Replies

Ummm, YOU brought it up, when you differentiated between bombing the poor and boming the not-poor. Get it?

I have already explained to you that I mentioned the poverty of Afghanistan because it has made them less able to withstand a military attack, not because of some half-baked international socialist belief in the moral superiority of workers or somesuch.
I really don't know what else I can say to clarify my position.
Maybe you should try this.

I have already explained to you that I mentioned the poverty of Afghanistan because it has made them less able to withstand a military attack, not because of some half-baked international socialist belief in the moral superiority of workers or somesuch.

LOL! You are the classic liberal hypocrite! I figured your name was meant sarcastically. Save yourself from yourself, first, and try that that page for yourself, big guy. Listen carefully, and try to comprehend... I'll use small words:

When... you... feel... that... something... non-economic... is... worse... for... poor... people... than... for... non-poor... people... then... you... are... using... Socialist... class... envy. The details are irrelevant.

Even if we were bombing France, the Bahamas, or Monaco, the individual citizens are JUST AS HELPLESS!!! The ONLY way to "withstand a military attack" is duck-and-cover.... rich or poor. The governments and their military might be better equipped to respond due to the national treasure... but... the... people... are... S-O-L... just... the... same. Having an eight-digit bank account won't help you when the explosions are ripping up the foundation of your mansion. Nobody will care if you have a credit card with a high limit when they are waiting for the Red Cross to come in with medicine and doctors. Nobody will let you cut in the bread line when the rationing begins because you have a more expensive pair of shoes on.

Understand?

Or are you pathetic enough to think that Afghanistan's poverty exempts them from warfare, and that the United States should only take military action against those with a GDP above 'acceptable' limits, set by the UN perhaps? Exactly how Socialist are you without even realizing it?

I'll try one last time, then I'm done with you: "Wealth level should NEVER determine how to behave in a certain situation." If that is a determinant for you, then you don't understand FReedom, liberty, equality under the law, fairness, morality, or the Constitution. Your comment, that Afghanistan should be given a pass simply because it is poor, was poorly thought-out, improper, anti-American and would be counter-productive if ever utilized at the national level.

/rant>

I have already explained to you that I mentioned the poverty of Afghanistan because it has made them less able to withstand a military attack, not because of some half-baked international socialist belief in the moral superiority of workers or somesuch.

LOL! You are the classic liberal hypocrite! I figured your name was meant sarcastically. Save yourself from yourself, first, and try that that page for yourself, big guy. Listen carefully, and try to comprehend... I'll use small words:

When... you... feel... that... something... non-economic... is... worse... for... poor... people... than... for... non-poor... people... then... you... are... using... Socialist... class... envy. The details are irrelevant.

Even if we were bombing France, the Bahamas, or Monaco, the individual citizens are JUST AS HELPLESS!!! The ONLY way to "withstand a military attack" is duck-and-cover.... rich or poor. The governments and their military might be better equipped to respond due to the national treasure... but... the... people... are... S-O-L... just... the... same. Having an eight-digit bank account won't help you when the explosions are ripping up the foundation of your mansion. Nobody will care if you have a credit card with a high limit when they are waiting for the Red Cross to come in with medicine and doctors. Nobody will let you cut in the bread line when the rationing begins because you have a more expensive pair of shoes on.

Understand?

Or are you pathetic enough to think that Afghanistan's poverty exempts them from warfare, and that the United States should only take military action against those with a GDP above 'acceptable' limits, set by the UN perhaps? Exactly how Socialist are you without even realizing it?

I'll try one last time, then I'm done with you: "Wealth level should NEVER determine how to behave in a certain situation." If that is a determinant for you, then you don't understand FReedom, liberty, equality under the law, fairness, morality, or the Constitution. Your comment, that Afghanistan should be given a pass simply because it is poor, was poorly thought-out, improper, anti-American and would be counter-productive if ever utilized at the national level.

/rant>