Thanks to a little-noticed item in Bush’s budget, it won’t just be Islamist suicide bombers whose families are limned and paid off for the death of their fighters. American warriors, too, will have a rather similar emolument: a death gratuity of $100,000 plus a $150,000 life insurance payment that goes to the person who is likely to be grieving the most. If it works for Islam, maybe it will work for democracy as well. The government’s point here is control: cradle to grave and beyond. [Full Article]
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/3138/paid-to-fight-paid-more-to-die/
Paid to Fight, Paid More to Die
Previous post: The Thought Police and Hoppe
{ 75 comments }
← Previous Comments
John, I can equate iraqi people who blow them selves up to kill other iraqi citizens and other iraqi police and attack non-military foriegn contracters as MURDERERS, TERRORISTS.
1 step further. Im gonig to say that those who attack American troops are murderers and terrorists because American troops don’t attack innocent people.
You’re arguments are totally flawed John. You think that if you replace speeder with murderer that no one will care or notice that WORDS HAVE MEANING AND IMPLICATIONS. A murderer is someone who KILLS another person. A speeder meerly operates a vehicle. Is that so hard to understand??
Why is the golder rule suck a whacky system? Were trying to impose “don’t kill innocent people” in iraq and you say that “thats not thier system. there will be conflict.” Are the values of freedom only valid in the US and other white countries??
Are you serious?
“They hate America because the US military occupies their holy lands with US troops, the US government supports whichever dictator we happen to like at the time, the US government puts sanctions on their countries which makes them even poorer, and the US government gives Israel much of the weapons they use to agress against Palestineans. In additition, every night on the news they see the pictures of dead men, women, and children from Iraq and that makes them even angrier. This is why the Middle East hates America.”
Someday due to its hostile religious ideology the Mohammedan world will confront the USA and its allies whether or not it interferes in their affairs.
More reasonable Mohammedans (that is what they are – they follow the teachings of their prophet Mohammed) over the ages have recognized that holy war risked uniting the non-Mohammedan world against them. So they have settled for a policy of gradual expansion. The “fanatics” among the Mohammedan world are not so reasonable and believe that “Allah” will give them victory over the “infidels.” So they confront and antagonize the Western empires and their allies.
They apparently believe that causing a massive attack by America and its allies will get their more cautious brothers “off the fence” and force them to stand and fight the “crusaders.” Then, they seem to believe, “Allah” will give them victory and destroy by their hands the non-Mohammedan world.
Recall that both Saddam and Osama were US allies and dependents for as long as it suited Saddam’s and Osama’s purposes. The Taliban was also supported against the Soviet Union and the Northern Alliance of Afghanistan.
Joseph Adrial
That’s the truth Joseph. I cannot fathom that people are ignorant of the FACT that islamo-facists want to carry out those 5 principals and kill anyone who opposes them. Plain and simple, this is a threat your life.
ANDY
If the European Unionon decided to invade the USA in order to bring an end to the death penalty, which is in the majority of countries is abolished and considered inhuman, would you then consider the americans who fight the intruders as terrorists? Should they not according to your previos postings cheer the foreigners as heroes and fighters for freedom and human rights?
I wish that you for a moment can consider that there are differences in this world and that our ideals and values do not apply in all places. As well as a others do not apply in ours.
And try to grasp the concept and not specific word.
John
From what I see coming out of Iraq, the targets are almost always valid targets, not innocent civilians — army convoys, army personnel, people lining up to join the Iraqi army, police, etc. Granted, their methods leave something to be desired, but the idea that killing military personnel with whom you are at war is “terrorism” is quite astonishing.
Some insane maniacs who call themselves teachers of religion might tell them that, but if you ever actually bothered to look at their religion, you’d note that the Koran very explicitly requires religious tolerance, and especially protection of other “People of the Book” (i.e., Christians and Jews). [FWIW, sura 2, verse 62 says Christians and Jews are "saved" as well as Muslims; verse 79 condemns those "teachers" who claim otherwise]
This article appears to be a reinforcement of an opinion which has no real basis.
