Crimes against humanity
In reply to a suggestion of crimes against humanity by the Bush administration.
They would have equally as good a case for a peace prize as Obama, none were any worse than he. Don’t be so quick to forget about Sadam’s mass graves and human rights “shortcomings”, to put it lightly. While it can easily be argued that the devil you know is better than the devil you don’t, Iraq is arguably no worse off today than they were before, and potentially better off with a regime that has some level of openness to citizens. Surely you jest with the terminology. Hitler committed “crimes against humanity”, if we’re to believe the history books. 11 to 14 -million- people. It was a stated social policy of racial cleansing. Not even in the ballpark with crimes committed by an individual or individuals that may or may not have been known by the administration.
Far be it from me to say that Bush et. al. were saints or angels – they weren’t. There are innumerate examples of half truths, deceit, and outright lies attributable to that administration. Not at all like the current administration who has flatly stated their plan to run the country into the ground and taken every conceivable opportunity to rob their citizenry blind for generations to come. I find the indentured servitude of 300 million people for who knows how many generations as close to a crime against humanity as anything Bush may have been accused of. You can only kill me once, but to crush my will indefinitely? That is unforgivable.
Friday, October 9th 2009 at 3:55 pm |
NOT FORGETING ANYTHING, NOTHING GIVES US THE RIGHT TO INVADE AND KILL PEOPLE.
Friday, October 9th 2009 at 4:01 pm |
And telling the world this humane fact is the beginning of peace.
Friday, October 9th 2009 at 4:41 pm |
I <I>almost</i> agree with your former point, your second not at all. <I>Few</i> things give man the right to take away the life of another man. One of the things that does is theft – be that theft of rights or theft of property. Man is free to live life on his own terms, so long as those terms do not unreasonably infringe upon the rights of other men. Obama's policy of subjugating us to pay for the failures of others is no less a theft than the theft of life n war. The difference is, he's perpetuating it upon the citizens of his own country – the very citizens he has <I>sworn</i> to uphold and protect the rights of! This does not incite peace; quite the opposite, it incites revolt, suspicion, and distrust. Man will fight, it's instinctive to us. Subjugation promotes and encourages it, as proven by our very own history.
Friday, October 9th 2009 at 4:50 pm |
I misinterpreted your second statement – my apologies. I read it as telling the world that "Mr Obama is a great promoter and actor for peace" was a start towards a goal of harmonious existence. To the point of advising the world against agression, that is valid. However, not all the world shares my perspectives, and I vehemently reserve the right to protect that which is within my rights to protect. Life is for naught without the liberty to make one's own mistakes.
Sunday, October 11th 2009 at 12:14 pm |
You'll have to shout that louder, the graves in Arlington and Bagdad cannot hear ya !