did an intellectual argument, in favor of our intervening in Vietnam cease to exist? Well, as I say there, I think that there may have been a time when there was something to debate. For example, I think that in the middle fifties, though I was opposed to the policy and I think that it was right to be opposed to it, nevertheless I think it was a debatable issue, in a sense in which it is, it is no longer a debatable issue. Why is that? [cough]
Because at the moment I think it’s really an issue of the survival of the existence of Vietnam as a, as an entity, as a social and cultural entity. I think that’s what’s at stake.
But even that could be intellectually argued, couldn’t it? Well, in the same sense in which Auschwitz could be intellectually argued. Well, no, I mean in a different sense. Well…
No, I think in the same sense. In fact, don’t forget that there were people who, who argued in favor of Auschwitz, who gave…
No, no, I ha- hadn’t done that at all. Um, uh, I, um, hadn’t had any such on this program nor do I intend to, but it seems to that, um, even if what you’ve said were correct, there could be a perfectly legitimate argument over, for instance, the continuation of the State of Anguilla,
Hmm.
or the continuation of the State of Biafra, or the continuation of the State of Gaur, but… I, I didn’t, I didn’t, men-, say, talk about the existence of the state, American Terror libretto © Jeffrey Lependorf 2008
5