Family of military members have had payments made to them for decades now if the soldier dies. Back in the 80′s, the amount was $100k. All Bush is doing is increasing it.
The second statement I would contend is the one about economically poor classes signing up for this. The military has already debunked the myth about combat troops being mostly poor or minorities. Yes, most of the military is from poorer classes but, the facts exist that most of the combat troops in the military are white and from lower to upper middle class.
Mr. Potts has miss represented the facts to bolster his agenda, rabble rouse, and scare impressionable under grads.
Peter,
You aren’t paying attention. Roadside bombs against military targets is not what I am talking about. The majority of suicide bombers have been targeting civilians. Iraq isn’t the extent of it. Palesteinians have been targeting civilians for decades. The Saudis have been paying off their families for years.
As for your preceptions, they are wrong. Didn’t you read the paper yesterday? Bakerys and Mosque targeted by bombs. There have been a long string of civilian bombings in Iraq. Children waiting for candy, food distribution points, voting areas, employment lines, etc. More Iraqis are being killed than Americans.
Don’t be fooled by that nonsense about the peaceful stuff in the Koran. That is overridden by other scripture. The Koran is not written in cronological order but by the verse lenght. It is the religious leaders who interpret which Surah. You cannot base your understanding of Islam on what occurs in Christianity. For instance, you often hear that weapons are being stored in Mosques and fighters shooting from them. You probably assumed they were just crazy extremists. Well you would be wrong. A Mosque is both a religious and military center. That is because in Islam they are not separate. So from the Muslim point of view it is natural to store weapons in the mosque.
Don’t fall for those lies about protection of other “People of the Book”. Islam is not some shining example of tolerance. The “people of the book” are only to be protected in the way one would protect ones livestock. Have you heard of dhimmitude?
Dhimmitude is the status that Islamic law, the Sharia, mandates for non-Muslims, primarily Jews and Christians. Dhimmis, “protected people,” are free to practice their religion in a Sharia regime, but are made subject to a number of humiliating regulations designed to enforce the Qur’an’s command that they “feel themselves subdued” (Sura 9:29). This denial of equality of rights and dignity remains part of the Sharia, and, as such, are part of the law that global jihadists are laboring to impose everywhere, ultimately on the entire human race.
From: http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/#
Oh, and what about everyone else. Well they are just to be killed.
Don’t trust them, they are extremely deceptive when discussing their religion, and twist everything around. As an example, it was Islam that invaded Christian lands first which eventually lead to the Crusades. The muslims act like it was unprovoked.
I recommend you read “Islam and Terrorism: What the Quran Really Teaches About Christianity, Violence and the Goals of the Islamic Jihad” which was written by a former professor at Al-Azhar University, Cairo Egypt. He exposes the information that you can only get as a Muslim insider. BTW that is a prestigious Islamic religious school.
I’m not one of the “People of the Book” so I don’t get the benefit of becoming a inferior person under Islam. I get decapitation or worse. The same treatment you get if you try to convert from Islam to some other religion. The author of the book had several attempts on his life.
Response to Mr. Pott’s statement which follows:
Your cultural comparison is weak for making a simple comparison that American families will simply enlist people in the military to be paid to die. Additionally, the people who are terrorists and suicide bombers do not number very many. If they did, we, the Europeans, and the Israelis would have been gone a long time ago. You have engaged in a mammoth piece of sophistry in order to make an anti Bush point which appears to have little to do with real economics other than to quibble about SGLI versus death benefits.
Mr. Potts writes below:
The current benefit, as noted in the article mine links to, is a bit over $12,000 – the same as it was when I served in the late 1960s. Additional insurance (which I bought for my wife and child) was available as SGLI (Servicemen’ Group Life Insurance). Yes, Bush is just increasing it – by over 2,000 percent.
My article notes that the benefit may attract new recruits from lower economic strata, and that many of these will, as they are now, be rejected – not on an economic basis but on health, education, and criminal factors. On average, the military comes from backgrounds below the economic medians (as was I when I served). Lower incomes are more represented (overrepresented) among military members than in the population in general. The article doesn’t mention race or minorities.
