tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post4329088593482896679..comments2024-02-14T01:23:04.849-05:00Comments on View From Above: 26 Reasons For Staying In IraqHawkeye®http://www.blogger.com/profile/15719046062819366641noreply@blogger.comBlogger94125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-80126830504537425232008-10-23T18:24:00.000-04:002008-10-23T18:24:00.000-04:00LOL DO YOU WEAR GIRLS PANTS SOMETIMES? BECAUSE PEO...LOL DO YOU WEAR GIRLS PANTS SOMETIMES? BECAUSE PEOPLE WITH MUSTACHES ARE GHEY, AND GHEY PEOPLE WEAR GIRL PANTS.LOLREPBULICANSRGHEYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08923945438717905686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-51298920093789544272008-10-23T18:18:00.000-04:002008-10-23T18:18:00.000-04:00LOL YOUR COMMENTS R FRAIL. ALL REPUBLICANS ARE LIK...LOL YOUR COMMENTS R FRAIL. ALL REPUBLICANS ARE LIKE SUPER GHEY!!!11one! NO BLOOD FOR OIL UNLESS ITS BLACK PEOPLE'S BLOOD.LOLREPBULICANSRGHEYhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08923945438717905686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-31698219677456954182008-10-23T18:14:00.000-04:002008-10-23T18:14:00.000-04:00LOL TERRORISM IS AWESOME LOL I HOPE TERRORIST IDK ...LOL TERRORISM IS AWESOME LOL I HOPE TERRORIST IDK RAEP YOUR MOM FOR LIKE TEN HOURS. ROFL ROFLAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-70903023313540048692008-04-10T20:03:00.000-04:002008-04-10T20:03:00.000-04:00Darkangel,Thank you for your comment. You said...T...<B>Darkangel</B>,<BR/>Thank you for your comment. You said...<BR/><BR/><I>The American military should have not entered Iraq in the first place for Saddam Hussein was not the reason at all for our so called "war on terror," but Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda alone was [sic] the cause</I>.<BR/><BR/>Your statement is technically correct when you say that Al-Qaeda and its leadership were the sole cause of 9/11, and hence the "war on terror". Nevertheless, the conclusion you draw from this fact (i.e., that "the American military should have not entered Iraq in the first place") is in error.<BR/><BR/>In fact, in my opinion, your statement is a "<A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur" REL="nofollow"><B>non sequitur</B></A>". In other words, it does not follow to say that Al-Qaeda caused the "War on Terror", therefore going into Iraq was wrong.<BR/><BR/>I should remind you that in my article, I began with these words... <I>"whether you agree or disagree that U.S. involvment in Iraq was the right thing to do, it makes no difference... we are there now. The time for debating our entry into the Iraq war is over.</I><BR/><BR/>However, it can be argued quite logically that the "GLOBAL War on Terror" was indeed a perfect basis for our entry into Iraq.<BR/><BR/>You may recall that President Bush in his State of the Union <A HREF="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html" REL="nofollow"><B>speech </B></A> in 2002 (shortly after 9/11) labeled Iraq, Iran and North Korea an "axis of evil". Iraq he said, was among those "regimes that sponsor terror". He said our "goal is to prevent regimes that sponsor terror from threatening America or our friends and allies". He also said "these regimes pose a grave and growing danger". He said "I will not wait on events, while dangers gather. I will not stand by, as peril draws closer and closer. The United States of America will not permit the world's most dangerous regimes to threaten us with the world's most destructive weapons". And he was applauded.Hawkeye®https://www.blogger.com/profile/15719046062819366641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-88234622059232674202008-04-10T18:03:00.000-04:002008-04-10T18:03:00.000-04:00kristycrowley,There, there now. No need to blow a ...<B>kristycrowley</B>,<BR/>There, there now. No need to blow a gasket. You said...<BR/><BR/><I>You have no backing for your warrant!</I><BR/><BR/>I provided links to articles which supported many of my statements. Did you read them?<BR/><BR/><I>The reasons you give for staying in Iraq are pure opinion-based... and STUPID!</I><BR/><BR/>Well, I certainly have my opinions (and so do you). Apparently your opinions do not agree with mine. But to say that my reasons are "pure" opinion-based is not correct. If I provide a link to an article, then it is not merely based on opinion, but on facts. (unless of course the article quoted is itself pure opinion). But in this case I tried to stay away from opinion pieces.<BR/><BR/>And to suggest that my opinions are "stupid" without providing any examples of why they are "stupid" is simply name-calling. Try a more rational approach next time.