quote:Originally posted by dkn:
I would venture a guess to say the other noble cause might be the slaughter of 750,000 civilians or genocide as it is commonly referred to. If the whole world was against heterosexuality would that make it right? Is the world worse off without Hussein? If we let Hussein continue the chemical warfare and slaughter would Bush win the Nobel prize because he kept the status quo? If we went in 20 years too late then we needed to go in right? The world is a messy place, always has been, but hopefully we can make it better one day at a time
dkn,
That Cop out comment, we went in 20 years to late is NOT ENTIRELY TRUE. We were in for a long long time. American and British petro companies developed the oil riches of Iraq...ostensibly for Iraq. That was 70 years ago, give or take a decade. We supported Hussain against Ayatolla Kohmenei (sp) after the hijacking of the US Embassy in Teharan. Rumsfeld SOLD the chemicals to Hussain that made that gas that killed kurds that lived in the land Saddam ruled. While Reagan was president.
What we did not do, and this was during the reign of Bush the first, was SUPPORT the anti Baathist/Hussain Uprising by the Kurds and Sheits of Iraq. By the time the Republican Guards turned the tide of rebellion against them they had taken 13 of 16 provinces of Iraq, and AFTER they were crushed by Hussain's air power and armored infantry. We belatedly instituted a "no fly zone."
Last word, I promise, HOMOSEXUALITY IS. It is no more wrong that HETEROSEXUALITY. It is equal to ASEXUALITY as well. Condemning an act does not make it wrong. Tollerating it does not make it right. In this particular context, If you don't like it. DON'T DO IT.