I think your regard for my treatment of facts might improve with more-careful reading.
Joe Potts
So you know, Mr. Potts, I am a very loyal student of Mises but, I have rendered voluntary service unto Caesar to the tune of 12 years. I am also more inclined to fight with the rest of the worlds totalitarian or socialist regimes than our own aristocratic republic. Your comparison disregards motivations other than what you have experienced, my guess is as a drafted soldier nursing the anti draft syndrome. It might have been better to explain to people why we removed the draft instead of attacking the volunteers motives. Explain that all good imperial governments used volunteer armies to make and retain their conquests and that drafted armies are the least likely to fight. Do you have a copy of Human Action or Omnipotent Government? We are not a socialist government and are not evolving into one. An aristocratic democracy from an aristocratic republic like Athens. And just like they did, our soldiers are not driven by benefits any more than Athenian lower-classes was.
You put a lot of anger into your article. And, although well written, betrays your motivations. You seem to have misused information in order to support your opinion instead of deriving an opion from the information.
In reply to Andy
Indeed democracy is a freer and all round better system for the subjects than is totalitarianism but I don’t see why it’s a system to stop at as it clearly does not let liberty reign. It’s probably a system that works best because political power can be exerted without much recourse to violence, at least domestically anyway.
Your kids are oppressed when they grow up and are forced to pay taxes and to abide by laws to which they had no say in. The foreign aggressor may well be terrible but then the domestic aggressor has a real interest in making it seem like that. If and when the foreign aggressor is close at hand to do all these terrible things to my family and me then I’ll be willing to fight. States feuding with other states and those who desire to be a state are not squabbles I am willing to die for nor willing to ask anyone else to die for.
Freedom may not have been the best of words for me to use; liberty is probably what I should have used, as freedom seems to suggest being free from responsibility.
“Do you have a copy of Human Action or Omnipotent Government? We are not a socialist government and are not evolving into one”
Ludwig von Mises always maintained that the interventionist state always moves towards socialism. Last time I checked America certainly had less socialism in their economic system than most of the world but were hardly laissez faire.
Any wrote:”That’s the truth Joseph. I cannot fathom that people are ignorant of the FACT that islamo-facists want to carry out those 5 principals and kill anyone who opposes them. Plain and simple, this is a threat your life.”
How do these ‘terrorists’ threaten your life? I did not see them get worked up at America prior to America’s foreign policy escapades. Why are these terrorists not attacking Sweden? ‘Terror’ is the root of the word ‘terrorist’, yet methinks most people who use this word do not know it. The word ‘terror’ literally means to strike fear. Thereby any acts which strike fear are ipso facto acts of terror. By that the biggest terrorist is America. One can very well define the tactics America uses as ‘terror’. And surely if you told those people in Iraq who were suffering the bombs under the inital days of the ‘Shock and Awe’ campaign they would tell you they were terrorized. Terrorism is a tactic, not an entity. Declaring war on a tactic is stupid. Terrorism is as old as time. Therefore this Orwellian twisting of words surely doesn’t help but only adds to the problem as words are abstractions and the confusion of words serves to help the State.
It seems the American Empire can only pick on countries that are relatively weaker than it. Why did it not pick on North Korea? Because it knows it is a formidable power. Remember the U.S. spy plane that was shot down over China? Remember how soft Bush was with them? Contrast that with how Bush acted against Saddam and Iraq. This “superpower” is just an illusion.
It is not for you or anyone else to decide what other people want or ought to want. Clearly these people do not want the American style democracy. After a decade of American and British backed UN sanctions that killed thousands of children each month, do you think these people have any confusions as to what America stands for? And the recent atrocities from the bombings of ‘Shock and Awe’ to Abu Ghraib, to Fallujah all reinforce these peoples initial reactions of America being a force of destruction, not liberation, contrary to what the Orwellian words carefully concocted by the masters in Washington would have you believe.
