In the liberal mind today, "unilateral" equals bad, evil, right-wing, conservative, ect. You've heard all the smears and lies. "Multilateral" equals the Left's wet dream, the embodiment of all that is good and holy. For the left, "unilateral" bad, "multilateral" good.
Now, keep in mind that the above is a liberal's viewpoint. Got it? Good. Knowing what and how the liberals think, how can you explain the fact that the invasion of Iraq, decried as "unilateral" by the Left (despite the actual truth of over 40 other countries by our side) managed to remove Saddam and the Taliban, yet our total and completely multilateral approach to Sudan has resulted in a total lack of action and several hundreds of thousands of murdered civilians?
They sneer at our efforts in the Middle East as unilateral and call it bad. Yet when we do what the liberals want in regards to Sudan, nothing happens. Thousands of people get murdered while the rest of the world sits on it's hands.
What do liberals really want? Obviously, they prefer mass murder to positive action by the US military.
Any comments?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments are moderated. If you do not see your comment immediately, wait until I get home from work.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.