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for reading though.Hawkeye®https://www.blogger.com/profile/15719046062819366641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-5251743344961392942008-04-10T13:41:00.000-04:002008-04-10T13:41:00.000-04:00Your view point on the Iraq War is interesting and...Your view point on the Iraq War is interesting and very informative. However, I must disagree on your point of view and reasons for staying in Iraq. The American military should have not entered Iraq in the first place for Saddam Hussein was not the reason at all for our so called "war on terror," but Osama Bin Laden and Al-Qaeda alone was the cause. Going into Iraq started a war that was unneccessary and cost countless of American lives for no reason whatsoever. Staying in Iraq will only allow the death toll of "our" soldiers, not Iraq military, to continously rise.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-23896210725706056832008-04-04T09:23:00.000-04:002008-04-04T09:23:00.000-04:00You have no backing for your warrant! The reasons ...You have no backing for your warrant! The reasons you give for staying in Iraq are pure opinion-based... and STUPID! How does anyone know it isn't all made up?kristycrowleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17439362406698909378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-74212443705567231232008-03-12T13:20:00.000-04:002008-03-12T13:20:00.000-04:00KKC11,As I respond to your comments, please be awa...<B>KKC11</B>,<BR/>As I respond to your comments, please be aware that I not being angry or sarcastic in my responses. I am merely defending my positions, and hope you will accept my comments on an intellectual level. OK? (:D)<BR/><BR/><I><B>I'm not comfortable with you assuming that not only Iraq and the UN want the US to remain in Iraq, but also that it is even our responsibility.</B></I><BR/>It is not an "assumption", it is a "fact". I'm sorry if the truth makes you uncomfortable, but the truth does that sometimes. Americans are great at denying their responsibilities and obligations, but covering one's eyes and ears to them does not make them go away. It only means that we are not facing them.<BR/><BR/><I><B>who has ever declared US military the world police? </B></I><BR/>Please read my response to Mary above regarding this issue of the "world police".<BR/><BR/><I><B>Out of 192 countries in the UN you are trying to claim that ours is solely responsible for the restoration of Iraq defense policies.</B></I><BR/>Not at all. I never said that anywhere in the article. Please do not try to put words in my mouth. I actually believe that every democratic nation in the world has a responsibility to help Iraq become a stable self-governing nation. But since very few of those 192 countries seem willing to assist us, we cannot simply ignore reality and allow chaos to reign.<BR/><BR/>Also, I think you need to fully consider the ramifications of your statement. Do you imagine that if the U.S. pulled out immediately those other 192 nations would run in to do the job? I hardly think so. They would merely continue to complain and bad-mouth the U.S. (some countries are very good at that). In their opinion no matter WHAT we do, it is wrong.<BR/><BR/><I><B>If Iraq needs to be helped, why is it America's responsibility? </B></I><BR/>Please read the article again, find the answer to your question and report back to me. It's in there.<BR/><BR/><I><B>Another claim you make about Europe and Iraq's neighbors wanting us to stay bothers me.</B></I><BR/>Again, I am sorry that you are bothered by the truth. I'm not making this stuff up. I have provided links to document my statements.<BR/><BR/><I><B>Europe and Iraq's neighbors are ultimately just thinking... "Well, if America is busy trying to help them, we won't have to fool with America or Iraq."</B></I><BR/>There is some truth to your statement. Europeans and Iraq's neighbors are more than happy to have us deal with the problem. In their defense, some of them can legitimately claim that they objected to our going into Iraq in the first place. This merely provides more support for my claim that America is ultimately responsible for "cleaning up any mess we made". <BR/><BR/><I><B>I also thing [sic] your reason about betraying the US troops is completely bogus.</B></I><BR/>If you talk to the troops, you will find that it is hardly "bogus". They feel very betrayed by people such as yourself who oppose their mission and their success without having any knowledge of what is happening on the ground in Iraq. I can provide links if you wish.<BR/><BR/><I><B>What about all the families that WILL lose loved ones before the war ends?