On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Max B. Sawicky wrote:
> I'm not saying anybody here has endorsed this article but . . .
>
> I've been on the lookout for good anti-war stuff, and this article isn't
> it. You'd do just as well hanging a 'Stupid' sign around your head.
> An opponent could easily (and fairly) summarize it as: "Hiroshima --
> not as bad as you thought."
And I'm not saying you have your head up your beltway but no, getting an argument dead backwards is not generally considered a valid objection.
But you're right about not trying to enlist it as an anti-war article. It has little bearing on the advisability or inadvisability of the upcoming production because the gang in power would be more than happy to replace the policy of sanctions with one of invasions. It has perhaps a tiny bit of bearing on the question of how much we should expect average Iraqis to come forth on the day after bearing love for us in their hearts. As well as on our claim to be a uniquely moral nation.
In fact it might be a good simple answer to the question "Why do they hate us?" The answer is because we literally don't care if they suffer and die. It never enters our mind. And confronted with the numbers we say feh.
Michael