There would be no need for occupation had Bush not lied to America about going to war to oust Saddam who was no threat to America. There is no question that Iraq was better off with Saddam, than it is now. The people in Iraq even know this. Iraq is in a terrible condition, its society has been torn apart, scores of thousands have been killed and even more wounded, its infrastructure has been shattered, a power vacuum for warlords has been created.
JC,
It’s obvious that agressors are close enough to kill your family. They are hiding in our midsts as we speak. I am greatful that you nor any of your family died on 9/11, but for the 3000+ families, I cannot extend the same condolence.
Arman,
“Why did it not pick on North Korea?”
There is no question to the FACT that we have the most advanced military on the planet and all other nations are “weaker” than our militarily. You use no sort of economic-cost/benefit deduction in your post also. You deduct that Bush was soft on china with weak militarily? Your omnipotence is astounding.
“There is no question that Iraq was better off with Saddam” —- That was the stupidest statement of this whole debate. You’re just an islamo-facist apologist, and maybe if you took a look at some of the literature availible on this site you’d gain a speck of decentcy.
Fine, lets not use the word terrorist.
Islamo-facist: a person who;
YES hates the bill of rights
YES hates religious freedom
YES hates respecting women
YES wants to kill all sexual minorities
YES hates you because you aren’t muslim
And who will kill all those who are in their way.
You’re right, apparently the sweedish haven’t been attacked yet, but what about the great socialist dutch?? An islamo-facist killed a movie maker becuase it showed the REALITY of female subjegation, touture, mutilation, humiliation they endure in the muslim faith. We know his exact motivations becuase of the note that was STABBED INTO HIS CHEST.
Here is some more omnipotent statements from the enemy with-in our country:
“Clearly these people do not want the American style democracy. After a decade of American and British backed UN sanctions that killed thousands of children each month”
All of the autracities committed by saddam just forgotten… It was American who starved the children of iraq while saddam just toutured randomly and lived in over 30 palaces.
Ohh, I didn’t forget about you John!!
The VAST majority of Americans WANT the death penalty. Go talk to your neighbors if you live in America.
Unfortunatly, I cannot articulate my thoughts as well as others here. Just read above. My argument have been made quite clear by others.
NONE of you have answered the question on what America gains by
a) killing innocent iraqis
b) taking over iraq
Find me a real good answer. Convince me if your all so right.
Andy wrote:”There is no question to the FACT that we have the most advanced military on the planet and all other nations are “weaker” than our militarily. You use no sort of economic-cost/benefit deduction in your post also. You deduct that Bush was soft on china with weak militarily? Your omnipotence is astounding.”
Having the most advanced military on the planet does not guarantee victory or superiority on the battlefield. Historically this has already been proven for America in Vietnam. I am not comparing military powers here, I am merely comparing Bush’s softer reaction and approach to China and North Korea, to that of a nation such as Iraq which was devastated by over a decade of sanctions which killed thousands of children a month, and which Albright at the time thought that the price was “worth it”. A country that had been economically demoralized, suffering constant bombings throughout the years with no fly zones, was no match for a power like the U.S. However, American aggression becomes softer as the power of another country increases.
Andy wrote: “That was the stupidest statement of this whole debate. You’re just an islamo-facist apologist, and maybe if you took a look at some of the literature availible on this site you’d gain a speck of decentcy.”
There is no need for you to appeal to irrationalism and emotion. I think we are all capable of a cordial discourse. However, my point was not to be an apologist for Saddam, merely to compare and contrast past and present in Iraq. Clearly, the people in Iraq were better off under Saddam, than they are now, no one can argue against this other than wishful thinking. To do so would mean that people are better off in a warzone with destroyed infrastructure and bombs.
Andy wrote:”Fine, lets not use the word terrorist.
Islamo-facist: a person who;
YES hates the bill of rights
YES hates religious freedom
YES hates respecting women
YES wants to kill all sexual minorities
YES hates you because you aren’t muslim
And who will kill all those who are in their way.”
