JR, the thing is, you present something that isn't an either / or choice. There are many ways to lower the infant death rate that don't involve war. It is the same sort of logic I have seen you apply before - if you are against my view, then you are obvious for "this outrageous thing". No, I suspect most of these people (probably all) are appalled by the number of children dying in ALL SORTS OF PLACES... including Iraq.
By your logic, war=save the kids
You do that by killing their parents? Destroying their homes? Eliminating the infrastructre of a country? I suspect without clean water and a way to get food to the people of the cities, that the infant death rate will go higher before it goes lower.
If torture and killing of your own countrymen was the only reason needed to go to war, the US would have a full time force wandering around Africa diposing dictators and tribal leaders left and right. What's the infant mortality rate there?
Sorry, your attempt to mock those who don't share your views by using non-related "facts" is the problem, that is why you are "missing something" - too much non-related information leads to misunderstanding.
Alex
__________________
Let's go to the edge of disaster Push the pedal and go a little faster Let's slam into a wall at ramming speed Let's go to the edge of a mountain Jump off and lets start countin' Hit the ground and tell me if it bleeds
|
03-14-2003
Hybrid Mode
