Dove feathers in the President's mouth etc

[jbor]

And it's a shame that anyone who is critical of Saddam's regime, and who
dares to believe and hope that the UN can prevent him and other murderous
tyrants like him from continuing to kill tens and hundreds of thousands of
innocent people, automatically gets labelled a war-mongerer or
Bush-supporter, as if lives in places "over there" aren't worth a cracker.

It's a pity that the anti-Bushies have to keep trying to deny the evidence
of Saddam's past atrocities and the blatant obviousness of his future
intentions to keep their propagandism and party political flags afly.

What was Howard Zinn's argument? Sure Saddam's a tyrant, but there's lots of
other tyrants around too, so it's more "moral" for the international
community to sit back, do nothing, and give them all a free hand because it
would be unfair to single out just one of them. It's the exact same policy
the US was following from 1933-1942, a pretty solid ten year stretch there
when "American forces were not engaged in some war or other around the
globe". Yeah, that worked out just great.

best


on 1/2/03 2:41 PM, Otto at ottosell at yahoo.de wrote:

> It's really a shame that everbody who's critical of Mr. Bush's policy
> immediately is called a knee-jerk liberal, a cowardly leftist or is
> considered as anti-American, as if the freedom those who lightheartedly call
> for war claim to defend isn't based upon the freedom of speech and different
> opinions.
> 
> It's a pity that the war-coalition is unable to answer questions honestly
> (for example: "where's the evidence" or "isn't this war really about oil?")
> in public.
>