The are endowed by their creator with certain inalieable rights......
 

Please refer to my many posts to Slave about reading the DU site. They apply equally here.

Not fair
 

Misguided, like, the basic goal would be wrong, or like, it would be hard to execute properly? I agree with the latter. If you mean the former, why? Where is the error of philosophy in trying to save lives, improve lives, and foster happiness over slavery?

Not fair
 

Well, to start with, you're using the word "culture" in a way that is completely divorced from the way the rest of us educated, English-speaking people use it -- indeed, in a way that kinda sorta misses the point of my original post. I believe you understand this, on some level.

Not fair
 

To my memory, he's freed several more countries from totalitarian despot governments than did the last several presidents. Maybe Reagan might give him a run for his money, but . . . Carter? Clinton? Bush 1? (Okay, he's probably tied for second with Reagan.)

When did you guys become the party of "ignore that crying child, he's not mine"?

Not fair
 

They would be hard -- no, impossible -- to pull off. We need not discuss the principled grounds for objecting to an effort to change another country's government because we can't, in any event, pull it off in these cases.

Not fair
 

Penske was right. Derision has totally replaced debate. And, given my memory of college soc, and the expansive meaning of "culture" in the lexicon, it's not serving you well.

Not fair
 

There's Iraq. The jury is still out on whether the long-term solution will be much better than Hussein was at the time we invaded.

Is there another country that George Bush freed from a totalitarian despot government? I haven't been reading Powerline lately.

Not fair
 

If you seriously think that my reference to changing culture meant that I would oppose liberating Treblinka, you should go back for remedial kindergarten.

Not fair
 

This baffles me. If I see you, over the border, in chains, your family dead at your side, and a thug aiming his gun at you for the final shot, do I have to debate the principled grounds for interfering with his governance? According to you, I do. Well, I won't. You can sit here and moralize and temporize while more die, and I sincerely hope you feel nobler for it.

Not fair
 

Damn. Riposte! I yield. My argument clearly is weak.

Not fair
 

Where did I say that? I said that if the gun isn't loaded, why bother having an argument about principle.

You have a serious reading comprehension problem.

OK, never mind. You're on top of it already.

Not fair
 

You said "We need not discuss the principled grounds for objecting to an effort to change another country's government because we can't, in any event, pull it off in these cases. . . ." in the context of a discussion treating Iraq, through example of all the other countries we haven't invaded yet. We stopped that thug from taking more shots. Your "in any event" implies a connection between your principled discussion of the newly listed countries and the original discussion.

See? I did that with nary an insult. Try it. Then call Sidd.

The are endowed by their creator with certain inalieable rights......
 

Hoo!

Hooo Hoo! Heh.

No, actually I suspect that Ty was referring to those getting the shit beat out of them, and how those folks might not show up to the meeting in fear of getting flayed. Capt. Fishback, and 90 Senators, might show up to the meeting, though, to tell the Administration they can't simply torture and kill in the name of the War on Terror, which the Bushies clearly want the latitude to do.

But on second thought, I like your approach better. It allows us to chuckle in a jovial, self-contented way, and conclude over a nice cognac that those who deign to complain about torture at the hands of US personnel are simply liberal intellectuals whining about nonexistent problems, akin to library records.

Gattigap

Not fair
 

In case you haven't noticed our resources are stretched a little thin. Soon as we wrap up Iraq we will keep up the march. However, I am confused with your position. Have we spent too much money and resources on providing elections in Iraq and in Afghanistan, or do we need to spend more? Are there some other countrys that we haven't invaded yet to set up democracies that we should? Syria, Iran, North Korea - or do you think that some how we can get democracy to sprout there on there own with out using force, and we just haven't done we needs to be done to make that happen?

Not fair
 

There is another country sandwiched between Pakistan and Iran, it is called Afghanistan. Maybe you have heard of it?