Now, this isn't to start a flame war or anything, but somehow, I bet it's inevitable, heh. Anyhow, I don't mean this as an attack Rich, just a little rant...
You claim to be a humanist, yet you are bent on competition as being the most important thing around. You support Bush. You support the Iraq war. (Maybe you don't support Bush, but you seem to, and you definitely support the war. Right? I hope I'm not fucking this up already, haha.)
Anyway, if you support those two things - okay, fine, great. That's your belief system and I don't intend to make any attempts to change that. However, I have a request - please stop parading around under the guise of a humanist. Of a moralist, or a liberator, or any other noble sounding title.
You've agreed before that we just went in to get the oil. Well, that at least that was a major factor. Okay. Fine. Moralism is a sticky subject, I'm not going to debate it. However, we did not do it because Saddam was a threat and we did not do it to liberate the Iraqi people. They are not liberated, it was not a bonus. Some Iraqis have even gone so far as to say that we Americans are [i]worse[/i] than Saddam. We've re-instated his Naziesque police force, as well as many of the Baathists. Nothing has changed except the name of the ruling party and now we've got the oil, a staging point for further aggression if necessary and a big 'fuck you' to the rest of the world. A demonstration. Defy the US and this is what happens.
I know you're aware of this, yet you still try to play the role of this benevolent humanist. It's ridiculous, really. You're not looking out for humans, you're looking out for yourself and your nation (to an extent). That's it. That makes you a self-serving nationalist. You could add imperialist to that, as well.
If you think it's fine to just go around and do whatever, as long as it benefits our government and keeps the rich rich, fine, okay, that's your opinion. I would just appreciate it if you would disabuse yourself of this notion that the invasion was an act of defense and liberation. It has not made us safer, if anything, it has made us less so. It has not made the Iraqi people free, all it has brought is chaos. As an Iraqi civilian said, "At least with Saddam, we had safety." In regards to the looting and rampant crime that has followed the collapse of the regime. And in the wake of that, all the brutal, oppressive forces that Saddam employed against his people have been reinstated by the US.
No liberation for the Iraqi people.
No safety for the American people.
It was an act of greed, an act to prolong the American Empire and project our might.
I've no qualms with your opinions on whether that is justified or not, I just ask, one last time, that you admit that you are only concerned with yourself, and that you are not a humanist, as you earlier proclaimed. You despise us 'filthy liberals' because we are 'weak', and unwilling to stand up and do what's right, as you see it. Afraid to come out and stand by our convictions. Well, you are so similar to what you hate. You're afraid to come out and declare that you are concerned with no one but yourself, and that you are simply trying to justify this self-serving nature with ridiculous rhetoric about humanism, defense, liberation, etc. Don't be afraid, Rich. Be proud of what you are - a self-centered nationalist. Or should I say [b]The Nationalist[/b]?