« photoshop fun | Main | all weather, all the time »

a boost to the immune system

I suppose I can respond to all the email in one shot.

Dear People Who Are Extremely Worried About My Soul,

I am not pro-war, per se. I am pro regime change, and I don't think there is any way that regime change will come without use of force.

I do not want to go into Iraq and kill babies. I do not want to steal their oil or destroy their culture. In the best possible world, we go in there, oust Saddam with very little violence and death and then stay until the regime change is in total effect, a democratic government is installed and the cities and towns are rebuilt.

Is that costy? Sure, it is. But can you really put a price on spreading freedom around the world? It doesn't just benefit the people of Iraq, it benefits all of us. The less tyrannical governments that exist in this world, the more chance we have that our children and grandchildren will live to see a world at peace.

We, for the most part, live lives of comfort, lives of choice. I can wear what I want and say what I want and go - or not go - to work where I choose. Is there something wrong with wanting that for everyone? Is there something wrong with choosing military action if it means a peaceful future not only for us here in the United States, but for those in Iraq and then the surrounding countries?

It's not like we are swooping in on some foreign land and imposing a dictatorship on them. I believe that all citizens of the world are citizens who yearn to be free. If we can give them that freedom by releasing them from the one man who keeps it from them, then why not do it?

Just as democracy can be spread, so can - like a disease - the more frightful governments of the world. If we let that disease alone now, it will only grow. And it grows through terror and fear. You are foolish to believe you are immune to that disease. There is no vaccination for this one except preventive medicine.


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference a boost to the immune system:


Well said!

Thank Michele. Those are my sentiments exactly.

yes, what alex said. i'm glad when the war or no-war decision erupted that i remained on neutral ground, as it has given me a chance to listen to both arguments equally and in fairness. on each side there are intelligent points, but these days...i lean toward action. i'm simply dumbfounded by those who think saddam hussein is a good man with good intentions. dumbfounded. i've quietly read your site and the links you've posted these last months and have found myself swayed against the 'idiotarians.' i'm tired now of hearing stupid people say stupid things. (including myself: warning bran, shut up now.)

No need to explain yourself, Michele. The people who deny all the evidence of Saddam's complicity in Muslim terrorism, who claim that he has a perfect right to a WMD arsenal he's already used against the Kurds and others, who shrug off his protracted torture and exploitation of the Iraqi people as "not our problem," who point to his "electoral victory" as proof that he's a legitimately elected chief of state and George W. Bush is not, are the people who need to do the explaining.

The easy way to describe: Cancer.

A cancer that must be stopped, removed, and destroyed, lest it metasticize. It has already destroyed a goodly portion of Iraq. The patient requires intervention to be saved. Surgery is ugly, the results are not pretty, but survival is better than a beautiful corpse.

We are well beyond "Live fast, die young and leave a good looking corpse".

To carry your analogy further, I watched my ex-mother-in-law die of cancer. It got ugly and painful and I do not see this ending any other way.

Sounds like lots of people got hate mail from the peace-and-love crowd yesterday. Like I said on LGF, the marches must be like viagra for them.

And we already know that the Bush administration promises democracy for Iraq.

Which means that all moral objections to the coming conflict are now null and void.

I'm glad you cleared that up, I was starting to worry.

Well put. Unfortunately in attempting to fight the disease, it looks like you've managed to get sick yourself. This isn't an insult or a personal attack. I'm saying that in the attempt to rid Iraq of a Dictator who rules through fear and terror, you've managed to turn your country into a land ruled by fear and terror. Orange alerts, government advisories about sealing windows and doors in the event of an attack. The Patriot Act 2 proposing to allow the government to conduct secret arrests and taking any sort of judicial intervention out of law enforcement. Maybe after Iraq becomes a democracy, someone will attempt help turn the U.S. into one too.

I think those protests this weekend prove that you can still say what you want in America, Chip. Even meaningless slogans like, "Maybe after Iraq becomes a democracy, someone will attempt help turn the U.S. into one too."

You know Michele, it is for posts like this one that I truly admire you as a writer. My post would have been more like this:

Dear People Who Are Extremely Worried About My Soul,

Piss Off.


I'd be much more impressed with "the Bushies are going after civil liberties" if it was accompanied by "we fought these proposals when Clinton first made them and we're still fighting them".

And it would be a nice touch if the writer either didn't feel compelled to misrepresent the proposals as they did with Patriot I. I suppose expecting them to admit to, let alone apologize for, the latter is too much.

Michele, while I don't agree with you -- I appreciate this post. At least you lay out your reasons and they're not jingoistic and moronic. I don't agree with them because I fall into that category of "maybe after Iraq becomes a democracy, someone will attempt help turn the U.S. into one too." I think we need a little work here. Money has too much power, etc. I'll save the sob story. I don't trust our leaders.

But I appreciate your post and your viewpoint. You're a good writer. Why don't you spend more time writing things like that rather than trashing those who don't agree? The last few days all I see is, "look at these silly, stupid, misguided liberals..." You have more power when you're writing about what you believe rather than what you don't like.

Thanks and peace.

(typos courtesy of earl)

You can't be all bad, you have a Daredevil post that mentions Frank Miller...

Earl, one of the problems is that people treat the whole political party system as a team sport. If you're not on my team, you're a diddly-boob.

Consider me a conservative who HATES the Republican party, almost, but not quite as much as the Democrats. I meant to vote for Spongebob Squarepants on the last election but here in Florida, the ballots are very confusing. We have 50 woment to choose from for Miss America, but only 2 boobs for the seat of the President (then again, the thought of Gore in a bikini is making me a little queasy (sp?))

But, I will disagree with you openly on the "Turn the US into a Democracy". Although the thought of pure democracy sends shivers down my spine and leaves me with this wonderful, warm fuzzy, we live in a Republic. I am just too stupid on world events to be allowed to vote on them. Hell, I didn't recognize 1/2 the candidates on the last election (and left them blank because of it).

We elect people who we feel will make the same types of decisions we would. If they don't perform, we elect someone else. In a true democracy, we would elect the leaders and give them a publicly decided agenda to which they must adhere. Most people are too lazy (like me) to take all the time needed to be perfectly educated enough to vote on everything or to even pay attention to what our elected officials are doing.

I've got a daughter who I'd rather spend time with. Am I a bad person?

"one of the problems is that people treat the whole political party system as a team sport"

That is actually one of the most insiteful things I've heard in a while. And there certainly isn't anything wrong with wanting to spend time with your daughter. I'm not talking about a direct democracy. I just feel like a plurality of views is not being represented (imo). Money tends to talk and that where I feel that our representitive democracy is breeched. The media (although labeled as liberal is more center to right) represents corporate interests and governent seems to represent one interest. When your only real choices for president are Dubya and Gore, you're in trouble. Nader may be too far left for some, but he wasn't even given much airtime. That's all I'm saying in terms of democracy. Give people the ability to be informed on a plurality of views.

Pardon the plethora of typos.

Robb, i meant insightful. Doh!

This was well written, but:

"It's not like we are swooping in on some foreign land and imposing a dictatorship on them..."

Excuse me, but it seems to me that's seems a fairly accurate description of what you would be doing.