</B></I><BR/>A tragedy to be sure. The death of anyone by violence is sad, especially when it is our best and brightest. But terrorism must be stopped, and it will never be stopped unless it is faced head-on. Radical Islamic terrorists who are unwilling to see reason will only continue to use violence in an effort to intimidate and bully. They want to establish a "Caliphate", and will not yield to anything but a superior force.<BR/><BR/>And if we are successful in Iraq (as it now appears we will be), then we will have dealt a serious blow to al-Qaeda. The world will be a safer place for everybody, and the sacrifice of our men and women will not have been in vain. The position you advocate GUARANTEES that their lives will have been wasted. My position is optimistic. Yours is pessimistic. My position believes in the hope of success. Yours is a position of gloom-and-doom, and guarantees only failure.<BR/><BR/><I><B>If we pull out now we could save the lives that haven't been lost yet.</B></I><BR/>You seem to forget that the job of the military is to "go into harm's way", and that we have an all-volunteer military. A significant portion of those who now serve in Iraq volunteered for service following 9/11, and many even volunteered after we entered Iraq five years ago. They knew full well when they volunteered that they would most likely serve in a dangerous war zone. It is not the job of the American people or the Congress to "protect" our soldiers from danger. If we are protecting the soldiers, then who will be protecting us?<BR/><BR/><I><B>And... your "chance for success" is exactly that, just a mere CHANCE.</B></I><BR/>It is now more than just a "mere CHANCE". It is a very good chance, and I am cautiously optimistic that it is more like a "probability". I can cite plenty of sources, but for starters I would read the articles <A HREF="http://viewhigh.blogspot.com/2007/12/success-in-iraq-just-dumb-luck.html" REL="nofollow">HERE</A>, <A HREF="http://viewhigh.blogspot.com/2007/12/dod-progress-report-on-iraq.html" REL="nofollow">HERE</A>, and <A HREF="http://viewhigh.blogspot.com/2008/01/credit-where-credit-is-due.html" REL="nofollow">HERE</A>. <BR/><BR/>I should also point out that there is concrete proof that reconciliation is happening among the Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. Also, the Iraqi Parliament has been having success passing the "benchmark" legislation that the U.S. Congress has been looking for. In fact, at one point in time very recently, the Iraqi parliament had introduced and passed more legislation than the U.S. Congress did for the same time period. Links available upon request.<BR/><BR/><I><B>So, taking the higher risk of losing more soldiers and wasting more money is nothing compared to the minor chance America has to actually help Iraq</B></I><BR/>I will reiterate that it is no longer a "minor" chance for success. Success there has been very real and palpable. If we are in fact succeeding, then we are not "wasting money", and the risk is worth the very real reward of: dealing a serious blow to al-Qaeda, creating a stable democracy in the Middle East, and having a friend and ally in the war on terror.<BR/><BR/>Thank you for reading the article and sharing your thoughts.Hawkeye®https://www.blogger.com/profile/15719046062819366641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-31503462585986965922008-03-11T12:53:00.000-04:002008-03-11T12:53:00.000-04:00Britney,Please read my response to Mary's comment ...<B>Britney</B>,<BR/>Please read my response to Mary's comment (just above) regarding the "world police" issue.<BR/><BR/>You said: "but why haven't you went over to Iraq." I'm not sure exactly what you mean by that. I'm 55 years old, and therefore too old to enlist in the armed forces. I also have a full-time job working 5-1/2 days a week, so it's not easy to just jaunt over there, even though I'd like to.<BR/><BR/>You also said: "P.S. Iam a african american". I'm not sure exactly what that has to do with anything, but thank you for sharing that. Although I have managed only a small department in my company, I have hired many African Americans, as well other minorities over the years... if that means anything.Hawkeye®https://www.blogger.com/profile/15719046062819366641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-61178280220288200152008-03-11T12:40:00.000-04:002008-03-11T12:40:00.000-04:00gnp2,Please read my response to Mary's comment (ju...<B>gnp2</B>,<BR/>Please read my response to Mary's comment (just above). The "world police" issue is your assumption, not mine.Hawkeye®https://www.blogger.com/profile/15719046062819366641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-5770202713962684752008-03-10T22:39:00.000-04:002008-03-10T22:39:00.000-04:00Mary,Thank you for your kind words. I'm glad you f...