Freedom Isn't Free
posted by mochi at 6:48 PM
Sunday, September 25, 2005
Video Start Your Day
News Snipet Blog
Stuff That's Going On
American Scene
Michael Bérubé
Center for Citizen Media: Blog
CJR Daily
David Corn
Donkey Rising
Gadflyer Flytrap
In Media Res
Media Nation
New Donkey
Orcinus
The Plank
Political Animal
Real Clear Politics
Romanesko
Street Prophets
Andrew Sullivan
Talking Points Memo
Talking Politics
TPMCafe
Tapped
Matthew Yglesias
Previous Posts
- Broussard is one of the good guys
- America's Fun-est Family
- Back with a Vengeance
- Changing leadership not enough
- A couple of quotes
- Uphill Battle
- Avian Flu
- FEMA Chief, Over Qualified?
- Compassionate Conservatism
- One week later
Blogroll
6 Comments:
Freedom costs a buck o five.
Those pro-war people are so ridiculous with their talking-point-slogan signs. What the hell does the conquest of Iraq have to do with our freedom?
Terrorist supporting regime, attacks on U.S. and U.S. interests, no connection there. None whatsoever.
Chickenhawk: freedom might be goin' up to 5 bucks a gallon...
Sean:
Terrorist supporting regime - So are we and a lot of our allies. Are we going to invade them, too? And then invade ourselves?
attacks on U.S. - Iraq has never attacked the U.S.
and U.S. interests - If you're referring to Kuwait, George Bush Sr. told them the U.S. had no interest in that issue, basically giving them the go-ahead.
The truth is, Iraq was a secular, not theocratic, nation, and the war has created more terrorism and endangered the world more than ever. I'll concede one thing: it does affect our freedom now, because the more new terrorists are inspired by the Bush regime, the less free from terrorism we will be.
Sodom was secular when it suited and "religious" when it suited. He supported terror networks that were targeting the U.S. His people had met with al Qaeda, there was at least one al Qaeda training camp in Iraq. He was paying the families of suicide bombers attacking Israel $25,000 each.
I suppose reasonable people can disagree over Iraq. I just find it confounding when people blame Bush for not "reading the signals" and stopping 9/11. Yet when, through the lens of 9/11, Bush decided not to wait around for Sodom to develop and/or hand-off WMD's he gets continually criticized.
Then, when he handles North Korea the way his detractors said he should have handled Iraq - with diplomacy - he gets criticized even more.
It seems like no matter what he does, it will not satisfy his opponents.
Post a Comment
<< Home