alex has been a bit error-prone, but he does have very good range. He’s got one, maybe two chances to have a future in Miami, so he’s going to need to show improvement somewhere—and very soon.
Andy Fox is the infield spare part, capable of filling in at shortstop for the duration, which is exactly what he did in 2002.
Third Base
Mike Lowell is going to bat fifth for Florida in 2003. He established career highs in doubles and homers last season, despite hitting .145 (12-for-83) during August. He’s what you might call "journeyman plus," a solid player who isn’t ever going to be the bellwether of a team.
Who AB R H D T HR RBI SB CS BB SO BA OBP SLG
Lowell 2002 597 88 165 44 0 24 92 4 3 65 92 .276 .346 .471
#5 NL 2002 610 82 160 32 2 22 91 7 4 67 123 .262 .339 .430
When we compare Lowell’s 2002 to the average production of #5 hitters in the NL last season, we see that he’s a bit above average (about 11% as measured by OPS+, prior to any park adjustment).
Like Derrek Lee, Mike has his own early-season pattern, though it’s a bit different: a hot April is followed by a cold May.
Left Field
Yes, that’s Al Martin, USC’s phantom linebacker and the man of many wives, taking dead aim at the Marlins’ LF job. Al skipped the Year of the Palindrome after getting cut by the Cardinals, but he’s been hot in the early going down in Florida, while Todd Hollandsworth (the ex-Rookie of the Year whose total of major injuries is even more plentiful than Al’s combination of wedding bands and letterman’s jackets) has started slowly. [Update: Hollandsworth has come around in recent days, going deep in three of the last five exhibition games.]
Of course, neither of these guys is really much of a solution for the loss of Cliff Floyd and Kevin Millar, but batting one of these guys seventh in your lineup for a couple months won’t kill you—so long as you come to your senses in time and give the rapidly aging Abraham Nuñez a crack at the job in June. Nuñez isn’t that much younger than Hollandsworth (the gap has narrowed from seven years to four...), but he still could have a decent career built around secondary offensive skills, plus he’s a much better defensive player.
Center Field
The doomsayers have been lining up to take their licks at Juan Pierre, the latest poster boy for "Coors Field jet lag" (a concept that Rob Neyer did a pretty good job of debunking, in fact, in one of his columns). Most of the knocks on Pierre come from the fact that he hit poorly away from Coors in 2002; his career record on the road, however, isn’t quite so ghastly (.283 BA, .330 OBP).
Don’t get me wrong: Pierre is no prize. He’s going to be a marginal hitter who will be a pale follow-up in the #2 slot to Castillo, but the two of them might manufacture a few extra runs now and then that could prove useful to a team that figures on being in a lot of close games. Pierre will probably spend a lot of first innings giving himself up to get Castillo into scoring position; it’s not the kind of offense that latter-day fans and/or statheads are used to, but it has its uses, especially if the team has good enough pitching.
One thing that we can all agree on, no matter what camp we’re in: whatever Pierre does this season, it will done cheaply ($600K).
Right Field
Juan Encarnacion is another one of those players who inspires derision from a certain segment of baseball fandom—and why not? He has some tools—a dash of speed, a pinch of power, a thimbleful of defensive versatility—but they’re all randomly arranged appurtenances. He’s all parts and no sum.
Of course, he is turning 27 (assuming we can believe his listed age, of course...), and if Brock Hanke were writing this he’d surely want you to keep that in mind. Players don’t always have freakish peaks at age 27, but enough of them do—and enough of them are players who don’t show any significant improvement in prior seasons—that it’s at least something to consider. Don’t rule out the notion (however absurd it might appear on the face of it...) that Juan could hit 30+ HRs this season, especially from lower in the Marlins’ batting order (where, for reasons ranging from sample size to post-hypnotic suggestion, he’s hit better historically).
Starting Pitching
The Fish cut bait last year, sending Matt Clement away in a salary dump and Ryan Dempster in an unmarked car. This caused a certain amount of wailing in some quarters, since the Marlins’ rotation going into 2002 was supposed to be the biggest thing since sliced meatloaf. Instead, the Marlins rotation was all dressed up with no place to go—except onto the shelf, as various injuries dogged A.J. Burnett, Brad Penny and Josh Beckett.
That was the bad news, and that was last year. This year, it appears that all three are ready to go, and no trio of pitchers has a bigger potential upside. Florida’s chances to finally be the team that many expected them to be rest on these three right arms, and there’s no reason why they shouldn’t put things together at last.