<B>Mary</B>,<BR/>Thank you for your kind words. I'm glad you found my article "compelling and interesting". Most of all, I'm glad it made you think. That's what it was meant to do. And don't forget that this article was written several months ago, and we have made much more progress in Iraq since then. Regarding your disagreements, please recognize that as I respond, I am doing so in a polite and intelligent manner. I hope you will not think I am angry, sarcastic, or otherwise emotional in any way. OK? (:D)<BR/><BR/>Many people share your opinion that the United States should not act as the "world police". And regardless of my own personal opinion on the subject, nowhere in the article did I suggest that it is the responsibility of the U.S. to act as the world's police force. Nowhere in the article did I suggest that the reason we went into Iraq was because we were acting as the world's police force. Nor did I suggest that a reason we should stay in Iraq is because we are the world's police force. That concept of the U.S. acting as the "world's police force" is a subject which you (and many other commenters here), have repeatedly brought up. [If my suspicions are correct, this concept was one of the topics of discussion in the curriculum at a certain University of West Florida.]<BR/><BR/>As a practical matter, when commenting on a blog article, it is best to concentrate on the facts presented in the article, rather than talking about a concept that is not presented or defended by the author. To do so diminishes your comment to the category of an unsubstantiated, judgmental opinion which bears no relationship to the text at hand. This is a mistake that is made quite frequently by "trolls" who hang about certain blogs merely to cause trouble, and I'm sure that an intelligent person like yourself would not want to be found in such company.<BR/><BR/>You asked: "What gives us the right to go into a foreign country and bestow our beliefs on those who don’t even want us there in the first place?" Well, my answer can be found right there in the article: "whether you agree or disagree that U.S. involvment in Iraq was the right thing to do, it makes no difference... we are there now. The time for debating our entry into the Iraq war is over. We simply cannot go back in time and change history."<BR/><BR/>Again, as a practical matter, when commenting at a blog, it is a good idea to avoid discussing a subject which the author has specifically stated is off-limits, or is not worth discussing. Again, it diminishes your comment by suggesting that: a) you did not read the article and are only commenting to make yourself heard, b) you did read the article but just didn't "get it", or c) you did read the article and could care less what the author said. In other words, you look: a) pompous, b) dumb, or c) discourteous. And since I know that you are none of the above, I hope you will appreciate my efforts to illuminate these things.<BR/><BR/>You said: "America’s first priority should be ourselves. We should look after our own best interests above anything else." I find your statement to be quite disheartening. As a Christian, my value system is apparently much different from your own. My faith tells me...<BR/><BR/>"I bid every one among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think." --Romans 12:3<BR/><BR/>"Greater love has no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. --John 15:13<BR/><BR/>You also said: "Going to Iraq has costs hundreds lives and has given us nothing back in return." I would have to disagree with that statement. First of all, I think that history will look much more favorably on Iraq than we see it today. We are too close to it right now, but when we look back at it, we will remember with pride that: 1) We deposed a cruel dictator, who was a murderer and an eco-criminal. 2) We liberated 27 million Iraqis and gave them an opportunity for self-governance. 3) We officially ended the 1991 Gulf War, which was still in a state of "cease-fire" until March 2003 when we entered Iraq. 4) We eliminated any possibility that Saddam would acquire weapons of mass destruction, or that he would harbor or give support to terrorists. 5) We fought al-Qaeda on foreign soil rather than here at home. 6) We have dealt al-Qaeda a serious blow, not only militarily, but to their prestige around the world. 7) We have helped bring about reconciliation between Sunnis and Shiites who have been feuding ever since Saddam Hussein took power in 1979. 8) We have created the possibility for a stable Iraq which will be an American ally in the war on terror.