I looked over that e-mail again.

I see one primary theme running through it: That the United States stop letting people suck it dry while those same people jeer and spit at the U.S. during the entire sucking process.

Our military spending--of money and lives--preserved freedom across this planet for two generations. It's doing so right now, including protecting sea lanes and international air space. The "bedroom nations" of Europe, Asia, and elsewhere have the luxury of being bedroom nations because they didn't have to defend themselves all that time. In a rational world, this would probably be appreciated.

The humanitarian aid given by America, both public and private, dwarfs that of any other nation. Idiots then twist the numbers by things like "percent of GDP," which allows various "Duchies of Grand Fenwick" to strut proudly in the international community as the most generous nations in the world.

Given the bizarro moral code of the liberals, withholding any of this largesse is apparently the same as an attack, as some kind of "punishment." It's similar to the anger they have when those who pay all the taxes complain about it. In their world it's the function of those who produce to slash their arteries for those who don't. The contempt and hate of the recipients as they drink is just a little collectivist bonus that seems to come with a modern moral code that has discarded all remnants of ideas like "generosity" or "gratitude." The moral code of the parasite, that knows damn well what would happen to it if the blood supply ever dried up, and hates their victim even more for that.

It's a simple enough question, Robert.

Why the hell doesn't the world call China when someone's ass is in a crack?

Or does the answer expose something uncomfortable about all this? You even state in so many words that telling someone to call on anyone except the U.S. is the same as condemning them to death. What does that say?