user ballots
Login
Register
Add One
FAQ/Contact
Popular Ballots
Recent Popular
Recent Votes
Best
Worst
Yes or No
Choices
What If
Prediction
Advice
Would You
Crime
Recommend
Quiz
TV & Movie
Music & Radio
Political
Science
Sports
Relationship
Techonology
Culture
Philosophy
Religion
Ethics
History
Food & Health
Fashion & Beauty
Crime
FanBase
Discussion
Bug Report
|
COMMENTS:
hard to make the argument that it's better. Bush should look up the word "diplomacy" ini a dictionary.
by LCD on Fri Jul 07, 06 3:29pm
[+]
But I do know their morgues are filling up faster than they can deal now.
by Jyl on Fri Jul 07, 06 6:44pm
[+]
Democracy cannot be forced on another country-the very nature of it does not allow that to happen. Democracy should come from the people-not an invading army.
The news we recieve is mainly from the Baghdad area - for them, life is apparantly worse. This is debatable, as almost all western journalists are unable to leave the green zone. They rely on independent Iraqy photographers and journalists to give them the news - which primarily is just reports of car bombs. These Iraqy journalist are not in positions to report conclusively on much else. There are many places that are not in the Baghdad area that are peaceful and are better off. To give you a general answer, I don't know - currently for some no, but i think for the majority - yes.
For the majority -- No. More dead. Less security (overall) -- taking into account military strikes/ operations, armed militias, kidnappings, explosives, etc. Less dependable access to electricity, clean water, gasoline.
|
|