Burnett and Penny have had good seasons already (Burnett last year, before a mysterious elbow problem sidelined him, and Penny in 2001). Beckett’s blister problems appear to have been solved, and he’s in the same class of flame-throwing phenom as Mark Prior of the Cubs—in short, a big power pitcher of the future whose time could just be right now.
There’s no reason why these guys can’t be as big of a Big Three as Zito-Hudson-Mulder, and if they can achieve that status, it will serve to mitigate a whole lot of offensive deficiencies that the team might have.
[Late breaking news: Burnett, who’d pitched fabulously thus far in the spring, was taken out in the third inning of the Marlins’ March 15th game against Baltimore due to "tightness" in his right forearm.]
Behind this trio is Carl Pavano, another injury reclamation project who was acquired from the Expos in the middle of last year. Pavano’s elbow problems, which surfaced in 2000, may finally be clearing up; after being battered around for in 2001 and most of 2002, Carl finally put together a decent string of starts for the Fish last September (3-0, 3.55 ERA, 1.27 WHIP in 6 GS).
Lefty finesse pitcher Mark Redman was acquired from the Tigers over the off-season, where he was a poor man’s Tommy John on a team that burned before it crashed. (23% of Redman’s starts for Detroit last year were in the QMAX "Tommy John region": lots of hits, few walks.) He was shut down with a "tired arm" in mid-September and has been getting battered around so far in the spring, but the Fish will probably open with him in the rotation.
If either Pavano or Redman get too stinky, little lefty Michael Tejera will get the first replacement call. Tejera was better out of the pen last year, but he showed enough in his eighteen starts to warrant another shot in the rotation if need be. As a spot starter working primarily at home in Pro Player Stadium, Tejera could be quite useful: he posted a 7-3, 3.84 record as a starter in Miami last year.
Behind Tejera is righty Justin Wayne, who was picked up with Pavano in the deal with the Expos for Cliff Floyd. Wayne is ticketed for AAA this year, but he’ll be just a call away if anyone goes down.
Bullpen
Incumbent closer Vladimir Nunez will be back in that role this year, with Braden Looper as the primary set-up man. Beefy (6’5", 240 lb.) Blaine Neal might leapfrog both of them, however. The Fish’s catch in the Wilson-Johnson trade (involving that strange pass-through of Mike Hampton), righty Tim Spooneybarger, is another guy who has closer credentials: he had 11 saves with the Braves’ AAA club at Richmond before spending most of last season in Atlanta.
Aside from Tejera, the only other lefty in the Marlins’ bullpen will be the erratic Armando Almanza, who alternates between being unhittable and unable to hit the broad side of a blue whale. Actually, a look at Almanza’s splits reveals what is likely a conditioning problem: over the past three seasons, he’s had a 2.83 ERA before the All-Star Break, but a 7.15 ERA afterwards.
Manager
Jeff Torborg caught Sandy Koufax’ perfect game, which isn’t a bad thing to be able to out on your resumé. As a manager, however, he is commonly perceived as being a good bit less than perfect. In his three previous stints at the helm, Torborg did oversee one team transformation: the Chicago White Sox went from 69-92 to 94-68 under his wing in 1989-90. It’s sometimes claimed that Jeff can wind up standing in the way of his team’s success, usually by not being able to just keep his mouth shut. Given the turmoil surrounding the Marlins’ ownership, the attendant roster turnover caused by ongoing financial distractions, and the injury problems he faced, however, Torborg turned in a pretty good performance last season.
Prognosis
The Marlins scored 43 fewer runs in 2002 than in 2001, while giving up 19 more. They won about four more games than what their Pythagorean Won-Loss record suggests.
But they’ve kept the three best arms they have, and they figure to put a good defensive team behind them. If they can get 100 starts from Burnett, Penny and Beckett, and can win 60% of those games, they need only play a bit below .500 in the games remaining to post a 90-win season.
To do that, realistically, the Marlins will need to cut down on runs allowed, because their offense can probably only gain, at best, 50-75 runs over last year’s team. Torborg’s 1990 White Sox shaved 147 runs off their opponents’ scoring from the previous season; something similar will be needed to keep the Fish in school for the post-season.
Have they got a shot at it? Yes. It is likely? Likelier than most everyone thinks, but not something on which to bet the ranch. I’d like their chances more if they can find a way to improve left field; but, then again, everybody knows which way I lean.
And then, of course, there’s the final question. Can we handle the specter of Jeffrey Loria in the post-season? Hey, if we can survive Steinbrenner, we can survive anything.
