Touche…

This man was never oppressed.

Please, these are the people who call themselves “progressive”.

Never, never should we refer to them as such, without using quotes.

Amen. Ideally we shouldn’t refer to them as “liberal” either, but I may be losing that battle… ;-/

Today, many former Soviet citizens feel no more free under the yoke of global capitalism than they did before…

Sounds like he’s working on a new movie title. What’s it called… Baghdad on the Hudson? Moscow on the Tigris? (Mixed on the metaphor?)

Three objections were made to this state of affairs.

The first was that Hitler had expansionist ambitions. His annexation of the Sudetenland in 1938 was, however, rooted in a long-standing territorial claim based on the fact that Czechoslovakia had been part of the Austrian Empire under the Habsburgs and was only hived off by the Treaty of Versailles.

The second objection was that Hitler was developing weapons of mass destruction. Had he acquired nuclear weapons, this might have proved a useful check on the Soviet Union’s ambitions.

The final objection to Hitler’s rule, on which more and more weight has necessarily had to be placed by those responsible for his downfall, is that he abused the human rights of German citizens. Quite clearly he did. Yet, why should it be assumed that this consideration trumps all others?

Living under tyranny may not be ideal, but it is not impossible. Hitler offered his people a harsh deal. Yet, their lives were at risk only if they chose to challenge his authority (or were Jews).

MTPOSBUY, (May The Peace Of Saddam Be Upon You)

We would then have the Peace of Saddam……………….

I have another idea. Since Cox is willing to sacrifice untold numbers of “dissidents”, why not sacrifice the Guardian and all its readers for the greater good? After all, it would be a more peaceful world once they, and all who think like them, are gone. It would be for the greater good.

I can see the bumper stickers now

“WWSD”

No! Kill Saddam, kill his whole tribe. Suppress the Sunnis horribly. Allowed only puppets among the Kurds and Shiites. Exterminated hundreds of thousands just to set an example. Rounded up and kill thousands of “journalists” like Cox. Nationalized all media in the US and killed all who opposed. Allowed only favorable reports in the “Media” Have an election where 99.8% of the people in Dade County vote for Bush. I guess that would have been “OK” for Mr. Cox.

After all, more people would have died had he not nuked Berkeley.

This cretin’s written diatribe proved Michael Savage right: Liberalism is a Mental Disorder.

Not only has he never suffered under such oppression as he pays tribute to, he hasn’t as much as been in the same neighborhood. Any military person who has visited Kuala Lumpur, Dubai, Bahrain, etc. and spoken to a local who managed to get away from Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia or another closed muslim nation could tell him a little. I’ve spoken to numerous expatriat Iraqi shopkeepers who were thrilled to meet an American “GI”, and every single time, they expressed the wish that we had gone and gotten Saddam in ’91.

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” – Benjamin Franklin

People like David Cox don’t understand that in the gulags you have perfect security. All you have to do is whatever you’re told. People want freedom, and freedom has never been free.

by this guys reasoning i guess hitler should get credit for “the diary of anne frank”.

When I was a junior at NYU 2001-2002, I watched from my dorm room window as the World Trade Center towers collapsed 4 blocks away.

According to Mr. Cox, it doesn’t matter how ‘others’ are living as long as “the rest of us would be a lot better off.” He can’t even claim ignorance (as I could about the Taliban…although that is small comfort to me). He knows what kind of a man Saddam is (soon to be was). He is willing to support him as long as Saddam makes sure not to bug the rest of us.

Well, you can decide that people that are different than you don’t deserve to have decent lives. You can even fool yourself into believing that people who are different than you don’t really want to be free to determine their own path (or perhaps just free to not be raped by Saddam and his sons). The funny thing is that, eventually, it will catch up with you. Whether it is 9/11, 3/11, 7/7 or another day, it has a way of catching up to you.

Well, we all value freedom. Some value it more than life, and those who do certainly go on about it. Nonetheless, they are probably a minority.

I usually hear this sentiment from Republicans. “the Constitution isn’t a suicide pact” and all that jazz.

More freedom and the resulting increase in danger is fit for Iraqis, but not for Americans? No, we’re above that. We’ve evolved past viewing freedom as more valuable than life. We’ve become enlightened to the concept of threat minimization and “necessary” (and wholly temporary — they promise) reductions in freedom. For the public good.

So why, if our concept of our own “free enough” society is the standard, are we not imposing that directly upon the Iraqis? Why not get Welfare and Medicare and 50% taxation rates going from the get-go?