... you would think that somebody who ostensibly studied history at whatever prep school he went to, got an Oxford degree, and spent 10 years as Prime Minister wouldn't sound like a goddamned World Net Daily editorialist when discussing recent Middle Eastern history.

I mean, why not ask "Why are there so many refugees?" or "Why are there about half a million people dead?" That makes about as much as "Why are they so angry?"

it would be enough if Blair were just allowed to fade into obscurity, perhaps as Bush's faithful English gamekeeper, but his recent actions -- trying to cement a fascist police state and now expecting the Iraqi natives to bend their knees and thank us for doing what they're simply too backward to do -- well, I hope he and Cherie have the most miserable old age any evil political couple have ever had. That he is still able to show his face in public proves that the Brits are no longer a great people.

A Rand-McNally geography textbook from 1903. In it is a chapter on the various "races of man" Due to a peculiar accident of history, it lists the Chinese as "the least developed" because of their lack of a phonetic alphabet. Of course it describes a Pyramid with "Caucasians" at the peak. You're quoting a document from 1926. In the grand sweep of history, that's an eyeblink ago.

The good news is that we think these attitudes are worthy of comment. In that regard, we've come a long way in a short time. But the basic idea that Northern Europeans owe it to the rest of the world to provide "civilization" at gunpoint still permeates our thinking. We still have quite away to go before "All Men Are Created Equal" reaches far enough into our collective consciousness to render such conversations moot.

I'll have to chew the cud for awhile.

I feel like a pair of needle nose pliers are in my tummy.

The article will take time to digest.

I'll need to pass a pair of needle nose pliers.

I can read more seriously later in the day.

Imagine the French bombing the hell out of the colonies, then occupying us for years, all in an effort to "free" us from George II. Imagine Tory sympathizers stirring up trouble for the French, with the remaining 2/3 of the colonies' population living in terror.

We would have seen in an instant that the French were here only because they were enemies of the British.

And we would have wanted them out tout de suite!

The Iraqi government started announcing civilian deaths in March 2005. In the last 12 months (5/06-4/07) they acknowledge 22,435, and an average of 1,870 a month. (Source ).

Iraq’s population is 27,499,638. (Source )

The U.S.’s population is 301,139,947 (same source) and we lost 2,750 in the Twin Towers and a total of 2,973 in all the 9/11 attacks, not including the 19 hijackers themselves.

This is 0.00987248% of our population. The same % of Iraq’s population is 271.5 people.

So every 4.41 days, the same % of Iraq civilians are killed as we lost in all the 9/11 attacks.

This of course does not count dead Iraqi military or security forces, does not count people who die because the infrastructure is broken, and does not count people who flee the country.

Incidentally, Iraq has lost 12,228 civilians in the last 6 months

10,206 civilians in the previous 6 months

3,923 civilians in the 6 months prior to that

4,186 civilians in the 6 months prior to that.

Though the worst month was 9/06, the trend does not look good.

And Blair can wonder why they aren't grateful

This is completely irrelevant, but how on earth did you find that text from 1926?

I reallly like your paragraph starting "In general, human beings do not appreciate..."

This is completely irrelevant, but how on earth did you find that text from 1926?

The benefits of having someone work with me now to help with research. I saw that Blair article, asked him to look for similar justifications for British colonialism where colonialists praised themselves for helping the subjugated races by bringing them such great opportunities.

As it turns out, it was not difficult to find. He filled my mailbox with many British imperialists making arguments that sounded exactly like Blair's:

- King George III, Proclamation of Rebellion, 8/23/1775

"Whereas many of our subjects in divers parts of our Colonies and Plantations in North America, misled by dangerous and ill

designing men, and forgetting the allegiance which they owe to the power that has protected and supported them; after various

disorderly acts committed in disturbance of the public peace, to the obstruction of lawful commerce, and to the oppression of

our loyal subjects carrying on the same; have at length proceeded to open and avowed rebellion, by arraying themselves in a hostile manner, to withstand the execution of the law, and traitorously preparing, ordering and levying war against us:

And whereas, there is reason to apprehend that such rebellion hath been much promoted and encouraged by the traitorous

correspondence, counsels and comfort of divers wicked and desperate persons within this realm."

Full of fun and laughs until the end.

But really, Blair is just mimicking his handlers in Washington, just as he has done for the last 6 years. Here's Bush from a mid-January interview on CBS:

Asked if he thinks he owes the Iraqi people an apology for not doing a better job, Bush says, "Well I don’t, that we didn’t do a better job or they didn’t do a better job?"

"Well, that the United States did not do a better job in providing security after the invasion?" Pelley clarifies.

"Not at all. I think I am proud of the efforts we did. We liberated that country from a tyrant. I think the Iraqi people owe the American people a huge debt of gratitude. That’s the problem here in America. They wonder whether or not there is a gratitude level that’s significant enough in Iraq," Bush replies.

The more things change................

Which of our non-allies in the mid east, west Asia are in fact more liberal and democratic open societies than the ones we support? Are Yemeni elections somehow more tainted than Algerian elections for instance? Is Kazhakstan nominally more 'free' than Uzbekistan? Are the upper middle class people of the Gulf States somehow worse off than the Freedom smelling

patriots of....where? Sudan?

And more importantly, in the context of middle eastern, west asian geo politics, what exactly IS an ally? A customer? A friend? A country of shared values? What? Seems that in reality all of these states are simply looking for the best overall bargain wherever they can. Iran for instance buys nuclear technology and weapons from Russia using German credit. Syria does more or less the same thing but with the help of French banks. Libya, ditto, and so on. I'm left wondering what you think who is an ally who is not and by what measure this one or that one ranks anywhere near what you or I would call nominally open?