 |
|
wPuri sermonis amator |
|
|
 |
Politics and Pop Culture.
And occasionally informative, amusing, or bizzare non sequiturs.
Matt's in charge here, others can post.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wMonday, March 03, 2003 |
|
|
|
Response to Andy
You're wrong on Iraq. You're wrong on the Civil War. You're even wrong on the Japanese. You're just plain wrong.
The Japanese - we didn't need to bomb them. The Japanese tried to surrender before Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Truman bombed them to show off the Atomic Bomb to the Russians."Based on a detailed investigation of all the facts and supported by the testimony of the surviving Japanese leaders involved, it is the Survey's opinion that certainly prior to 31 December 1945 and in all probability prior to 1 November 1945, Japan would have surrendered even if the atomic bombs had not been dropped, even if Russia had not entered the war, and even if no invasion had been planned or contemplated."
- The United States Strategic Bombing Survey, a commission formed by Harry Truman after the war Looking at the hundred year legacy of Jim Crow, you can say that the South ever changed its mind about how moral or legal slavery was? Sure, the institution itself was ended, but because reconstruction was not properly undertaken, we've STILL got people in this country who think the confederacy is a good idea. Bush didn't even bother to include any money for Afghanistan in his budget proposals for next year. You trust this man to lay the groundwork for the 20 year occupation period that democratizing Iraq will take?
I don't give a damn about whether or not Iraq has prohibited weapons or not. He's not giving them to terrorists and he's not caused any trouble over the past 12 years. Al Qaeda is on the loose. North Korea's getting Nukes. Iran has a more advanced nuclear program than Iraq AND they're ruled by a radical fundamentalist islamic democracy (Yeah, it's weird. But that's the best way to describe it.) Saddam killed his own people in the past, Mugabe's doing it now. Pull your head out of the brainwashed media circus and think about things for a bit.
And actually, it's been proven that Saddam does play by the rules. We gave him the weapons to gas his own people, and we looked away when he did it. We supported him when he invaded Iran. President Bush actually sent him a message in writing saying we wouldn't do anything if he took over Kuwait, and then changed his mind. Saddam isn't stupid. He just miscalculated when he invaded Kuwait because of mixed signals from the first Bush administration. He's a Stalinist, not a terrorist. And we know how to deal with them. Containment worked for 50 years with Russia, it's worked for 12 with Iraq and it will continue to work.
Or would you prefer that we invade and Osama Bin Ladin another hundred thousand recruits? Remember how 15 of the 19 highjackers were from Saudi Arabia? Remember why? Yes, that's right, because our military is in their country supporting an unjust government. All invading Iraq will do is give Al Qaeda a larger talent pool. Oh, and Dick Cheney will get a shit load of oil.
Michael Savage is a racist fascist lunatic. That's all I have to say about that.
Your question about the Nafta editorial says that you either didn't read it, or didn't understand it. The solution was mentioned in the article - end (or dramatically cut) agricultural subsidies in this country. We don't have Free Trade when the government subsidizes 20% of the industry.
Quote of the Day:"With all the power that a president has, the most important thing to bear in mind is this: You must not give power to a man unless, above everything else, he has character. Character is the most important qualification the President of the United States can have."
- Richard Nixon
posted by
Matthew Carroll-Schmidt at 4:57 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
