[playa_playa]

seriously, are you diabled? Because, you seem to be suffering from some sort of a relevancy disorder here. I wasn't making the claim that the impending war on Iraq is unjustified nor that the actions America has carried out thus far are necessarily unjust. I am making the claim, and I'll repeat for the last time, that reparations in the name of justice that harbors injustice is a contradiction and an injustice in itself. When the author of the original article was pointing out that it's "too bad" the pow didn't get a trial and was detained, I made the claim that this sort of callused behavior to injustices - even in the smalles kind - is too a sycophantic and corrupting literature in order to be considered a valid praise for America.

Do you get that? Let me put in in bold for you: Yes, we have done much good in the world. And for that, we should be commended for that. But we shouldn't be exempt from criticism because of this fact. Because the moment we become above criticisms, we begin to believe that we are inherently superior.

We ARE trying to do the best, that was my point, but maybe I have to express that point in unnecessarily large words for you to understand it.

Save me the limp personal insults. At least flame with some orginiality or something. Why do you keep bringing this up is beyond me. Confidence issues maybe.

As for repeating old mistakes, there is more evidence that ignoring a hostile, cruel dictator does more harm than good. While you contend that the U.S. would repeat old mistakes by going into Iraq, I contend that we will NOT repeat the old mistakes of WW2 by going into Iraq. I will repeat this from another thread: "Evil is doing nothing in the face of need"

Where in my original post did I ever mention that we will be making old mistakes if we go into Iraq? Find this make-believe claim I made. Or are you just *surprise, surprise* making this up?

Also, I never said that the U.S. wasn't acting out of self-interest, in fact a I made a point to say that we often do, but the fact is that more times than not what is in our best interests coincides with the best interests of the world in general and we share in the benefits. And if you are going to argue that leaving Hussein in power is in the world's best interest, you are a fool.

Ummmm...Right, of course I said leaving Hussein in power is in the world's best interest. Of course, of course! Wait, no I didn't. I think this is what I said - which, coincindentally, had nothing to do with leaving Hussein in power.

originally posted by playa_playaI can argue for your case that what is good for America most of the time is good for the democracy of the world in general. But what relevance does this have? I never said the opposite was the case. Neither did I mention that we shouldn't act out of self-interest. I think you need to reread or something.

I even said that I perceive that what's good for America most of the time is good for the democracy of the world in general. I am AGREEING with your case here. Remember what I said about being disabled? Now would be the good time to get it checked out.

Lets see, WW2, Bosnia, Panama, Somalia, etc. Whether of not they were all successful is irrelevant. The point is that America went in there and did what it could. Bosnia was laughable. The U.N. didn't budge until the US gave support and made it an issue.

Those cases, of course, represent the world as a whole. Cases like operation enduring freedom where GB helped us out or the Vietnamese war where S. Korean soldiers fought alongside US troops obviously mean nothing to you.

This broad generalization you drew: "other countries don't do anything," is proven false with just those two cases I mentioned.

As for not being un-patriotic, I think think its obvious that you are. Despite whatever careful wording you use, you're themes are quite evident. You call a potential Iraq war "unjust", but why is that? Here's the facts:

First, I never called a potential war on Iraq unjust. can you point this out in my previous post?

second, if being patriotic means not criticizing your own country even in the face of injustice, I am definitely unpatriotic. But that's not my conception of patriotism. Love for my country would have to entail that I try to point out what we have done wrong to improve it, should we do something wrong.

My question to you is this: What will it take for this war to be just? To find a smoking gun, it needs to be fired. What if that smoke takes the form of a mushroom cloud? And don't say it couldn't happen. We didn't think they could find a way to take out the world trade center either. Terrorists are resourceful and intelligent, even if deluded. So whats it going to take? Evidently common sense isn't enough to sway you.

I don't know exactly. Neither am I saying that this war on Iraq is inherently unjust. To tell you the truth, I haven't made a value judgement on it. But all things considered, a war on Iraq would not be an unjust act in my conclusions thus far. I never said it would be.

You are still missing my point. Not one thing in your post was a reponse to my idea: that the article takes a callused attitude towards harboring injustices like the pow detained without a trial in the name of facing a bigger injustice. And this, to me, isn't a right way to commend something. Just like how I pointed out in my introduction to your reply:

The original intention of my post was to point out that America is a country far too great to be praised by such a blatanly sycophantic and useless literature. I_never_mentioned that America is somehow inherently evil due to the mistakes it makes or due to the selfishness with which it operates in international affairs.

You obviously are ultranationalistic. With what little "facts" you have, you have drwan conclusions like "other countries don't do anything" or "criticizing your own nation is unpatriotic." I can't think of a more textbook example of the phenomenon. It's people like you who give true patriots of the country a bad name.