Replies

The war in Iraq did not change world public opinion of the US one iota. What the debate did is expose it for everyone to see. World public opinion of the US is exactly the same as it was before this whole Iraq debate began. The only difference now is because of the debate countries were compelled to reveal publicly their true opinions of the US. The Iraq debate brought world public opinion of the US to the forefront; it exposed it, it made it available, and it made it known for all who wish to see.

The left’s contention that the world now hates us because of the War with Iraq is as absurd as their liberal-socialist political philosophy is absurd. Because of this debate what we found out is that there is much resentment throughout the world because America is the richest and most powerful country. They resent our riches, our power, and (most of all) they resent our influence, and as long as America maintains its position of world pre-eminence that resentment worldwide will remain.

The only thing that would remove this world resentment of America is the faltering of our pre-eminent position, which is exactly what the left and losers like cheese eating surrender monkeys advocate. They advocate that America subrogate its sovereign authority and national interest to the U.N., which is run by a cabal of leftist-socialist-globalist, who would then cut America down to size. It’s one of the most appalling and ridiculous philosophies imaginable.

Bill Clinton recently commented that America is "too powerful" and Jimmy Carter recently published an op-ed in the New York Times condemning Bush’s determination to go to war with Iraq without U.N. approval. These leaders and all who follow them, a.k.a. the Democratic Party, advocate that America become less rich, less powerful, and less influential. They are appalled that America should seek to maintain its position of global pre-eminence and international leadership.

It is a position so against American values and principles that it is anti-American.

Ah, where to begin, where to begin. I'll just pick out a few links in the "logic" chain that are the most obvious:

PN: But I thought many of our allies, including Israel, were in violation of more security council resolutions than Iraq.

I disagree with this statement regardless, but the logic in this statement is that since other people do things the UN doesn't like, we should never bother enforcing anything. Ironically, what this person doesn't realize is that they are actually arguing that the UN is irrelevant.

PN: Mushroom cloud? But I thought the weapons inspectors said Iraq had no nuclear weapons.

This includes the big assumption that the inspectors know what the HELL they are doing, which few reasonable people believe. PN: But couldn't virtually any country sell chemical or biological materials? We sold quite a bit to Iraq in the eighties ourselves, didn't we?

This statement assumes that all countries are equally belligerent. A lot of countries may have chemical weapons, but few are ready to use them to kill as many Americans as possible as Iraq has sworn to do. And for the ones that would, they're probably next.

I'll stop there. That was amusing enough for a late night.

I can't decide which I like best.

The "missles" that the inspectors clam don't exist (you know the ones that just hit Kuwait)

Or the "weapons" that spontaneously disintegrate in ten years (never mind that anthrax spores can last 100 years and WWI mustard gas is still a major hazard when shells are found in French fields).

Similarly, US Nerve gas has to be destroyed by a specialized incinerator (nerve gas was last produced before Nixon was president) but we are supposed to think that the vx gas in Iraq was destroyed by pouring it into a pit.

Life is so much easier when you don't have to think...

nor is this leftist: Many human rights organizations and medical journals documented saddam's atrocities with nerve gas etc in the last 15 years, and many still have these documents on line. However, the peaceniks are again pushing the big lie, figuring if they do it enough, it will be believed. Just like Stalin got away with starving 30 million Ukrainians ...