<BR/><BR/>Finally you said: "I enjoyed reading your article and i hope i didn't offend you in any way." Allow me to reassure you that I was not offended in the slightest way, Mary. And hopefully nothing I said offended you either. I am only trying to provide you with constructive feedback.<BR/><BR/>Good luck and thanks for sharing your thoughts.Hawkeye®https://www.blogger.com/profile/15719046062819366641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-6175914097689726172008-03-10T17:38:00.000-04:002008-03-10T17:38:00.000-04:00You assume that you are the world police, but why ...You assume that you are the world police, but why haven't you went over to Iraq.<BR/><BR/>P.S. Iam a african americanBritneyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06407365567444802911noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-60994207477447634352008-03-10T16:38:00.000-04:002008-03-10T16:38:00.000-04:00Your argument is very thought provoking, however, ...Your argument is very thought provoking, however, I disagree with your assumption that the United States is the world police. Why is the U.S. always the one who has to do all the dirty work? It is our responsibility to protect our country. We are not responsible for protecting other countries. The U.S. should not be allowed to do anything it pleases. Invading foreign countries for false reasons is unacceptable. Some would say it is abuse of power. In your reasons for staying in Iraq you wrote of many people who want us to stay there. Well, we are not the world police and it is not our duty to work out everyone else's problems. We have enough problems of our own and need to concentrate on fixing our own country.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-30742473654433581942008-03-09T23:42:00.000-04:002008-03-09T23:42:00.000-04:00I'm not comfortable with you assuming that not onl...I'm not comfortable with you assuming that not only Iraq and the UN want the US to remain in Iraq, but also that it is even our responsibility. I understand your claim that the Iraqi prime minister came to the UN and asked US to not pull troops out at this time and cause chaos, but who has ever declared US military the world police? Out of 192 countries in the UN you are trying to claim that ours is solely responsible for the restoration of Iraq defense policies. If Iraq needs to be helped, why is it America's responsibility? <BR/><BR/>Another claim you make about Europe and Iraq's neighbors wanting us to stay bothers me. I recognize that their is a problem in Iraq as well as most the people in this world, but Europe and Iraq's neighbors are ultimately just thinking... "Well, if America is busy trying to help them, we won't have to fool with America or Iraq."<BR/><BR/>I also thing your reason about betraying the US troops is completely bogus. You are subsequently stating that it is better to stay in Iraq because we wouldn't want all the families with lost loved ones to think it was for nothing... What about all the families that WILL lose loved ones before the war ends? If we pull out now we could save the lives that haven't been lost yet. <BR/><BR/>And... your "chance for success" is exactly that, just a mere CHANCE. So, taking the higher risk of losing more soldiers and wasting more money is nothing compared to the minor chance America has to actually help Iraq... But like I stated earlier... Who declared America the world police?kristycrowleyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17439362406698909378noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-525534492320154222008-03-09T18:01:00.000-04:002008-03-09T18:01:00.000-04:00Dear Hawkeye, I found your article very compelling...Dear Hawkeye,<BR/><BR/> I found your article very compelling and interesting. It really made me think about my position and stance on the war. I agree with you on the fact that we are making MUCH NEEDED progress in Iraq; however, I respectively disagree with you on some issues. <BR/>-I don’t believe that it is the United States of America’s job to go into Iraq and act as the world police. What gives us the right to go into a foreign country and bestow our beliefs on those who don’t even want us there in the first place? It is not our job to go in and clean up other people’s mistakes. America’s first priority should be ourselves. We should look after our own best interests above anything else. <BR/>-Going to Iraq has costs hundreds lives and has given us nothing back in return. Although I agree with you that we should not pull out of the Iraq War now, (because we have to finish what we started and pulling out will just make more problems), there was never any real reason to start a war with Iraq in the first place.