“To the Democrats my life and the lives of twenty-five other million Iraqis are evidently not worth trying for. They shouldn’t expect us to be grateful for this.” — Omar
Actually, we don’t. You see, Omar, it is a question of priorities that must be resolved. Perhaps you can help in this matter by answering the following question: “Why should Americans, already saddled with a massive federal deficit since Bush took over, spend billions upon billions upon billions of dollars (as well as thousands of lives) providing Iraq with a surrogate police force to keep you Iraqis from killing off each other, when we could instead spend that money on, say, reducing extreme life-killing poverty in subSaharan Africa (and perhaps pay off some of that federal deficit too)? Our federal government is already spending significantly more on you Iraqis than it spends on all of subSaharan Africa put together. In addition, our federal government came out with a report last year indicating that it was the very presence of American troops in the Middle East that is encouraging your countrymen and others in the Middle East to join terrorist groups. So let’s just say that spending money on an American presence in Iraq might not be the best way to go.
The bottom line, Omar: you need some sympathy, but you’re not alone. While the Republicans insist on pouring more and more money down the drain into Bush’s Pet Project, when it comes to reducing misery in the world we Democrats favor a better, more intelligent use of scarce resources.
