I’d LOVE to see one of the charlatans playing the line above enumerate for all of us the total troop numbers in Afghnaistan since the beginning of the invasion there, and how the Iraq situation dried up those numbers in Afghnaistan.

GUESS WHAT FALSE WHINING CHARLATANS ?

THERE IS A REASON NONE OF YOU WILL EVER DO THAT !!!!!!!

Complain all you want about the war in Iraq, but please stop the non-convincing absolutely baseless and NEVER FACTUALLY SUPPORTED WHINE

THAT THE WAR IN AFGHANISTAN SUDDENLY STOPPED, RECEDED, CEASED AND DESISTED- OR DISAPPEARED.

CHECK THE TROOP NUMBERS FOR YOURSELVES BEFORE YOUR IGNORANT MOUTH OF CONSPIRACY OPENS AGAIN !

( I say conspiracy- because it’s such a common line based on presumptions with ZERO FACTUAL BACKUP ! )

Thanks, please don’t censor me or be angry - I’m just DYING to see how the war in Afghanistan stopped.

So the US has the right to raise Suddam, the mad dog in 80s.

But that is precisely the point. Their foreign policy SHOULDN’T be guided by being pious and altruistic. A democracy has the moral right, but not duty, to topple dictatorships like Saddam’s. Should we go to war with every murdering dictatorship out there simultaneously? Why start a war we cannot possibly win?

It breaks down like this: unless you are a heartless person and/or really out of touch with reality, it is obvious that the US is a great, free place to live that, hand-wringing and boo-hooing aside, is probably the best place to live in the history of civilization, from virtually every standpoint. The overriding reason this is true is: capitalism and democracy. Each of us has the freedom of earn and accumulate what we are capable of, and what better incentive to individual acheivement can there be? There are no such things as ‘group accomplishments’–just individual accomplishments. And of course we want other people in the world to be free to make their own choices about their own lives. This is good for a couple of reasons. First, I don’t like to see people needlessly suffering. Second, dictatorships have an unparalleled history of starting wars, committing violence, and being breeding grounds for terrorists. Finally, you only have ONE life, and you ought to be able to spend it as you see fit, as long as you aren’t interfering with others’ rights.

So of course, we want all oppressed peoples of the world to be free. Does that mean we have a moral OBLIGATION to spend our time, money and LIVES freeing other people? No. It means that since murdering dictatorships have ~no~ moral authority, we have a moral ~right~ to end them when and as we can afford to.

My personal opinion is that yes, China is a terrible, terrible regime. But like the former Soviet Union, it will collapse under its own weight and eventually come to Democracy. It has already essentially rejected Communism/Socialism as an economic system. It’s people will be free within the next 20 years, by their own initiative. If you want some inspirational stories, read about some of the pro-Democratic dissidents in China, and what they have endured. The word is spreading, and the ailing Communist Party cannot stop it.

See? Something positive to look for ward to!

Sure, no problem… The civil rights violations Saddam’s government have been accused of are atrocious, and I hope he’s called to account for them…

but if were going after civil rights violations why not stop by Saudi Arabia, North Korea, or any number of Mid-African nations? Why not cast an eye to Central and South America and the civil right issues the people face there? Why not finish the job started in Afghanistan?

There are plenty of injustices in the world, it’s just shame George W and friends only decide to act pious and altruistic when there’s a profit attached.

We left the job in Afghanistan terribly terribly unfinished, and then we invaded Iraq. And other people wanted to move on to Syria and Iran soon after!

We cannot invade and leave chaos behind; everywhere we do tills the soil for Al Queda (and similar) to grow. This may have needed doing, but it was a windmill that could wait just a while longer.

As for the other, I’m still trying to imagine Bush and Ashcroft as members of the Enlightenment. I think if you said that to Ashcroft, he’d punch _you_ in the nose. :-D

I support American action in Afghanistan because it was necessary to disssemble the Al Quaeda infrastructure. We ought to commit necessary resources to help make it a stable democracy. Once democracy is out of the bag and allowed time to flourish, it does get ‘back in the bag’ too easily.

I support the action in Iraq because a legitimate nation has a moral right, but not a moral duty, to depose dictators like Saddam. And Saddam is an utter, murdering bastard. I think we can at least agree as to that last bit.

I worry over nation-building and invasion of the perview of a soverign state as much as anyone. A glipse at the US track record in Central and South America ought to be sufficient historical precedent to make ~any~ American president balk at the idea of installing a regime in another country. Which is why I ~like~ the idea of doing away with dictatorships and doing whatever is necessary to get these places democratic. I can only hope that we follow through on this promise. Our abandonment of Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawl was a terrible mistake and a terrible precedent that probably has many people wondering if this bit of history will repeat itself.

My concerns about others come to a swift end where my life and safety (and those whom I care for) begin. I affirmatively ~want~ to live in a world where people believe and do as they choose (religous, personal, you name it), as long as their choices do not interfere with others’ choices (especially mine). Why apologize for a hierarchy of values wherein YOU (and yours) are the most important thing to YOU (and yours)? Why balk at the idea that people who reject science and reason in favor of mysticism and gut
feelings are savages, compared to memeber of the civilization of the Enlightenment? Is it savage to treat women as chattel without rights? Is it savage to resolve your differences by killing your enemies and uninvolved civilians as a first course of action?

I am sorry if I offended those of you who are very sensitive to cultural differences. In fact, I am sorry if the tone of my original post was too strident or hostile. If I did not respect the original author, I wouldn’t have responded in the first place. I look forward to his reply to my original post.