FWD: Saddam Hussein Found Guilty & Sentenced to Hang!

In article ,
Rand Simberg wrote:

Poor in this country live materially much better than royalty did a
century ago. There is no true poverty in the US, visual or otherwise,
except for those who choose it, or are mentally ill (generally the
same thing).

There is no poverty in the US, visual or otherwise, except for those
who choose it? My god, are you absolutely blind and insane???

Why are there neighbourhoods that people are not safe to walk in,
in daylight!

Mostly because of our nutty drug policies.

Drug policies? What are you getting at. Drug policies are much harsher
in the USA than most places. And drug usage is lower in the USA than
most places. Are you saying it is the harsh drug polices that create
unsafe neighbourhoods?

Why is the crime rate
so much higher than most places, yet the prison population is 10 times
higher than most places!

Again, our nutty drug policies.

And I'll agree somewhat here. If one diddn't toss people in jail for
simple drug possession, perhaps there wouldn't be so much money
wasted!

Nick

do we even HAVE 200,000 or 300,000 troops available with all the
equiptement needed to support them for a extended stay in iraq?

frankly this should of been done BEFORE invasion....

today its too late......

better a civil war starts and we withdraw to the borders so the mess
doesnt spill into other countries.....

In article .com,
wrote:
do we even HAVE 200,000 or 300,000 troops available with all the
equiptement needed to support them for a extended stay in iraq?

frankly this should of been done BEFORE invasion....

Yes, it should have. And there were even those inside the administration
pointing this out.

today its too late......

Not really. Put a draft in place. Ramp up training. Drop a few
billion dollars. It will take 2 or 3 years to get into place, but
I really don't see any alternative now.

better a civil war starts and we withdraw to the borders so the mess
doesnt spill into other countries.....

So it would be cleaner to occupy Iran, Libya, and Saudi Arabia? I think
that would only make things worse.

Nick

In article ,
Rand Simberg wrote:

No. Neither. Didn't you read what I wrote?

I did, but it seemed to be blaming the poor for their problems. Rather
than acknowledging that society as a whole has created the circumstances
that these problems thrive.

Mostly because of our nutty drug policies.

Drug policies? What are you getting at. Drug policies are much harsher
in the USA than most places.

That's what I mean.

And drug usage is lower in the USA than
most places. Are you saying it is the harsh drug polices that create
unsafe neighbourhoods?

Yes. Just as prohibition created the mafia and organized crime, the
current drug laws drive up prices, eliminate legitimate drug sellers,
and fund modern street gangs.

Ah, you do get it! My apologies, I thought you were arguing the other
side of that one.

Nick

In article ,
Rand Simberg wrote:

I did, but it seemed to be blaming the poor for their problems.

I'm saying that there are very few truly poor here. The ones that
are, are poor due to their own choices and behavior. If you want to
call that "blaming the poor for their problems," then so be it. If
you choose to subsidize bad choices and behavior, you're likely to get
a lot more of it.

There's always going to be some of the can't lead the horse to water.
But you tell me, and I really don't understand it. Just why IS poverty
still such a huge problem in the USA. Why when wandering around US
towns and cities, does there seem to be so much more poverty than there
is in other G7 countries. Especially when the average income is higher?

Crime, violence, and incarceration rates, I can see a lot of the answers.
But poverty? I just can't grasp that one, unless it's simply a by-product
of the other systemic issues.

Nick

In article ,
Rand Simberg wrote:

I don't think we should necessarily "occupy" any of them. But we
should continue to toss out or kill leaders of governments that
support terrorism. Eventually, they'll get the message.

I don't disagree, though it has to be careful. Iran is particularly
dicey - on one hand they've got the kind of democracy that the US
desires in Iraq - on the other hand, look at who they elected. So
does one try and knock off a duely elected leader, and risk all hell
breaking loose, or just try and sit him out, and hope the whole thing
balances out in the long term. It's a bit of a problem when the voters
themselves support terrorism.

Iraq would have probably have gone a lot better, if the US had simply
knocked off Hussein, and hoped the next Baathist leader wasn't quite
the same meglomaniac.

Nick

"Nicholas Fitzpatrick" wrote in message
...
The only thing that would be more fun would be if Bush, Cheney,
and Rumsfield were also sentanced to the gallows for their
war crimes.

I suppose they'd first have to commit some.

"Nicholas Fitzpatrick" wrote in message
...
Still, there is little question that the current administration has
committed
war crimes

Such as?

"Nicholas Fitzpatrick" wrote in message
...
Why do Americans not have the ability to think about politics in
anything more than left/right - it's so 2-Dimensional.

WHy has Europe repeatedly refused to to live up to its responsibilities, and
then condemn the US for acting?

"Nicholas Fitzpatrick" wrote in message
...
In any other nation, if one of these issues
occurred, there would be work to get rid of it.

So, what's Europe doing to stop terrorism? *Running away* sure isn't
working.