2003 ZiPS
Projections - Click for info
PO Player G AB R H 2B 3B HR RBI BB SO SB CS BA OBP SLG
C Rodriguez 107 415 63 129 30 2 20 61 24 68 6 5 .311 .349 .537
1B Lee 162 568 89 160 33 6 27 82 81 144 12 6 .282 .371 .504
2B Castillo 144 585 88 179 17 6 2 38 66 81 48 16 .306 .376 .366
3B Lowell 154 573 78 160 42 0 22 94 58 84 3 2 .279 .345 .468
SS Gonzalez 114 405 43 98 23 2 7 41 23 81 4 1 .242 .283 .360
LF Hollandsworth 125 401 43 97 24 1 11 42 38 90 10 8 .242 .308 .389
CF Pierre 160 633 77 172 21 7 1 36 37 47 42 13 .271 .312 .332
RF Encarnacion 145 547 69 146 22 6 20 72 39 102 18 7 .267 .316 .439
c Redmond 80 224 18 66 11 0 2 22 18 27 0 2 .295 .347 .371
c Castro 101 309 50 90 21 0 15 51 27 65 1 1 .291 .348 .505
1b-of Banks 139 422 70 112 31 2 15 61 48 65 4 5 .265 .340 .455
if Fox 121 374 45 92 12 4 4 34 42 80 22 7 .246 .322 .332
if Mordecai 92 195 21 50 15 1 2 18 15 39 2 3 .256 .310 .374
if Hooper 128 475 65 127 17 3 1 31 39 71 14 9 .267 .323 .322
of Williams 116 405 52 94 23 1 8 37 22 70 9 9 .232 .272 .353
of Martin 117 384 62 104 17 5 11 38 36 73 8 9 .271 .333 .427
of Nunez 143 470 66 108 18 4 13 47 55 130 22 10 .230 .310 .368
PO Player W L ERA G GS IP H ER HR BB SO
SP Beckett 6 6 3.79 20 18 95 81 40 12 33 112
SP Burnett 10 10 3.95 27 26 173 152 76 13 74 171
SP Penny 8 9 4.04 27 27 158 152 71 14 47 130
SP Redman 11 9 3.68 28 26 171 169 70 14 40 126
SP Pavano 7 7 4.38 27 18 117 119 57 13 37 87
SP Wayne 8 9 4.22 26 26 147 149 69 11 50 97
SP Olson 6 6 4.14 26 21 126 125 58 15 34 102
RP Tejera 7 9 4.43 38 21 138 135 68 16 51 116
RP Neal 3 3 3.45 58 0 60 52 23 2 24 53
RP Almanza 2 3 4.70 56 0 44 39 23 6 28 51
RP Kent 1 1 4.27 34 0 59 55 28 5 33 52
RP Mairena 4 5 4.50 55 0 68 70 34 8 23 48
RP Nunez 6 7 3.81 54 11 118 118 50 14 47 92
RP Spooneybarger 2 2 3.55 64 0 71 60 28 4 34 70
CL Looper 3 3 4.44 75 0 75 77 37 6 29 50
ZiPS is not a playing time predictor and should not be added for team totals.
Don Malcolm
Posted: March 16, 2003 at 12:00 AM |
19 comment(s)
Related News:
General
Reader Comments and Retorts
Go to end of page
Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.
Petrick "potentially great"? Thats a stretch.
"Diplomacy" is a different thing altogether, because there was never any real attempt made by the adminstration to find a diplomatic solution to Iraq. So it's quite proper to put "diplomacy" in quotations, because using that word in reference to the Bush administration's approach to Iraq is an extreme stretch.
Hope that helps, kids.
s/
""Diplomacy" is a different thing altogether, because there was never any real attempt made by the adminstration to find a diplomatic solution to Iraq."
What's it like living in your own little fantasy world?"
It's very nice, Mr. Powell. The sky is a very nice shade of clear-blue every day, all of the citizens have a deep and well-balanced understanding of history and culture, and trotting out trumped-up plagiarizations of abandoned post-grad theses and claiming them as "proof" that everyone should have just trusted us and attacked when we said so is not diplomacy.
But ultimately this just kills the flow of any discussion of the Marlins -- and the reason people started reading this article was to read about, and discuss, the 2003 Marlins.
Slate.com has "the fray," a way to give feedback on topics they cover -- like Iraq. They run many, many articles about Iraq, so I'd suggest going there if you feel a need to comment on the war.
