Source: Washington Post Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28092-2004Dec26.html Title: "Occupation Hazards" Date: December 27, 2004 And you thought liberals had bad ideas .... Moving on-- ______________________ Notes: Raspberry, William. "Occupation Hazards". Washington Post, December 27, 2004; page A29. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28092-2004Dec26.html
Is that stupid or what? After you invade their country like some gangrenous vulture, you ask why we should treat the native inhabitants nicely. And to top of stupidity, you wonder why anyone would want to blow up an American...
if you treated the iraq civis any WORSE you wouldnt have anyone in that country LEFT. Sure you might kill them all but there wouldnt be one person who wasnt against you
You guys don't even have a clue as to what's going on over there. Oh and yes I do! There are people over there that have been living in worse conditions since Saddam took over. There are people there that couldn't drink clean water because they weren't popular with the bathists. I have a friend over there right now who is part of a team who has given electricity and clean water to a village that hasn't had the luxury since Saddam took over. The children absolutely love our troops but the bathists and the Syrians and Iranians don't like that and they do incredibly cruel things like cut little childrens heads off for being friendly with the Americans. I say once again you guys should stop eating from the bowl of liberal dribble and find out for yourselves what is what.
You're right. We should kill 'em all, like the Ayn Rand people say. Thank you for making that clear, Lowefly.
in principle i agree with the Ayn Rand institute guy. he goes to show 2 things: 1) Bush and his "neocons" are not as evil as ANSWER and MOVEON would have you believe 2) a lot of people believe in all stick and no carrots -- the institute is not a dot in a big void -- they represent a large group of people and probably, though few will admit, i believe, a US majority of people's "id"s (what Jung was referring to) the ones who are guilty of moral cowardice most of all are the current gov't in the White House, not the US public, because the public would support Bush (though the MSM is a different story). there are however some small groups in the US are guilty of suicidal [political] tendencies... which is even worse than moral cowardice
Its historical, every "War on" the US has announced has failed in tremendous fashion. The US is overextending itself, and itse not able to deal with fact no matter how benevolent you think you are...a invasion is never benevolent.
