In what way would "understanding" Pol Pot have allowed him to be dealt with without lethal force? Sitting across from the table from Adolph Hitler, what would be the enlightened position on the Final Solution? The understanding "middle ground?" What's the final bar for saying, "No. This is not acceptable in any form."
Leftists don't like to use the word "evil," or "crazy" except when referring to their own nation and leaders, which is safe and comfortable, like throwing rocks at a dummy. They can find comfort in the delusion that if all problems stem from America, then reform is just an orderly, non-violent election away. They routinely denounce their own authority figures in the foulest ways, knowing full well that they will come to no harm from it, and that in many other nations, including some of our adversaries, such actions would mean imprisonment or death.
Identifying evil elsewhere carries the uncomfortable baggage of action above and beyond just crapping where you sleep. Small wonder they don't want to do it.
Current Events » in reply to You misread it
Again, here's a shorter version:
The whole thread (49 posts)
- Absolutely devastating, from "Time". America's Broken-Down Army
- A commentary on this
- Somehow I don't think you would like what it would take to win.
- Where are my eagles?
- Don't be shy, tell us what you really feel
- The "Peace Dividend."
- re: The military is not the solution anymore
- Give peace a chance
- Stealth mode: run silent, run deep
- Now explain that in light of Bush's 6 years of getting everything for which he's asked.
- The "Peace Dividend."
- Don't be shy, tell us what you really feel