“Hate” is not a monopoly merely used by “Islamo fascists”. It is also used by neo-Con fascists, and even yourself. Your hatred of those different from you and those who disagree with you is seeping from your text. The whole “clash of civilizations” bromide is nothing more than the illusions concocted by Statists to justify their never ending wars.
“You’re right, apparently the sweedish haven’t been attacked yet, but what about the great socialist dutch?? An islamo-facist killed a movie maker becuase it showed the REALITY of female subjegation, touture, mutilation, humiliation they endure in the muslim faith. We know his exact motivations becuase of the note that was STABBED INTO HIS CHEST.”
Are we now to use this as our pretext for never ending war with the Muslim world? Let’s follow this again. From “WMD” to “deposing Saddam” to “democracy”, and now we are using Theo Van Gogh as one of our pretexts for war? If you do not like Muslims perhaps you yourself should go over there and fight them instead.
“All of the autracities committed by saddam just forgotten… It was American who starved the children of iraq while saddam just toutured randomly and lived in over 30 palaces.”
Are we forgetting that before Saddam was America’s enemy, he was buddy buddy with America? Do you forget the picture of him shaking hands with Rumsfeld? America helped Saddam to power. Saddam is no saint, but neither is the U.S. Do we forget the atrocities America committed, not just in Iraq, but historically, such as the dropping of the bomb? I am simply in awe of the different excuses war advocates bring forth to somehow justify war.
Your a little late to the debate Arman, so please fill yourself in with my earlier points.
Were the German people better off when hitler took over france? Would the french be better off if they didn’t fight against the nazis? The problem with your argument is that there is no right or wrong. You make no distinction for those who kill innocents in order to gain power.
“relatively weaker than…”
No, you were talking about militaries. How else would you define a stronger country? A countires strength IS defined by its military. I don’t like how that is, but it’s reality. I don’t like how over 3000 people were killed by islamo-facists either…
Vietnam is not a good example for your case. You’re trying to say it was a strong country than the US? It was a military victory, and the only problem with our military is the politicians who act to save thier ass instead of choosing the right. Every member of our military is superiour to thier counterparts in other countries. We have the most advanced weapons, the best training, the most dedicated military. We can destroy any country with convential means if attacked.
Why do you talk about the word hate?
Are you agreeing with my definition of an islamo-facist and how precisly that describes the criminals in Iraq and around the world perpetrating violent crimes against innocents motivated by their beliefs of islam?
Your right, I do hate those who disagree with me that liberty is worth dying for. I hate people who think other people shouldn’t be respected as humans becuase they don’t have similar religious beliefs. I hate people who tourture women because they are women. I hate islamo-facists.
“…our pretext for never ending war with the Muslim world?”
Actually I was countering you rediculious statement that if we didn’t “bully” the middle east, we wouldn’t be attacked. Im stating that in denmark, and in france, muslims are killing or committing crimes against jewish, christian, and/or whites based on thier beliefs. Demark and France were opposed to the Iraq war, yet they are currently under attack from islamo-facists.
We use the pretext that islamo-facists want to carry out their objectives at all costs. They want to deny the rights of human beings given by God. That is the pretext of war.
Response to your saddam question was already given, ill repost and quote Joseph Adrial,
“Recall that both Saddam and Osama were US allies and dependents for as long as it suited Saddam’s and Osama’s purposes. The Taliban was also supported against the Soviet Union and the Northern Alliance of Afghanistan.
Plus at the time saddam wasn’t killing his people.
Would you turn to the police to catch a criminal??
(Depends on your morals…)
“It’s obvious that agressors are close enough to kill your family. They are hiding in our midsts as we speak. I am greatful that you nor any of your family died on 9/11, but for the 3000+ families, I cannot extend the same condolence.”
That’s the point, aggressors are all around us, the worst of them are called the “state”, the rest are called either “criminals” or “terrorists”. Only in very desperate need would I call upon the domestic aggressor to help me and that would only be because of a choice between the lesser of 2,3 ect evils. Terrorism is no where near the danger made out. There are 18,000 – 20,000 murders every year in the United States. Don’t you think “criminals” are as big a threat as “terrorists”?