2. ZiPS is pretty pessimistic on Beckett. I thought I'd read that his 2002 numbers were better than his 2002 ERA would suggest. Is that right, and do people think he's ready to break out in 2003?
""and trotting out trumped-up plagiarizations of abandoned post-grad theses and claiming them as "proof" that everyone should have just trusted us and attacked when we said so is not diplomacy."
and my standard of proof won't be met unless I'm given access to top-secret classified intelligence information, or a major city is anthraxed. And even then I'll be skeptical, because our own government could easily manufacture the evidence. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if Bush somehow engineered the 9/11 attack himself!"
Your hyperbolic hysteria notwithstanding, the question wasn't concerned with some shadowy 9/11 conspiracy theory or even if the veracity of Powell's presentation. The question was about whether or not Powell's presentation of questionable merit combined with the arm-twisting and carrot-and-stick machinations behind the scenes should be properly called "diplomacy." The obvious answer is no.
Perhaps if you had a little more respect of "liberal elitisms" like logic and critical thinking, or even reading for comprehension, you wouldn't make these sorts of mistakes.
""The question was about whether or not Powell's presentation of questionable merit combined with the arm-twisting and carrot-and-stick machinations behind the scenes should be properly called "diplomacy." The obvious answer is no. "
We have in fact been engaging in diplomacy, not just for the last six months, but for the better part of twelve years now. The diplomacy failed a few years ago. And yes, a lot of diplomacy goes on behind the scenes, and quite often involves a significant amount of arm-twisting and deal making. Our biggest mistake has been letting this situation drag on as long as it has. It may not meet your standards of what diplomacy should be about, but there's really nothing that can be done about that. "
Iraq hasn't acted even vaguely aggressively in the last 12 years. He has not invaded any coutries. He has not attacked us. Diplomacy, though perhaps not as neatly packaged and idealistic as you'd wish, has been working.
""Perhaps if you had a little more respect of "liberal elitisms" like logic and critical thinking, or even reading for comprehension, you wouldn't make these sorts of mistakes. "
You don't even want to go there buddy. As someone who has helped to engineer one of the key pieces of software that's being used at CENTCOM to coordinate the battle plan at this very moment, I'd put my logical skills up against yours any day of the week. Depending upon what happens in the next few days, I might even have to hop on a plane out to Wait-and-Wait to help support the warfighters and make the world a safer place, even for ungrateful malcontents like yourself. You don't have to thank me."
Coding is not critical thinking. You may be the niftiest code jockey in the whole of the modern world for all I know, but your argumentation in this exchange, assuming you are the same person who was using the "Colin Powell" and "Liberal translator" duck blinds, is lacking and logically inconsistent. In point of fact, you're arguing to points I've not made, setting up red herrings and strawmen left and right, and avoiding the meat of the debate at all possible turns.
Perhaps you should stick to writing code for spooks and skunks. If it's your skill, stick with it. But don't expect me to run out thanking you for being an accessory to murder and the subversion of the very ideals of liberal democracy, all the name of "making the world a safer place", or any other horseshit moral equivocation for indefensible actions. I'm too much of a patriot to support your Machiavellian warmongering, if you don't mind.
s/
Of course, Malcolm didn't have to set the trap...hopefully lesson learned. Even mentioning certain political topics is like putting a bat and a piñata in a room full of eight year-olds. Some people simply cannot resist unfurling their opinions and their disagreements about others', anywhere, anyhow, anytime.
Otherwise, Don, a very nice, well-written and entertaining synopsis.
I'm all for discussions that digress, but I'd rather not have to weed through that stuff to get to the Marlins comments. A simple tag at the beginning would make it easier for people to read what they want.
And while we're at it, let's take all of this hostility and focus it on the true evil that is Jeffrey Loria.
March 18, 2003 - Above poster
["Iraq hasn't acted even vaguely aggressively in the last 12 years. He has not invaded any coutries. He has not attacked us. "
Nice try, but I don't think so. Iraq has led several state-sponsored terrorist attacks against us in the last 10 years, including (but most likely not limited to) the attempted assassination of President GHW Bush, the 1993 World Trade Center bombing by the Iraqi intelligence agent going by the name Ramzi Yousef, and most likely the anthrax attacks in the aftermath of 9/11. Not to mention the fact that Iraq has launched attacks against our troops in direct violation of the treaty ending the Gulf War numerous times. ]
Sam: The assissnation attempt was unsuccessful and didn't warrent retaliation *by the guy they tried to kill.* The '93 WTC attack was prosecuted and the people who carried out are in prison. Iraqi involvement in that attack should have been broached in 1993. Waiting a decade to retaliate removes the moral impetus for retaliation, if it were there to begin with. Iraqi engagements of British and American patrols in the no-fly zone were answered with retaliatory strikes against military targets, as needed.
