Well it's true.....

If you really don't care about a given country, then trying to introduce a better way of life is certainly a waste of time and resources. It's a much better idea to let the combatants kill each other off and let someone else rehabilitate the leftovers.

I reiterate the call to bring all the troops home (except Iraq) and let's tend to our own business.

Why on earth didn't we occupy the Soviet Union sooner?

Perhaps it's just me but tis something eerily similar about you and and people like macgupta that I can't quite put my finger on.

Well fish or cut bait as they say. Either you're on the hook to rescue every last man woman child and goat or you're not. Once you pull an Angelina Jolie and hand pick the cute furry causes and toss everyone else in the trash all you need do is cop to that preference. I couldn't care either way.

North Korea: 2 million dead from famine

Congo: 3 million dead in civil war

Algeria: 150,000 killed in Islamic violence

West Sahara: 20 year civil war

Chad/Sudan: well you know

Somalia: a bloodbath

Chechnya/Ossetia: some estimate 250,000 killed or more

Burma: who knows?

Sri Lanka: 30,000+ killed in the last 10 years

Egypt: 30,000 political 'disappearances' a year

Nigeria: some estimate 20,000 dead in the last 5 years of violence

Indonesia: still killing people in East Timor

Uganda: 350,000 killed in violence with the LRA

West Africa/Sierre Leone, Liberia, Cote d'Ivoire: perhaps as many as a million killed

Biafra: 1 million dead

Now let's blame evil white Bwana American and go home. Mission Accomplished. I think when you put everything on the scales, most of the world is profoundly and structurally incapable of not pursuing genocidal murderous mayhem. But if you think wringing your hands is going to work, have at it.

If you would have me into your homes to take your lives, I could set you free.

I'm not interesting in "rescuing" the Iraqis. I'm interested in allowing them to live their lives without American bombs falling on them.

Those stupid "savages" don't seem to like bombs from foreigners falling on them and killing their children. Don't know why. They're odd that way.

And I for one would never presume to interfere with that cultural heritage. I agree, leave them be and let them unwind whatever destiny they have in mind for themselves. Apart from a few choice places rich westerners like to vacation, no one in the developed world will notice. I've been in the Sahel, and trust me, the 'hel' part is spot on.

North Korea: 2 million dead from famine

Congo: 3 million dead in civil war

Algeria: 150,000 killed in Islamic violence

West Sahara: 20 year civil war

Chad/Sudan: well you know

Somalia: a bloodbath

Chechnya/Ossetia: some estimate 250,000 killed or more

Burma: who knows?

Sri Lanka: 30,000+ killed in the last 10 years

Egypt: 30,000 political 'disappearances' a year

Nigeria: some estimate 20,000 dead in the last 5 years of violence

Indonesia: still killing people in East Timor

Uganda: 350,000 killed in violence with the LRA

West Africa/Sierre Leone, Liberia, Cote d'Ivoire: perhaps as many as a million killed

Biafra: 1 million dead

Now let's blame evil white Bwana American and go home. Mission Accomplished. I think when you put everything on the scales, most of the world is profoundly and structurally incapable of not pursuing genocidal murderous mayhem. But if you think wringing your hands is going to work, have at it.

-- Electro Robot

Or somebody else's.

You can bet we've been involved in most of those at one time or another, genius.

Do they still hang people at the Hague? In public, preferably.

There is a simple but unacknowledged fact behind Hiatt's nonsense: air superiority is of consequence only for the combatant that fails to achieve ground superiority.

Thus there are few more obvious indications of failure in Iraq than the ongoing perceived need in Iraq for the U.S. to bomb from on high.

So of course Dead End Fred wants to mobilize a few hundred brigades per crusade. Even he understands that winning somewhere -- anywhere -- will require ratcheting up the size of the force a bit.

And perhaps he is right -- another three or four hundred thousand troops, billeted in Iraq for another decade or so, and we just might establish sufficient ground superiority to finally eliminate the need to drop bombs on hospitals.

Good show.

http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1985/21185a.htm

Remarks at the Welcoming Ceremony for King Fahd bin `Abd al-`Aziz Al Sa`ud of Saudi Arabia

February 11, 1985

The President: Ahlan wa Sahlan [Welcome]. It's a great privilege to welcome a world statesman, a leader of Arab and Muslim people, and a good friend of the United States, His Majesty King Fahd bin `Abd al-`Aziz Al Sa`ud. [...]

[...] The citizens of the Western democracies and the Muslim world, by all that they believe to be true and just, should stand together in opposition to those who would impose dictatorship on all of mankind. [...]

- - President Reagan, February 11, 1985

The Associated Press, June 12, 1987

Religious Lobbyist Sees ''Christian-Bashing'' In GOP

A religious lobbyist says some Republicans, including Vice President George Bush, are engaging in "Christian-bashing" and may drive the religious right to form its own party.

Robert Grant, chairman of Christian Voice, criticized Bush for telling a joke about evangelist Oral Roberts. . .

Christian Voice is a lobbying group that issues a "Biblical Scorecard" on what it calls "the family-moral-freedom issues." They include not only abortion and school prayer, but also support for increased defense spending, "Star Wars," and aid to anti-communist insurgents in Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Angola and elsewhere. . .

- - The Associated Press, June 12, 1987

you got all these soldiers, if you don't use, people will ask why their taxes are supporting a 'defense' machine bigger than the rest of the world, together. so naturally, you gotta use 'em. besides, using results in wear and destruction, so you can transform more taxes into mic profits. eisenhower saw the results and warned america, but somehow no one since has said anything.

news flash, folks: the bad guys won, they've been running america for a long time, you're not smart enough to see it, not brave enough to change it, and the rest of the world can expect visits by the american military every time dubya's dad wants to pump up carlyle group's profits.

naturally, they will strike back when and how they can. if there are any people left who think american foreign policy has no ill effects, such as the 9/11 attacks, they are as stupid as dubya is hypocritical. 3000 casualties should have provoked introspection, the expenses of preventing another such attack should have inspired someone to ask: "why are we so hated?" sorry, it's not because you're so wonderful.

hiatt's a dimwitted apologist for the current notably boof-headed regime. he shouldn't need a reply, but i suppose gg makes a living by 'outraging' several times a week. since he never has anything to say about 'why', he really isn't much more useful than hiatt, they are book-ends, in it for the money.

america's problems are much more serious, incurable most likely. you're just too dim, too ignorant, too arrogant to figure the world out. so you'll keep butting your collective head against reality, until finally the head breaks. it will, reality always has the last word.

in the meantime, choose yer 'king fer a day' as tho' it mattered. argue about 18c a gallon, as tho' this was more important than imperial war, melting polar caps, alternative power sources. and never, ever think think that killing people all around the world might have consequences 'not necessarily to the advantage' of americans not invested in munitions making.