Actually im not too much worried about the murderers. The vast majority are gang-related. In my state we have shall-issue CCW. Unless im on the airplane, its gonig to be hard for me to stop a terrorist from causing harm to me with it.
And I agree with you that I wouldn’t call for help either. I’m better armed than the police! I think terrorists should be treated like criminals. None of this fancy pants double secret probation really convinces me.
“Contrary to some opinion here, which yes is disturbing, false and repulsive, most families of men who die in the Marines are very very proud of the sacrifice of their familiy member. They are proud because these men (no females have died in combat in the MC that i know of) stepped up to defend the freedoms that you enjoy.”
Thanks, but no thanks. Iraq never posed a threat to any of us. Get a clue! Actually, travelling abroad I am considerably less safe because of the fact that people abroad now have considerably less love for Americans than before our heavy-handed agressive wars.
“you may disagree with the war, but the elected government and the best military minds see this as the correct way to defend the freedoms your exercise.”
Give me a break! The best military minds spoke out against this war and were subsequently marginalized or fired. Those remaining are those who only defend the president’s decision. In fact, those who were most egregiously wrong about the “weapons of mass destruction” were promoted and/or given “medals of freedom”. If you did even the slightest amount of research you would see that this is an illegal war that has been waged on false pretenses.
“I’ve been spoken too by Generals, and Colonels, and instead of “fighting the war on terrorism,” they know we’re fighting a war on fundamentalist islam.”
If we’re fighting Islamic fundamentalism, the worst thing you can do is to overthrow a secular regime and replace it with a Shiite theocracy.
“You can sit back in your comfey chairs and preach all about how evil this war is, but why don’t you condem those who are trying to cut your throats?”
We do condemn those who try to cut our throats. I have no love for Bin Laden and I have no love for you.
“You say that terrorism isn’t real and this is a bush aggressive “rouge nation,” so then why will the terrorists kill YOU with every chance they get. You have the benifits of not living in fear, of not worrying if your children will be blown up because of the men dying around the world.”
Terrorism is, of course real. The leading terrorist organizations in the world today are:
1. The federal US government.
2. Al Qaeda.
3. Israel.
4. Hamas.
“Do our service men kill innocents on thier own volition?’
Of course. How did the hundred thousand+ dead Iraqi civilians die?
“Are we systematically killing innocent people to advance our religion of oppression and tyranny?”
If you are part of the military, you may be doing that. The Iraqi war like the wars on Guatemala, the Philippines, Chile, Vietnam, Korea, Cambodia, .., were all fought to bring puppet governments to replace popular governments (some of which may have been misguided, but none of which threated us). We don’t necessarily impose our religion or our language, but we invariably leave a large US military presence, including a permanent military base. These bases serve to “project US power”, meaning threaten the rest of the world with US hegemony.
“Before you make idiodic claims of comparing our soldiers who die for their love of freedom to murderes in headscarfs, do a reality check. You said you were in the Navy too???”
“Love of freedom”. Please do me a favor and don’t rain down your love of freedom on my neighborhood. I suspect most are in it for the free training, scholarships, regular pay, and prestige.
“Have you any idea what these radical islamo-facists stand for??
YES they hate the bill of rights
YES they hate religious freedom
YES they hate respecting women
YES they want to kill all sexual minorities
YES they hate you because you aren’t muslim”
No they think it is irrelevant – when living in America’s Saudi or Pakistani allies they are right.
Perhaps but Islam has a much better long term record of religious freedom – which is why Iraq has Christians but Spain has no non-immigrant Moslems.
Again this is just how the west was in your grandmother’s youth.
Kill all the moslems that like boys? This indictes a profound ignorance of Islamic cultures.
Fear more than hate – as in americo-fascists hate/fear moslems, communists, the French etc
Neil, I said islamo-facists, not all muslims.
I have no reason to fear anybody, unless they are trying to kill me. Look as you twisting my words, why? I said nothing or implied nothing about race or religious genocide. I said rise up and kil the man who is trying to kill you. That is it. I didnt say that I hated islamic cultures, why would I? Because i’m such a bigot?
