"trotsky" wrote in message
...


Sockpuppet Yustabe wrote:
"trotsky" wrote in message
...


That's not a valid comparison. At some point in our existence we are
going to reach the point where zero casualities is the only think
acceptable, if we haven't already. In the old days dying in battle was
supposed to be a thing of honor, now it's only a waste of life.



There is no honor in it. It is a waste of life. However, sometimes it
is
necessary, to prevent a greater waste of life or to preserve liberty.


I guess I'm a little unclear on this "preservation of liberty", too.
If, in Iraq, the majority of the populace is likely to vote for a
religious based government, then we're not really interested in
democracy, right?

I think we'd like to give them more than one shot to get it
right. Being new to democracy and all, you really think they
will get fair and open elections the first time?

We're *dictating* what form of government they can
have. That's dictatorship, and has nothing to do with liberty.

Only think I'd like to see dictated is that the elections aren't a
one time event.

ScottW