Oh. I'm happy that your sons and daughters are part of our patriotic volunteer armed services.Let me congratulate you for your wonderful children.
Or are you under the impression that the draft still exists?
And in case you didn't notice, our armed forces are going after Sadam's army, not "innocent civilians".
Sadam can stop this in one minute: By resigning. He already has a place to go, and has sent his money ahead to prepare an escape trap. He could have stopped the sanctions in one minute, by disarming.
Nicely said. To veer off the path just a second . . . North Korea's Kim, according to bleeding-hearter's figures, has already starved thousands, maybe millions, of North Korean people. But he's not blamed. The rich countries, chief among them the US of course, are responsible because we haven't GIVEN ENOUGH MOOLA AND FOOD. They always manage to skip the reports that the host tyrannical government always siphons off the money and the people still starve. Then, to compound their prejudice, the bleeding-hearters bemoan the fact that there'll be, oh my God!, collateral damage if War Imperialists like us go in to replace the despots responsible for the problem.
A heartless equation one has to consider is . . . which is better . . . to kill hundreds or even thousands by accident or, again according to the bleeding-hearter's own figures, to let millions die of malnutrition later? To me, the answer is a no-brainer. Which is why the bleeding-hearters can't answer it -- they don't have one.
Sorry my tangent was so long, but the same argument holds for Iraq. We'll never have accurate figures for how many innocent Iraqis have died at Saddam's hand. Only those countries who care about the sanctity of life, like the US, bother to count the dead. But does anyone with an open mind really believe the numbers of innocents killed if we invade will be higher than the innocent Iraqis So-damn-dumb Saddam kills on a regular basis?