<BR/><BR/>I enjoyed reading your article and i hope i didn't offend you in any way.Maryhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14134146538817025255noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-69856706474596759062007-11-16T13:14:00.000-05:002007-11-16T13:14:00.000-05:00Still no response... sigh... you disappoint me.Still no response... sigh... you disappoint me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-61260140713862874722007-11-05T12:58:00.000-05:002007-11-05T12:58:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-47432010681032968162007-11-05T12:57:00.000-05:002007-11-05T12:57:00.000-05:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-37089527350430516172007-11-05T12:48:00.000-05:002007-11-05T12:48:00.000-05:00Hawkeye, you bring up some thought provoking point...Hawkeye, you bring up some thought provoking points as to why America should stay in Iraq, but I respectfully disagree with the assumption that we should stay to prevent potential sectarian civil war. We are not the world police. We entered the war under false premise (WMDs & 9/11 connection) now we should stay to avoid a secular civil war. These peoples have been in conflict for years, what makes us the 'big dog' to stop the fighting. It is not our country. We cannot take it upon ourselves to regulate another nation. Or force upon our ideals or way of thinking. As a superpower in the world we can offer assistance to those who are aiming for positive principles and standards. Thus, America cannot situate itself every and anyplace there might possible be a conflict.amrika whttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10976649953632985750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-64013249970850918202007-11-05T12:08:00.000-05:002007-11-05T12:08:00.000-05:00Hawkeye, you made the statement, "Sorry, but if yo...Hawkeye, you made the statement, "Sorry, but if you didn't notice, it's NOT someone else's war. It's OUR war. Whose war do you think it is? France's? Belgium's? Germany's?" Umm.... the answer is "None of the above". It is IRAQ's war. It is THEIR problem. They are in a civil war, and our troops are caught in the middle of it. They need to come home.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-44827336449616896462007-11-05T11:54:00.000-05:002007-11-05T11:54:00.000-05:00Hawkeye,You failed to respond to my post. I would ...Hawkeye,<BR/><BR/>You failed to respond to my post. I would love to hear your defense for your own accusasions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-81677334804459218622007-11-05T11:32:00.000-05:002007-11-05T11:32:00.000-05:00Hawkeye, your blog points some great ideas to stay...Hawkeye, your blog points some great ideas to stay in iraq. Yet, the idea of assuming it is our job, as the U.S., to export democracy to Iraq is disagreeable. Our troops are not trained to force and maintain democracy over in Iraq. The United States does not need to babysit Iraq and decide for them. Furthermore, Iraq's culture very much different than our culture. As a result, democracy may not be a suitable government for them. In conclusion, I say it is best to allow Iraq to decide for its own by choosing their a government that works best for their culture.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-63557613594731279532007-11-05T08:08:00.000-05:002007-11-05T08:08:00.000-05:00Kelly L,Thanks for the input. I'm glad to hear you...<B>Kelly L</B>,<BR/>Thanks for the input. I'm glad to hear you are doing well in class. Keep up the good work.Hawkeye®https://www.blogger.com/profile/15719046062819366641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-19602460856967474432007-11-05T08:01:00.000-05:002007-11-05T08:01:00.000-05:00Wieslawa,You said... "What about UN-the World Poli...<B>Wieslawa</B>,<BR/>You said... <I>"What about UN-the World Police? Why UN not take care Iraq’s problem?"</I><BR/><BR/>Good question. I wish they would, but they can't and they won't. They are not strong enough. They are not organized enough. They don't have the will to do it.Hawkeye®https://www.blogger.com/profile/15719046062819366641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12075358.post-67544857440214082802007-11-05T07:53:00.000-05:002007-11-05T07:53:00.000-05:00AnonymousYou said... "Unless you attend college, l...<B>Anonymous</B><BR/>You said... <I>"Unless you attend college, let the educated students who are actually IN the class make their own judgements... We are happy to be receiving a college education. Too bad you can't enjoy the same pleasure so you have to instead do your little blog-bashing."</I><BR/><BR/>FYI, I have been to college twice and have 2 degrees, thank you.Hawkeye®https://www.blogger.com/profile/15719046062819366641noreply@blogger.com