You wound me.

That's why this post is longer, isn't it?

Shooting at ships or planes is about the same thing.

Sinking neutral merchant vessels is not the same as taking ineffectual potshots at military aircraft.

In essence we could have resumed the war after the first such incident of demonstrated hostilities.

In theory, not in essence. And yes, we could have resumed hostilities.

We gave Saddam time enough to bury the Queen Mary if he wanted to and time enough to wipe out the people who buried it.

Really? What the hell are we paying all these taxes for satellite surveillance for? Hole on Tuesday, trench on Wednesday, filled on Friday. No scars? No clues? No photographs? I thought they were plentiful...or so I was told.

So your family has a history of looking the other way when mass murderers are on the loose.

I'll thank you not to draw parallels between my family and yours.

You were the one who brought up your family - not me.

So that is where that came from. It was only a guess. OK.

Yes and in the thirties it [isolationism] was a wise policy.

So, when it's a position espoused by a member of my family, it's "looking the other way when mass murderers are on the loose". When it's a Republican Party position, it's "a wise policy".

I always thought it was a woman's prerogative to change her mind. Would you care to make up yours?

Hitler's track record was established early on and there were still folks who believed in his right to attack the other nations and occupy them. [emphasis mine]

Ummm... I have carefully avoided comparisons like this. Are you sure you want to go there?

Kristallnacht occurred in 1933. By 1938 all Jews required identification cards. All this was well known

You see what I mean, then, about the "wise policy" of the 1930s Republicans.

Just as an aside, we all know now where this was leading, but at the time, this was no more brutal than the treatment American blacks received under the Jim Crow laws. The occasional lynching, the segregation, the restrictions on voting rights and property ownership, the miscenegination laws. Of course, black Americans were never required to wear badges and carry identity cards... but then, one can usually tell without the paperwork.

Part of the reason the Holocaust was so shocking, once Allied soldiers saw with their own eyes what had been done, is that so few people believed that such a thing was possible. A little brutality, some Jews and Gypsies and Japs thrown in some camps -- hey, we all do these things. But 6 million people systematically murdered in cold blood during a 4-year period (1941-45) in what was presumed to be a civilized nation because of racial bigotry? This was beyond imagination.

Our imaginations have been educated.

Saddam's brutality is well known but brushed off by the left.

Remember "our buddy Saddam", every bit as brutal but less brazen, who merrily exterminated Iranians? Who supported and supplied him? Who made him what he was? Who brushed it off for years, and even fed it weapons? Hint: it wasn't the Left.

You read leftists write "Saddam clearly never had any WMD. They don't exist."

You read Leftists saying that, or reports on Right-wing websites saying they said that. I read Leftists saying, "Saddam didn't have WMD at the time the US used their existence as an excuse to invade a sovereign nation." The Left hasn't said he didn't have them, nor has the Left said he didn't use them. But it appears he hasn't had any recently.

The organization I saw most thoroughly denying Saddam's use of chemical or biological weapons over the past 10 years has been the US Veterans Administration, trying to discredit Gulf War Syndrome so it wouldn't have to be treated in VA hospitals. But they did that with Agent Orange, too, so I wasn't surprised.

Bottling one's compassion and reserving it for strategic usage when it gives a political advantage only hurts oneself.

Well said. I'll have to bookmark this for a discussion of domestic policy.

Being correct about a tragic outcome and then pointing that out is not equivalent to "rejoicing". That's like saying that people who work in emergency rooms "rejoice" when one more brain-dead helmetless motorcyclist is wheeled into the ER because his injury supports their research about head trauma. They know the consequences. They preach the consequences. When their words are disregarded, the anger they feel at the tragedy is not "rejoicing". It's grief and frustration. They know that another brain-dead helmetless rider will be in next week, and they can do nothing to stop it. This is the anger of the Left. "Rejoicing" isn't even in the picture. It feels to you as if the Left is gloating because the situation in Iraq shows that the Administration's projections look more and more simple-minded and unplanned as each week passes, and you dislike the embarrassment.

I know it would be difficult to try to understand the other side, because it would be necessary to put some value on them, and that would imperil your positions.

Regards--
Mary Anne