Z--- As you know war's a bit of what you might call a dirty business. What some have tried to say boils down to something like this: Had you rather: A. Live in a small bamboo cage for 5 years in Vietnam? B. Have your head cut off in Iraq? C. Have a leash put around your neck at Abu Ghraib? Choice is yours, Z. And there ain't a man in your family if you don't directly answer the question.
Shortly after Abu Graib was turned over to the Iraqi's the prisoners were screaming that they wanted the Americans back. I guess the Americans weren't so bad after all.
Can you please provide an url to a reliable source to back your statement? I think what you are saying is probably true, but would like to see a reliable source.
Fallacious argument built on the fallacy of a false dilemma. Same stupidity as Bush's: "You are either with us or against us."
Unreal. As usual your hypocrisy is sickening. Are you not the one who said that we cannot unilaterally condemn the hanging of a young woman in Iran for the crime of 'acts inconsistent with chastity' (flirting with a young man of her own age, apparently about 18)? Are you not the one who said we must defend a tribal elder's right to genitally mutilate children in the name of 'tradition'? Did you not defend these acts in another thread for 40 posts, amid a flurry of charges of moral relativism? Are you not the one who said that we must respect the 'cultural differences' and that these acts are not illegal and immoral? And now you're here accusing others of moral relativism? You're the poster boy for moral relativism. How you're able to say these things without any apparent shame is beyond me.
Apparently there are no males in the Zzzzz household. Not that many of us didn't know that all ready...
He's also the same nimrod who said that "only" hundreds of innocent citizens being murdered by released felons is proof that the parole system works. He's also the same tool who believes pedophilia is a laughing matter; he also wrote that he wished the murder of another ET member's children by a pedophile. He's a lonely, divorced alcoholic aging faster and faster. Bitterness is his stock in trade. He's going to die a very, very lonely human being. Such a foul creature doesn't even understand the word "shame."
They're war criminals decided by whom? A World Court? A Global Nation? Who defines these global platitudes? Kofi? An entire generation of libs in the West has been fooled by this ridiculous concept, perhaps because they enjoyed an unusually long period of relative peace and prosperity all their lives. The world is a competitive place with competing interests. If America is cut down to size (which a lot of you wish for), the world will become a far more dangerous place, until there is a new dominant power. You should wonder about all the wars and genocide that didnât happen all because of Americaâs sheer power. Roosevelt and Churchill would have been war criminals, but guess what? They won the war!
Of course not. Why? Because they are on our side. Dumb Olâ Seymour thinks he is a Citizen of the World. He worries about troublemakers in Iraqi jails, because he canât tell the difference between our soldiers and the people who shoot them. Why? Because Olâ Seymour Hersh is First Citizen of the World Nation. He is above it all. And heâs willing to sell out his own country to prove it. Dumb post WWII babyboomers. I swear. There are tons of them who think this way, and itâs dangerous as hell. Of course, U.S. soldiers and Western civilians are first killed, then charred, then dragged on streets, and finally hung on bridges for the amusement of jumping and cheering Arab rent-a-crowds. But noooo. Olâ Seymore wonât touch that, because as a Citizen of the World, America needs to be kicked around.