What a lie! “Islam has a better record of religious freeom.” What about the 7 days war?
The spanish basques??? what about them??
Steven –
Popular government? you’re so full it! The vietnamese enjoy many freedoms that we do today…er…
Gee, the last time i checked, S. Korea wasn’t a 3rd world country, while a country with the same exact people and geography is right next to it happens to have millions starving.
You reply to my comments with no economic foundations and the best military minds we’re NOT against the war.
You feel less safe because of the American government? Wow, can you see the implication of that statement? Would I hold a grudge against a north korean becuase I don’t like his government? Why would I ever do that? He has nothing to do with the action of his government. Maybe where you travel there is an absense of intelligence. Or maybe it just lies with you.
“Popular government? you’re so full it! The vietnamese enjoy many freedoms that we do today…er…”
Ask yourself a question. If they have no popular support, then who exactly was fighting us? ~1.5 million Vietnamese died in the Vietnam war or as the Vietnamese called it the “American war”. From the perspective of most Vietnamese, the war was one of independence. Who could blame them for fighting for independence against an imperial power, especially after their experience with the French. I would say that the support of several million people and well over half of the population constitutes popular. What is your definition.
“Gee, the last time i checked, S. Korea wasn’t a 3rd world country, while a country with the same exact people and geography is right next to it happens to have millions starving.”
Yes, the South Korean economy is doing better than that of North Korea, but the fact that communism is a flawed ideology, does not mean that it was not popular. Look at how popular communism-lite programs such as socialized medicine and public schools are in this country. How would you felt if a foreign country invaded us to liberate us from our collective stupidity?
Not even the most brutal dictator can remain in power without at least some support. North Korea is changing as a result of economic necessity, but our saber rattling is not helping it progress. It is making it become defensive and making the people more dependent on their leadership. No doubt North Korea would become communistic in the same sense as China is communistic (i.e., not).
“You feel less safe because of the American government? Wow, can you see the implication of that statement? Would I hold a grudge against a north korean becuase I don’t like his government? Why would I ever do that? He has nothing to do with the action of his government. Maybe where you travel there is an absense of intelligence. Or maybe it just lies with you.”
I am glad that you understand this and my friends certianly understand this, but unfortunately, many people do generalize and say things like they hate all Americans or the hate all Moslems, Jews, Westerners, etc.. So, yes, I do think that there is an increased chance that I will be victimized abroad due to the actions of my government. If you do not believe this to be true, I invite you to travel to “liberated” Iraq, if you dare.
LoL! All my friends are over there now, but i’ll wait till uncle sam pays for my ticket. Such big talk from you.
“Are we systematically killing innocent people to advance our religion of oppression and tyranny?”
Of course. What else could “exporting democracy” possibly mean?
Guys, Andy is a typical troll – beyond any reasoning and totally incapable of seeing things from other people’s points of view.
So, please, don’t feed the troll.
saudis cheer when iraqi schools busses, are blown uop, they cheer when iraqis stampede away from bridges, the saudi king and public, a monarchy if ever there was, support suicide bombing as they are royalists and satanists, if the king hurts his tow, they cry, if iraqis babies die in incubators they cheer, if a mine collapses in iranm they cheer, if they read a man, from any land, in the world died at aby time they cheer, as they are satanists and and support indiiscriminate death in iraq, while brits and us forces only kill when theey are trying to kill suicde bom,bersd
saudis cheer when iraqi schools busses, are blown uop, they cheer when iraqis stampede away from bridges, the saudi king and public, a monarchy if ever there was, support suicide bombing as they are royalists and satanists, if the king hurts his tow, they cry, if iraqis babies die in incubators they cheer, if a mine collapses in iranm they cheer, if they read a man, from any land, in the world died at aby time they cheer, as they are satanists and and support indiiscriminate death in iraq, while brits and us forces only kill when theey are trying to kill suicde bom,bersd
← Previous Comments
Comments on this entry are closed.