Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • This is some of the worst liberal blather I've heard in a long time, and pretty well sums up the position of most pinheads in this country. Let's take some points in particular, shall we?

    The imminent war was planned years before bin Laden struck, but it was he who made it possible.

    So, Clinton was planning a war on Iraq then? What is he referring to here?

    Enron; its shameless favouring of the already-too-rich; its reckless disregard for the world’s poor, the ecology and a raft of unilaterally

    • The cost will be minimal. The benefits, assuming a free democracy is set up and there is help in rebuilding from the West (and there would be), far outweigh the costs, both to the Iraqi people, the U.S., the Middle East, and the world. Let's not forget what a mother-fucker Hussein is. This guy *is* Stalin, only his army isn't nearly as big (thank goodness). How many Iraqi lives have to be lost at Hussein's hand? YOU ARE NOT SAVING IRAQI LIVES.

      The costs wont be minimal, and they haven't been minimal during
      • by djberg96 (2603) on 2003.01.23 11:53 (#16305) Journal
        The costs wont be minimal, and they haven't been minimal during the last gulf-war. I heard something about roughly 300,000 casualties. Those were numbers I wasn't aware of and numbers you wouldn't have expected if you had followed the news coverage by this time.

        Actually, I was referring to civilian casualties. 300,000 sounds like an estimate of Iraqi military casualities.

        Pardon me, but that's a silly statement. Do you want to declare war against a particular political system or against the people suffering from it? No, you need to come up with a more intelligent (more costly, more tricky, less simplistic) solution than dropping a nuke. The aim is to get rid of a few people not of a whole nation (or city, for that matter).

        Well, I was hoping my sarcastic exaggeration was obvious, but apparently not. In any case, I vote we take a poll on the subject...in Uganda.