Homestead mailing list

[DSanner106 AT aol.com]

As far as I am aware the vote has not happened; it is due to occur on  the
30th of the month.  Was there another that I am not aware of?
 
Nope, but registrations have occurred and numbers are very high.

The  people we are fighting are not generally Iraqi  
>citizens, but  terrorists from other nations gathered together at the point
of   
>the sword.


((The first soldier was stationed in Iraq at the beginning of the  war, the
((latter two are stationed there now.  I think we have worn out  our welcome.
 
I think the terrorists see our kindness as our weakness and will always try  
to use it against us, I am not aware of any bombs actually being delivered by 
 
children, but don't doubt the terrorists would employ them. These people are  
still not the typical Iraqi citizens though, but the insurgents from outside 
.  Our welcome is still there with the people of Iraq.

>>((In any  case, why are we there?  We have gotten rid of the  monster we  
went
>>))in for, found that their arms were not anywhere to be   seen....
> 
>Millions of pounds of weapons have been found and  destroyed, so I must  
>assume you are referring to the "weapons of  mass destruction" Practically
everyone 
>on both sides of the political  fence believed he had them and we don't  
know 
>that he didn't . Just  as in the first war, where Saddam sent his best
weapons 
>  

((But the point is, they were not there.  Whether we believe that  he had them
((or not, or whether he had them or not, it doesn't matter at  this point
((because we have never found them.
 
Of course it matters whether they were there or not. If they were and  Saddam 
has hidden them, we were certainly justified in our actions, if not, we  need 
to see where the US, British, French and other intelligence agencies all  
erred. 




((How many have innocents have we killed?   Does the end justify the means?
((Does good intentions make any of those  deaths any better?



And how many innocents have they killed? They certainly believe the end  
justifies any means and this makes them all the more dangerous. As far as 
good  
intentions and the resulting deaths go, this has been debated for centuries 
with 
 no definitive answer. Does the good of the many outweigh the good of the  
few??

>Should we not have simply because we didn't understand their  Ways??This is
not 
>a  religious war, we are not imposing our  religion on the people of Iraq. 

((No, but in their minds this is a Holy  War, is it not?  
 
Only in the minds and words of the terrorists, the people of Iraq do not  
view it this way.
 
((And in their
((elections, will women be allowed to vote? I really  don't know the answer to
((that question, but based on the fact that Western  cultures treat their
((woman will all the rights of a man, I find it hard to  believe that they
((won't be allowed to vote.  
 
In the end, the Iraqi's will write the rules for their elections, and if  
they choose to allow women to vote, so be it. If not, so be it. The US has 
not  
required them to.
 
((Now, is that not taking away their religious
((beliefs and imposing  our beliefs on them?  
 
The Iraqi's have always seen the difference between politics and religion,  
Saddam was not a religious cleric. The terrorists do want to impose religious 
 
leaders as political leaders though.



((And will insurgents  be allowed to be on the ballot?  I highly doubt it.  I
((would bet  that the only names on the ballot will be the ones that Bush
((wants as  colleages.  That is *not* democratic or free, is it?
 
Yes, they are, as long as they are Iraqi citizens and have not been  
convicted of crimes. Many known leaders
of these groups have vowed to run for office. We will see over time how  fair 
the process evolves to be. The US involvement will not last for long, in  
such a high profile case. If things don't get dramatically better, the next  
President will be elected on the pledge to withdraw. 
 
Drew