Babak, can you for one second take your brain off auto-pilot and just pretend to understand that it isn't "blind" hatred; that it could actually be well thought out, reasoned, substantiated hatred of US foreign policy? "Jubilation" as a basis for foreign policy? Are you serious? Do you honestly, truly think that should be stance America should adopt? Maybe you do. Of course, the real "blind" ones are those you think that the "jubilation" was the actual goal of the war, or the policy towards Iraq. Yes, those who fall for that blatant BS are the true blind ones. The simple fact is, the US government has never really cared about the effects on the general population of a country when formulating its foreign policy. The examples of this are beyond numerous. So ask yourself, who's being blind? It's the STATED objective that "legitamizes"* a war Babak, not the beneficial side-effects. (Unless you take the US government's undeclared but obvious position -- that there is one set of rules for the US , and another for all the other countries.) If you can't grasp that, than any discussion with you is wasted. * (yes, it's a term we've made up -- only because we want to avoid the tragic history of mankind)
This kind of mouthing off really doesn't warrant a response, but anyway. It is FAR from "obvious" you were "right all along". In fact, it is becoming quite clear -- due to the inability to locate the WMD -- that you were WRONG all along. Of course, it may well be that you, Rearden, don't actually understand the issue well enough to discuss it, so I'll take that into account.
I don't claim to be an expert on China, but I don't really agree that the Chinese government in its current form is quite as bad as the Iraqi government. At least the Chinese government is now operating in a way that holds out some promise for the Chinese - allowing growing numbers of Chinese to experience economic freedom, introducing dynamic elements of change, and so on. Nor do the Chinese currently appear to be pursuing an aggressive military posture (other than improving their own army). Currently, engagement seems much more likely both to help the Chinese and to secure our own interests than military confrontation. That said, if, hypothetically, the only way to liberate the Chinese people was through a military invasion- in a way that would cause less harm to the Chinese then merely letting the status quo continue, and would eliminate real risks that some aggressive Chinese posture posed toward the world generally and the U.S. in particular - and the US government had satisfactorily explained its reasons and objectives, then you wouldn't find me out marching against it.
I'm gonna do a candletrader type post..... I would like to just take a moment to thank everyone here for participating in MY thread. MY thread is one of the greatest threads in ET history. No need to thank me. Once again, I would like to thank you all for posting to MY thread, one of the greatest ever. FRuiTY (acting as candletrader)
"It is FAR from "obvious" you were "right all along". In fact, it is becoming quite clear -- due to the inability to locate the WMD -- that you were WRONG all along." HA HA HA HA H A ! DENIAL AIN'T JUST A RIVER IN EGYPT ! but its good for a laugh. loL
Well, I certainly do hope that Janeane Garofalo is putting on her kneepads. March 6th on The Pulse w/Bill O'Reilly. Garofalo has stated Bush is as dangerous to the world as Saddam, but "in a different way." OâReilly: âIf you are wrong, all right, and if the United States -- and they will, this is going to happen -- goes in, liberates Iraq, people in the street, American flags, hugging our soldiers, all right, we find all kinds of bad, bad stuff, all right, in Iraq, you gonna apologize to George W. Bush?â Garofalo: âI would be so willing to say Iâm sorry, I hope to God that I can be made a buffoon of, that people will say you were wrong, you were a fatalist, and I will go to the White House on my knees on cut glass and say, hey, you were right, I shouldnât have doubted you. But I think to think that is preposterous.â Add another loser celebrity to the pile......
Terrific article from across the channel. Excerpts: So, something of a cakewalk after all, then. No major set piece battles with the "elite" Republican Guard. No massive numbers of civilian casualties - "millions of women and children killed", as Shirley Williams, among many others, predicted. No relentless house-to-house street fighting. No insuperable problem with the desert heat - the Iraqi summer seems to have gone the way of the Afghan winter in that earlier impracticable American war effort. No uncontrollably burning oil fields in southern Iraq, leading to intractable environmental catastrophe. Nor has there been a great humanitarian disaster or a flood of refugees across the Iraqi borders. One aid worker in Basra was asked by a reporter how difficult it would be to get the city back up and running. He said it should not be hard at all because, as he put it: "We haven't had any real war here." It was just a matter of revving up the generators to get the power and water back to normal. The population has gone in for a bit of triumphalist looting of Saddam Hussein's local palace, but even that was petering out yesterday. I have this delightful fantasy of .....the Guardian comment page editorial staff putting their hands up en masse and saying: "Well, actually we got that a little bit wrong." ...But I'm not holding my breath. Those for whom America is always wrong will not be slowed down by this momentary setback. Rather like Mr al-Sahaf, they will not even appear to notice the tanks in the streets of their ideological neighbourhood. They will look away from the welcoming crowds of Basra (yes, they really did cheer, once it was safe to do so) and just move smartly on to the next American "crime against humanity". I am off to Washington at the end of the week, where a think tank has invited me to discuss European anti-American attitudes. What shall I say to them? That the obvious truth - America is resented because of its enormous power - is only a fragment of the picture? That the foundation of anti-Americanism lies deep in the pathology of a Europe that has never recovered from its own guilt and self-loathing over the two great wars of the past century? But how much reality can the ideologically committed be expected to digest? And when has self-contradiction and incoherence ever been a problem for the Left? See it all at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/...0902.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2003/04/09/ixop.html Yep, the Left will always have something to bitch about. They are masochists of the highest order.