Iraq has been contained for 12 years.
[As far as you claiming the mantle of being a patriot, I swear I'm almost ready to throw up. The dictionary defines a patriot as "One who loves, supports, and defends one's country." You don't even remotely qualify under any standard. Why don't you try telling the truth about how you really feel about America?}
Sam: Cry much? I love, support and defend my country. My country is a nation constituted on ideals. The aggressive invasion of another country, even one ruled by a ruthless tyrant, outside of the convention of international law *which my country created after the last major world war*, is antithetical to the ideals that constitute the nation. American patriotism is a patriotism toward ideals, not institutions. The current actions of the institutions of the American state are in violation of the ideals on which that state is supposedly founded. As a patriot to the *nation*, that is, to the ideals which constitute the state, it is my duty to oppose the actions of the institutions which subvert those ideals.
But hey, wrap up in the flag and pretend you're promoting freedom and democracy if you want. You won't be the only misguided fool in the world.
Well there's a good excuse.
Believe it or not, it is possible to read something that offends you and not reply, for everyone else's good.
RMc: "War's a terrible thing; invading another sovereign nation isn't very cool either. Both are preferable to leaving Saddam in power for one more minute. And you know it."
I tend to disagree. Let me rephrase for what I know: "War's a terrible thing. So is leaving Saddam Hussein in power on minute longer than is absolutely necessary. But the subversion of the ideals of democracy, of the basic notion of the rule of law, simply to avoid process and avoid diplomatic red tape is worse. The US no more has right to invade Iraq than a victim has right to redress his harm outside of the court systems. Vigilantism is not an option. By making it not only an option, but the preferred option, the US is destroying the very structures by which tyrants like Hussein and Milosevic *can be rationally reproached.*"
In a world where the US has every right to invade Iraq, Saddam Hussein has every right to hold onto his power base by any means necessary. The US can't deplore bully force politics and then use resort to the same when they don't get their way.
Lt. Whomever: You, nor anyone else, "provide" freedom. It is not a gift you deign to bestow upon the masses, out of the gracious goodness of your heart. Freedom is inherit. It is only ever taken away. (If this is a sarcastic reference I didn't get, my bad.)
s/
RMc:
"Oh, Chr*st, here comes the moral equivalence bullsh*t. OK, fine. You win. America's as bad as Iraq, and Bush is a bigger murderer than Saddam. No Blood For Oil, War Is Not The Answer (tm). Uh-huh."
Your strawman is burning, if anything. I never made the "moral equivalence bullsh*t" argument, in case you didn't notice. America is quite clearly not as bad as Iraq (though there are high level advisors of the current administration who deserve a trial for war crimes/crimes against humanity as does Saddam Hussein.)
My argument is not moral equivalency but rather the procedural hypocrisy. There's a difference. One can not claim to be defending the rule of law and international convention while ignoring it completely. Without the rule of law and international convention, there is no moral argument for taking out Hussein. The act of ignoring the procedural basis on which just more must reside removes the very structure by which the international community *can sanction tyrants.*
In short, I'm not opposed whatsoever to the removal of tyrants and the attempted promotions of liberal democracy. I'm all for that, even if it requires bloodshed (i.e. Kosovo, Gulf War I.) But in managing to trounce the very system they claim to be defending, the current administration has lost completely the moral validation of their actions.
If they'd just listened to Canada two weeks ago, this could very well have been avoided.
"The world burns while the likes of Mr Hutchinson fiddle."
The world isn't burning any moreso than it ever has. And there's no IN in my last name. Pay more attention to the world and you might notice these sorts of things.
Yep, that's exactly what you need. You certainly would hate to expand your autistically simplistic view of the world or anything.
s/
Please note that has Mr Hutcheson has failed to respond to RMc's questions (especially the "what would you do with Saddam?" no-brainer) and is back to ad hominem attacks. Mr Hutcheson has now officially lost the argument. We return you to Baseball Primer, already in progress.
__________________________________________________________________
Actually, I mentioned earlier in the thread that everything could have been taken down a much more rational road if everyone had listened to Canada two weeks ago.
s/
You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.
<< Back to main